SAVED BY FAITH ONLY

Curtis Hutson, editor of "The Sword of the Lord"

since the death of John R. Rice, published a sermon in

the February 12, 1982 issue of that paper entitled "By

Grace Alone, Through Faith Alone," Hutson is an old

time Baptist, is proud of it, and abundantly

demonstrates it. Total depravity is affirmed in the

sermon and such scriptures as Psalm 58:3, Psalm

51:5, and Romans 5:12 are misused to establish it.

The Baptist theory of imputed righteousness is

affirmed, and Romans 3:22 is mentioned as supporting

evidence.

There were a couple of matters that were especiallyinteresting to me in this sermon.

1. Under the heading, "A man is not saved becauseof what he does", Mr. Hutson quotes Titus 3:5 andEphesians 2:8,9. He then comments: "Some argue thatthe book of James teaches salvation by works, quotingJames 2:24, 'Ye see then how that by works a man isjustified, and not by faith only.' A good rule of thumbto follow in Bible interpretation is never to use anobscure passage to contradict a number of clear ones.

"For instance, Ephesians 2:8,9; Romans 5:1; Titus3:5, and many other passages plainly teach that man isnot saved by works.

"When the Bible says in James 2:24 that man isjustified by works, you must consider the context.Verse 18 of the same chapter states, 'Yea, a man maysay, Thou hast faith, and I have works: shew me thyfaith without thy works, and I will shew thee my faithby my works.' Notice carefully the teaching here.James said, 'Shew me thy faith without thy works, and I will shew thee my faith by my works.' The believercan only demonstrate his faith to others by his works.Since faith is invisible, you cannot know whether I amtrusting Christ as Savior unless I show you by myworks. So when the Bible speaks of being justified byworks, it has reference to being justified before men,not before God. We are justified before God by faith,but we are justified before men by works."

It appears to me that anyone smart enough to makean argument like that is smart enough to know better, His "rule of thumb" is a good one. But his application of it is difficult to follow. Why would one considerJames 2:24 an "obscure" passage? It is quite as clear as the other references he mentions.

And if James is speaking merely of being justified inthe sight of men, why does he use Abraham's willingness to offer Isaac as an example? In James2:21-23 we are reminded of how Abraham's faith was made perfect (complete) by his works when he offeredIsaac upon the altar. "Ye see then," James continues,"How that by works a man is justified, and not by faith only."

Before what men was Abraham justified on thatoccasion? It was the angel of the LORD who said, ". ..now I know that thou fearest God, seeing thou hastnot withheld thy son, thine only son from me" (Genesis22:12).

The truth of the matter is that man is not justifiedby works of the law of Moses, nor by works of righteousness which he has devised (Titus 3:5;Ephesians 2:8,9; Romans 4:1-4); but works of humbleobedience are a specified and essential part of justification (James 2:14-24).

2. In speaking of salvation "By Faith Alone", Mr.Hutson seems to be somewhat bothered by the matterof repentance. If salvation is by faith only, then wheredoes repentance fit in? He tries to solve this problemas follows:

"Repentance is not a separate act from believing. Itis included in the Bible word 'believe'."

He then quotes John 3:4, 14, 15, 16, 18, and 36 andsays, "Since Jesus did not use the words 'repent' or 'repentance' in his conversation with Nicodemus, therefore, we must conclude one of three things:

"BE THOU AN EXAMPLE"

One thing which convinces me that the church is adivine institution is the fact that it has survived the sorry example set by so many of its members, andespecially some who set themselves forward as preachers of the word. If ever there was a crying needfor the admonition which Paul gave to Timothy to "bethou an example of the believers", surely that time is now.

"Let no man despise thy youth; but be thou anexample of the believers, in word, in conversation, incharity, in spirit, in faith, in purity . . . Take heed unto thyself, and unto the doctrine; continue in them: for indoing this thou shalt both save thyself, and them thathear thee" (1 Tim. 4:12-16).

Timothy's youth could not be discounted when histeaching was fortified by such character as to makehim a worthy example of what every believer ought tobe, whether young or old. Note that Paul instructedhim to take heed to himself as well as to the doctrine. Faithful servants of God ought to preach the truth andnothing else. But they ought to LIVE the truth as well.Failure to do that blunts the force of truth in human hearts and causes the name of God to be blasphemedamong unbelievers. It has a devastating effect uponthe hearts and lives of the weak and tender children of God.

The Preacher and His Conduct Toward All

Paul continued his instruction concerning the needfor Timothy to set a right example and take heed tohimself as well as the doctrine: "Rebuke not an elder, but entreat him as a father; and the younger men asbrethren; The elder women as mothers; the younger assisters, with all purity" (1 Tim. 5:1-2). The "elder" ofverse one is not the elder (overseer) of the congregation, but a reference to the deference towardage which youth should show. Treat older men as afather. Younger men should be treated as equals (brethren). Give to older women the respect due mothers. PLEASE OBSERVE THE NEXT ADMONITION: "the younger as sisters, with all purity." What was the need for that qualifying phrase? Need we ask? It was needed for the same reason Paul wrote in his second letter to Timothy"Flee also youthful lusts" (2 Tim. 2:22).

Bad Examples of Believers

(1) Debt evaders set the wrong example. While

churches should be taught to adequately provide forthose who devote their lives to the work of the gospel,faithful servants of the Lord must learn to live within their means and to do so graciously, without murmuring. Things bought on credit should be paidfor. Desire for "things" should never outweigh sanityand financial ability. How embarrassing it is for acongregation, or its elders, to be approached by localbusinessmen for satisfaction of an unpaid debt after apreacher has moved.

(2) Immature conduct sets the wrong example. The work of preachers is sometimes beset with disappointments and frustrations. Pulpit fits and temper tantrums in business meetings are not calculated to inspire confidence and respect. Falling apart under pressure ill befits those who preach to others that they should "gird up the loins of your mind, be sober" (1 Pet. 1:13). Preachers who are too quick on the trigger to move, rather than see a problem through, often contribute to instability in thework they leave behind. Some have larger egos thanthe brethren are able to feed. One such preacher was reminded by an exasperated brother that "When we sing How Great Thou Art", we are not singing to YOU." (3) Gossip peddlers set the wrong example.Preachers rail against gossip and its attendant evilabout as much as any other infraction of divine law,yet many of us are the worst offenders of all. There is a 'brotherhood grapevine which swings from coast tocoast and border to border which elevates the most unsubstantiated rumor to the status of hard, cold fact. Often fellow-preachers are the victims of the carelesslips of suspicion peddlers who relish the fact that theyare definitely "in the know." It becomes "common knowledge" that certain preachers are looking to movewhen they have never even thought of it, all becausesomeone learned that the elders in another place calledjust to ask if they might be willing to consider a move.This writer has received several phone calls at timesfrom places looking for a preacher all because somebody, for some reason, started the rumor that Iwas "looking" when there was not an ounce of truth toit. Brethren have been charged, tried and convicted inabsentia of doctrinal and sometimes moral deficiencies based on false reports spread by suspicious minds andwagging tongues. "Thou that teachest another, teachest thou not thyself?" (4) Envious preachers set the wrong example. "Some indeed preach Christ even of envy and strife; and somealso of good will" (Phil. 1:15). So it was when Paulwrote those words and so it is now. Some are eaten upwith envy and jealousy because of the esteem in whichsome of their fellow-laborers are held. Even as in Paul's day, they may be spurred on to greater activity not somuch for the love of souls as for the purpose of cornering a greater portion of the glory they feel cheatedout of. Why should a preacher in a meeting feel a tingeof injury to hear local brethren speak words of praisefor the local preacher? Why should the local preacherfeel hurt when brethren who hear him every week saykind things about a visiting speaker? In each case, why

not "rejoice with them that rejoice?" It is a blessingthat all of us are not alike. Each has his unique way ofpresenting the truth. All any of us can really do is sowthe seed or water that already sown by others. None of us has the power to give the increase. I read somewhere that it is amazing how much we can accomplish when we don't care who gets the credit.

(5) Preachers who become too familiar with the sisters set the wrong example. It is painful to speak ofthese things. The cause of Christ has suffered severedamage in the last few years through this very thing.There seems to be a virtual epidemic of this malady.The scenario is all too familiar. A good brother who ishappily married, sets out to "counsel" with a sister who is having marital problems. He lets his guard down, violates his own rule to have either his wifepresent on such occasions or else,, one of the elders, oran older sister, so as to "provide things honest" in thesight of God and man, and the rest all too frequentlybecomes history. He feels sorry for her and in trying tohelp, imposes confidences from his own life. Additional"counseling" sessions are required and before long compassion merges into infatuation which is reciprocated, and there it goes. The news gets out and hasty resignations follow, or else firings, much to thedismay of the congregations involved. Even whensincere confessions of wrong are made, the aftereffectslive on to embarrass the church and to haunt the involved preacher for the rest of his life. The wagesare high. My brethren, these things must stop. The cause of our Lord is far too important for any of us togive in to such temptations to the destruction of ourown families, the detriment of our own souls and the retardation of the greatest work in the world. We needless "counselors" and more preachers of the word whowill tell troubled people what the word of the Lord hasto say in a setting that is beyond reproach and whichleaves no occasion for the adversary to speakreproachfully. We do not need to hear confidences andintimate information which our wives cannot hear, orone of the elders, or an elderly sister. If you are a singlepreacher and one of the elders is not available, or thereare none where you preach, then ask one of the oldersisters to go with you. You may, or may not, knowmore about the Bible than she, but she will know awhole lot more about life than you do and can mergeher wisdom with your knowledge to help the troubled.

We cannot expect the churches to grow in number orspirit without faithful and fearless preaching of theword of God. That preaching must be done by men whobelieve what they are saying enough to practice it inlife. Purity of character adds an extra earnestness andconfidence which is missing from those who know goodand well they are masquerading behind pulpits tocover serious character flaws. Oh yes, I know none of us is perfect in the absolute sense, but, fellows, surelywe can do better than a growing number have in thelast few years. "Be thou an example of the believers."

THE WORK OF ELDERS—Introduction

The editor of Searching The Scriptures has asked this writer to prepare several articles on the work ofelders. As much as possible practicality will be the keynote. The writer will be drawing on his personalinvolvement as an elder for about ten years. From thatviewpoint we hope to present some down-to-earth observations of things as they are—not hypotheticalobservations.

Much has been said by others at various timesrelating to the qualifications of elders or bishops astaught in the New Testament. For purposes of thesearticles, we shall assume the qualifications to alreadyexist and move from there to the day-to-day aspects ofthe work itself. There is a need for a practical study.Too much rhetoric already surrounds the subject. Weneed to grapple with the issue of the work itself andget the discussion down on the ground where we are allstanding.

THE WORK DEFINED. The work of elders is to oversee and direct the affairs of the local church (Acts20:28). The word "elder" emphasizes the age andexperience levels essential to the performance of thework. The word "bishop" denotes the function ofelders. They are "overseers". The flock or local churchis that which is supervised or overseen. Thus we have arelationship—the supervisors to the supervised—theshepherds to the flock—the pastors to the sheep.

The eldership implies a work to be done. It is not aprestige office nor a status symbol. It involves a lot ofwork to be a good elder. It is a hard job. It cannot becarried out by the lazy, marshmallow type. It requiresenergy, vigilance, industry, and zeal. It requires notonly a backlog of knowledge of the Word of God but acontinuing, diligent study of the same.

Dedication must be a characteristic of those who serve as elders. The church needs men of conviction,men of strength, men of vision, humble men. firm butgentle men, to tend, supervise, oversee, the flock. May these studies serve to stimulate our readers with respect to the function or work of the eldership

NEXT ISSUE: LEARNING TO WORK TOGETHER

When you renew, why net subscribe for afriend? All new subscriptions are $7.

THE ABUNDANT LIFE THEORY: A PENTECOSTAL EVOLUTION

"An interesting and important development in therecent history of the United States is the rise ofnumerous holiness and pentecostal denominations. For many years little interest was shown in this development and 'holiness people' were seen as relics of the nation's frontier past. Recent developments,however, have resulted in a mounting interest in bothperfectionism and pentecostalism by theologians and the public alike. Perhaps the greatest interest has beengenerated by the rapid growth of the 'charismatic' movement inside the traditional denominations within the past decade. Virtually every major denominationnow has its own pentecostal element, including theCatholic church."1

In the first paragraph of his work on the revivalistmovement of the 1950's and following, Dr. David Edwin Harrell says, "Once the object of derision, inthe 1970's pentecostal religion became almost fashionable. Many judged the charismatic movementthe most vital single force in American religion. Thegifts of the Holy Spirit (Charisms), speaking intongues (glossolalia), and divine healing were subjectsstudied in nearly every American church, and cells ofcharismatic believers appeared in most American denominations. By 1975, perhaps 5,000,000 or moreAmericans were taking part in the charismatic revival."2

It is an undeniable fact that the newly invigoratedcharismatic movement has invaded religion today—and with amazing ease. The theories have pervaded the ranks of even the Baptists and Churchesof Christ considered by most to be the most fundamental and conservative among so-called "mainline" churches. Tongue speaking, Holy Ghost baptism, and other evidences of the charismatic leavenings are being heard in various locales. Many ofthe teachings have been popularized by the media evangelists on radio and television in what is obviously a sophisticated extension of the revivalistmovement of the 1950's. During that period such menas William Branham, A. A. Allen, Jack Coe, GordonLindsey, and Oral Roberts sounded out the promises ofmiraculous healings and financial prosperity in exchange for faith in God and regular tithes to theirministries. Their places have been more than adequately filled today with such latter-day pentecostal ministers as Jimmy

Swaggart, Derek Prince, Kenneth Hagin, John Osteen,

and Bob Mumford. The FGBFI, or Full Gospel

Businessmen's Fellowship International, with Demos

Shakarian as its leader, has given a certain dignity to

the movement, along with such class evangelists as

Rex Humbard and Kathryn Kuhlman and of course

the most popular of all the religious superstars, Oral

Roberts, who gave the world a look at pentecostalism

through the eyes of well-conceived and immaculately

produced television specials. Television programs such

as the PTL Club and the 700 Club have been the tool

for giving the movement a constant contact with the

people through their daily religious talk-show

broadcasts.

The Pentecostal concept of the atonement has itsroots in the holiness movement of the mid to late 1800's. The father of Methodism, John Wesley,introduced to his followers the idea of what he called "entire sanctification," or the need for something after the acceptance of Jesus Christ as Savior. Much of whatWesley brought back to England after a rather unsuccessful tenure as a missionary in America wereconcepts he gained from associations with the Moravians in the state of Georgia. He quicklyincorporated these concepts into his teachings upon his return to his native Britain. He taught that evenwhen a person had accepted Christ and had been "saved," there remained a "residue of sin" which required a "second work of sanctification." It became a widely accepted doctrine among the followers of Wesley and his efforts to achieve "entire sanctification" following conversion resulted, in part, in his being referred to as a "Methodist."

Pentecostal theology was changed somewhat from1870 to 1875. The Keswick Conventions in Keswick,England began to affirm that sanctification or the"second blessing" as it had become known was actually the baptism of the Holy Ghost. From about1906 to 1914 a huge controversy arose in the holinessmovement over the doctrine. Some converts from churches which did not have the Arminian backgroundbegan to come into the movement, mainly from the Baptist church. They thought of conversion as involving both the initial acceptance of Christ and thebaptism of the Holy Spirit. They denied that a "secondwork of grace" was necessary, stating instead that theentire work was accomplished at the conversion of thesinner. This caused a split in the ranks of the holinessmovement with about an equal number subscribing tothe "second work of grace" and the so-called "finishedwork" groups. The factions requiring a "second workof grace" were mainly Methodistic and the groupsadvocating the "finished work" theories were mainlyBaptistic. This is actually the beginning of the divisioninto "holiness" and "pentecostal" groups. It is the new version of these doctrines, a kind of diluted pentecostalism, that forms the basis for the neopentecostal movements among the mainline churchestoday. The old guard pentecostals refer to them as"neo-pentecostal" while those actually involved in the movement today prefer the name "charismatics."

"The pentecostal movement arose as a split in theholiness movement and can be viewed as the logicaloutcome of the holiness crusade which had vexed American Protestantism for over forty years, and inparticular the Methodist church. The repeated calls ofthe Holiness leaders after 1894 for a 'new pentecost'inevitably produced the frame of mind and the intellectual foundations for just such a 'pentecost' to occur. In historical perspective the movement was thechild of the holiness movement which in turn was the child of Methodism. Practically all the early pentecostal leaders were firm advocates of sanctification as a 'second work of grace' and simply added 'pentecostal baptism' with the evidence of speaking in tongues as a 'third blessing' superimposedon the other two. Both Parham and Seymour (earlypentecostal pioneers, credited with founding the movement, db) maintained fully the Wesleyan view ofsanctification throughout their lives.3

Like all man-made religions, the holiness-pentecostalmovement has passed through stages of evolution. Theemphasis of the 1890's and into the new century wasobviously on the doctrine of entire sanctification. Theteaching for this doctrine was promoted primarily by atract called "A Plain Account Of Christian Perfection As Believed And Taught By The Rev. John Wesley."Interestingly, by 1915 the emphasis had switchedfrom the doctrine itself to that which came to be thought of as the evidence of the entire sanctification,the baptism of the Holy Ghost. Still later, the HolyGhost baptism gave way in preference to speaking intongues which was considered to be an evidence ofHoly Ghost baptism. By the time of the organizationof the Azusa Mission in Los Angeles in 1906, thoughtby many to be the prime instigator of modern pentecostalism, the old time, poorly educated colporteurswho had planted the seed and organized such groups as"The Church of the Living God for the Evangelizationof the World, Gathering of Israel, New Order of Thingsof the close of the Gentile Age," had given way to moreclosely organized groups. "By the turn of the centurythere were at least a dozen major holiness bodies that were well organized. Most conspicuous among theSouthern groups were the Church of God, the Pentecostal Holiness Church, the Fire-BaptizedHoliness Church, and the Church of God in Christ"4

By the 1950's the movement had undergone radicalchanges and at least some of the emphasis hadchanged from small local congregations which usuallyhad some sort of annual meetings at some looselyorganized national headquarters to the slick-tongued,fancy dressed, independent evangelists. These independent ministries were one-of-a-kind organizations which usually had one man, a highlyskilled and very articulate organizer, at the helm andin addition to the traveling tent revivals, theirministries were most always promoted by some sortof periodical which advertised their huge crowds and promoted the miracles they performed in greatand glowing claims. While "the abiding possibility and importance of the supernatural element . . . particularly as contained in

the manifestation of the Spirit,"5 still dominated the vital thrust of the movement, there was a new kind ofpentecostalism emerging. The tent revivalists, drawing huge crowds and sporting an almost carnival-like atmosphere, with their screaming, highlymotivating, mournful monotones were preaching a newbrand of pentecostalism with the emphasis on healing."Heal!" became the cry of the movement in the '50's. The testimony of the healed became the tool for the bringing in of expectant crowds sometimes in the thousands and the ever-present claims, ranging fromthe possible (in the case of some psychologicalhealings) to the ridiculous (one lady was said to have worn the same pair of hose for six months) gaveimpetus to the now burgeoning pentecostal society."The common heartbeat of every service was the miracle—the hypnotic moment when the Spirit moved to heal the sick and raise the dead."6

Today we see a new emphasis. While the supernatural of various sorts still forms the basis forthe pentecostal theology, there has again been a radical shift in emphasis. Tongue speaking is still the popular manifestation of the possession of the HolyGhost, and the miracle of healing still holds the spotlight at most Holy Ghost revivals. But there is anew, more subtle and possibly even more appealing theory being promoted by the charismatic groups.It is the Abundant Life theory. It has been aroundon the periphery of the movement all along. It enjoyedsome measure of success in the '50's and '60's with the use of A. A. Allen, who claimed that one dollar billswere changed into 20's by his prayer for prosperity.You can almost see the evolution of it. Synan says, "Carrying the idea of sanctification and perfection toits ultimate conclusion, he (Parham, an early leader, db) taught that 'sanctifying power reached every part ofour body, destroying the root and tendency of thedisease!' Just as John Wesley taught the possibilityof entire cleansing from sin, Parham taught entirecleansing from disease' in the experience of sanctification."7 And today, through the same type ofevolution and the entire sanctification has taken on a new dimension and has been extended into not two,but three parts-atonement, or the forgiveness of sins;health, the freedom from disease; and prosperity, thefreedom from financial woes. In its pure form it is adoctrine of health, wealth, and salvation, usually presented in that order. "American Christianity israpidly being infected by an insidious disease, the so-called wealth and health Gospel—although it has verylittle of the character of the Gospel in it. In its morebrazen forms (Brother Al, Reverend Ike, etc.) itsimply says, 'Serve God and get rich (or healthy).' Inits more respectable, but more pernicious forms, it builds 15-million dollar cathedrals to the glory of affluent suburban Christianity. Or it says, 'God willsyour prosperity (and health).' The message goes likethis: 'It's in the Bible. God says it. So think God'sthoughts. Claim it. And it's yours!"8

It will be our purpose in four short articles toexamine this doctrine of the Abundant Life. It is obvious that in such a work we cannot make an exhaustive examination of this most complicated andinvolved doctrine. But since very little work has beendone in this area, and since the doctrine is gaining momentum in all quarters of the religious world, wefeel that the need for such information is pressing. Thematerial in these articles was gathered as a result of anassignment given me by the Timberland Drive churchin Lufkin, Texas in 1981. I am indebted to them and toJim Poppell who is their preacher for causing me tolook into the doctrine and it is my most firm belief thatthe exposure of this doctrine to the principles of God's word will show it to be false, dangerous, and in need ofimmediate refusal by all who hear it. And if you havesome notion that it is not capable of pervading thethinking of the people of God, wake up and lookaround! Who would have thought that any sort ofpentecostal doctrine could invade the confines of theLord's church? But it has! And this will too, if we donot take notice of it.

FOOTNOTES

1

THE HOLINESS PENTECOSTAL MOVEMENT IN THE UNITED STATES by Vinson Synan, published by William B.Eerdmans Publishing Co. Grand Rapids, Michigan, 1971. Pg. 7

2 ALL THINGS ARE POSSIBLE by Dr. David Edwin Harrell,Jr., published by Indiana Press, Bloomington, Indiana, 1975,Pg.3

3

THE HOLINESS PENTECOSTAL MOVEMENT op. cit., Pg. 115

4

Ibid, Pg. 92 5 Donald Gee, from WIND AND FLAME, as quoted in ALL THINGS ARE POSSIBLE, op. cit., Pg. 11

6

ALL THINGS ARE POSSIBLE, op. cit. Pg. 6

7

THE HOLINESS PENTECOSTAL MOVEMENT, op. cit. Pg. 189

8

THE DISEASE OF THE HEALTH AND WEALTH GOSPELS by Gordon D. Fee, published by Word for Today,Costa Mesa, California, Pg. 1

THE ONE CONTAINER ISSUE

We still have brethren today who contend for onecontainer to be used in serving the Lord's Supper.They contend that "cup" in the Lord's Supper is thedrinking vessel, and that Jesus used "one cup"(drinking vessel) when He instituted "The Supper,"and therefore we should use only one.

They claim there are really three elements in theLord's Supper: (1) The bread, which represents Christ's body, (2) The fruit of the vine, which representsChrist's blood, and (3) The cup (container, drinkingvessel), which represents the New Testament. Theysay that since we have only one New Testament wetherefore should have only one "cup" (drinking vessel)in the Lord's Supper.

There are only a few passages in the New Testamentthat discuss the Lord's Supper. We read about Christinstituting this supper in Matthew 26:27-29; Mark14:22-25; and Luke 22:17-20. Then Paul discusses TheSupper in 1 Corinthians 10:16,17,21; 11:23-28.

In our examination of this position, I want to firstexamine the texts and see just what the Lord and Paulsaid. (Since all of the passages used say basically thesame thing, only one chart will be used to show what took place when The Supper was instituted).

Those who contend for the "one container" in The Supper, maintain that since Jesus took "a cup" withfruit of the vine in it, that it takes the cup with the fruit of the vine in it to have "the cup of the Lord."They assume that there was only one cup used whenthe Lord's Supper was instituted. However, in studying the context of the passages when The supperwas instituted, we see that the Passover supper wasbeing observed at the time the Lord instituted HisSupper. Now notice the following statement regardingthe Passover supper from the Jewish Encyclopedia,and Hasting's Dictionary of the New Testament.

There are at least two figures of speech used, notonly by Paul in 1 Cor. 11:26, but in every passage thatinvolves "the cup" in the Lord's Supper. One of thefigures, according to Mr. E. W. Bullinger in his book,Figures Of Speech Used In The Bible, is a metaphor. A metaphor, according to Mr. Bullinger, "boldly andwarmly declares one thing IS the other" (page 735). Onpage 741 he says this involves the Lord's Supper.

The second figure used in describing "the cup," isthe figure metonymy. Metonymy is from two Greek words, meta, indicating change, and onoma, a name— thus metonymy is a change in name.

In his book on Figures Of Speech, Mr. Bullingerdescribes metonymy as "a figure by which one name isused instead of another, to which it stands in a certain relation" (page 538). Thus in connection with theLord's Supper, "the cup" is named, but "the contents"(fruit of the vine) is what is meant.

The thing that seemingly is not understood by the"one container" brethren is the fact that every passagethat discusses "the cup" involves the figure "metonymy" (Bullinger, page 577).

But now notice this. It is obvious that once a figureis established in metonymy the thing mentioned doesnot have to be present in order for the figure to be used.

The figure, for example, "rejoiced with all hishouse." It is obvious here that one's house is his familyand not the structure in which he resides. However, theliteral thing mentioned—"house"—does not have to bepresent in order to use the figure, once it is established."That was a wonderful dish she fixed." The word "dish" is used to describe the food that has been prepared. But once the word "dish" has been metonymically established to show that "dish" standsfor "food," then a literal "dish" does not have to be present in order to use the figure. The food may be in apot, and yet we would still refer to it as a "dish" and all would understand that we are talking about the wonderful food.

"She sure sets a fancy table." This could be said at apicnic lunch spread on a cloth on the ground without aliteral "table" being within a mile of the place. The same thing is true of "The Lord's Table." This is a figure of speech used to describe "The Lord's Supper."That which constitutes the "Table of the Lord" is the unleavened bread and juice of the grape (fruit of thevine). Obviously a literal table would not have to bepresent in order to have "The Lord's Table."

However, those who hold the "one container" vieware not agreed on this subject. One brother I met in adebate on this subject said a literal table would have tobe present on which to set the bread and the fruit of thevine before you could scripturally partake of the Lord's Supper. Another said it would not. Obviously if youunderstand that when a figure is established that thething mentioned does not have to be present in order tomake the statement, then a literal table would not haveto be present.

The same principle would apply to "the Cup of Blessing." Once the figure has been established, a literal cup would not have to be present in order tohave "the cup of the Lord" any more than a literaltable would have to be present before we could have"The Table of The Lord." In fact, the next chart showsthat "The Cup of The Lord" can, and does mean, "thecontents" and not the container.

From this chart we can clearly see that Paul, being inEphesus, and writing to Corinth, referred to "The Cup of Blessing." You will notice the singular use of the word "cup." If, as some brethren teach, it took boththe container and the contents to constitute "the cupof the Lord," then would not Paul have said "The cupsof blessing (plural) which we bless"?

Not only does Paul use this expression in the singular (cup), but he also describes what this "cup" isof which he speaks. What is it? "Communion of theblood of Christ." But according to Jesus, that whichrepresents His blood is the fruit of the vine. Hence, the"cup of blessing which we bless" is the fruit of the vine. Therefore those who agree with the above statement are the ones who really believe that allbrethren everywhere bless, or give thanks for "the onecup." But that "one cup" is the fruit of the vine.

The one container brethren have all but made a "Holy Grail" out of the container. It is, they tell us, representative of the New Testament. However, iftheir contention is true, and we can have only onecontainer per congregation, then why not only oneNew Testament per congregation?

If you can see the principle set forth in the abovechart, then surely you can see how we can have "onecup" (fruit of the vine) in many containers.

But even if the brethren are right in contending thatMatthew 26:27 should be taken literally, and thecontainer represents the New Covenant (newTestament), the passage itself shows they are wrong.For in their communion service, they have the blood(fruit of the vine) in the container. But the passagesays "New Covenant (container) in my blood." So a literal application of the passage would have a container in the fruit of the vine. But observe from the following chart that the expression is figurative, andnote also what the meaning of the figurative expression is, according to The International Standard Bible Encyclopedia, and A. T. Robertson.

Another argument that is used by the "one containerbrethren" is that individual cups were not inventedand patented until 1894 by John G. Thomas. This istrue. Also, it is argued that individual containers werenot introduced into the communion service of the Lord's church until around 1915 by G. C. Brewer. Thisis also true. However, the implication left by thesebrethren in stating these statistics is not true. Bystating these statistics, they are trying to set forth thefact that only one container was used in each congregation of the church of Christ until that time, andthat is not true. Why even as a little boy, in the small country congregation where I attended before the individual containers were purchased, they had twowater glasses which contained fruit of the vine. And inlarger congregations where we sometimes attended,several glasses or goblets were used in serving thecongregation. Thus the implication left by giving theabove statistics is not true.

Drink "of" The Cup

Finally, the above expression, one container brethren tell us, means that to drink "of" a cup, allmust put their lips to the same container. Manyarguments could be made to show the untruthfulnessof this position. However I believe to simply ask a rhetorical question will be sufficient to do this. Since the same expression is used by Paul regarding thebread in 1 Cor. 11:28 "eat of that bread," does that mean that every member has to put his lips to the bread? (Or would it be the plate that contained thebread?).

Conclusion

The fact of the matter is this. Brethren who hold to the "one container" view are making a law where Godhas made none, and dividing the Body of Christ indoing so. They are putting an emphasis on the container that God never put on it, and are thus adding to the Scriptures.

All of us undergo a variety of examinations in our lives: tests in school, physical exams, job reviews, etc.Sometimes we find them less than pleasant, especiallywhen we see the results. But we take them because we understand they are for our good.

There are three New Testament passages that command self-examination, each with a different emphasis. But before considering them let us be reminded of the standard by which we must test ourselves. It is not our preconceived notions, feelings,or "I think so's." Paul said those who so test themselves are without understanding (2 Cor. 10:12).It is not the estimate of others. The same apostle said,"But to me it is a very small thing that I should beexamined by you, or by any human court" (1 Cor. 4:3).That is not to say we should be unconcerned aboutothers' opinions of us, but being approved by men does not guarantee approval by God. Nor is the standard tradition or custom. It is the word of truth by which we may present ourselves approved to God,hence that is the only reliable standard we mayemploy. Keep that in mind as we now consider thethree tests.

1. Test to see if you are in the faith (2 Cor. 13:5).Some at Corinth questioned Paul's standing, especially his apostleship. He suggested they considertheir own situation. If they passed the test and foundthemselves in the faith, it would confirm Paul as wellsince he was the one who had taught them.

The question posed here is a serious one. "Am I inthe faith?" "Am I in Christ?" Before answering onemust know how to be in Christ. "For you are all sons ofGod through faith in Christ Jesus. For all of you whowere baptized into Christ have clothed yourselves withChrist" (Gal. 3:26,27). The faith here spoken of is aconviction based on the word of God. Baptism is theimmersion in water of a penitent believer for (unto) theforgiveness of sins (Rom. 6:3,4; Mk. 16:16; Acts 2:38).If you have not complied with these conditions, you have failed the first test!

But observe that this command to examine self is addressed to church members, to those who at onepoint have obeyed the gospel. Let us not assume thatinitial obedience to God's word answers the questionfor all time. It is possible to stray from the truth (Jas.5:19), be taken captive through deceit (Col. 2:8), go too far and not abide in the teaching of Christ (2 Jn. 9), orsimply make shipwreck of your faith (1 Tim. 1:20). It isthose who continue walking in the light that have the promise of the cleansing of Jesus' blood (1 Jn. 1:7);only they pass this first self-examination.

2. Examine as you partake of the Lord's Supper (1 Cor. 11:28). The Corinthians had turned the Lord's Supper into a common meal. Paul told them that inview of such conduct they would be better off not tocome together. Lest they take him at his word, heproceeded to explain the proper place and significanceof the Supper as a memorial of Christ's death. He then added, "Therefore [in view of its significance] whoevereats the bread or drinks the cup of the Lord in anunworthy manner, shall be guilty of the body and theblood of the Lord. But let a man examine himself, andso let him eat of the bread and drink of the cup" (1 Cor.11:27,28).

What are we looking for in this examination? Some would say to see if we are in the faith, to see if we areworthy to partake. It is true that Jesus placed the Supper in His kingdom (Mk. 14:25) and its citizens arethe only ones who may rightly partake of it. But forone to be worthy to eat and drink means he is worthyof Christ's sacrifice, and none of us would qualify onthat count. There must be some other interpretation.Paul explains what this examination is about in thenext verse. "For he who eats and drinks, eats and drinks judgment to himself, if he does not judge thebody rightly." To partake in a worthy manner is tojudge the body rightly—to understand the specialmeaning of this eating and drinking as opposed tosharing a common meal. That is what we must look tosee if we are doing.

3. Examine your own work (Gal. 6:4). "For if anyonethinks he is something when he is nothing, he deceiveshimself. But let each one examine his own work, andthen he will have reason for boasting in regard tohimself alone, and not in regard to another" (Gal.6:3,4). Like the Pharisee of Luke 18, we sometimes takecomfort in being "not like other people." But whatever"boasting" we do must be in our own work itself, notin comparison to what others are or are not doing. Andmy primary concern should be my work, not someoneelse's.

There are several questions we might ask ourselvesin examining our work. First, "Is what I am doingpleasing to God?" Not everything in which we may beengaged is necessarily consistent with God's will. We are taught to "walk as children of light, . . .trying tolearn what is pleasing to the Lord" (Eph. 5:8,10). ThePsalmist said, "Unless the Lord builds the house, theylabor in vain who build it" (Ps. 127:1). Another goodquestion is, "Am I doing what God intends?" One might avoid doing wrong and still be displeasingthrough a failure to do right. The Parable of the Talents teaches us to use the talents and resources God has entrusted to us in His service. Just how much are we contributing to the Lord's kingdom?

A third question that merits our attention is this:"How successful is my work?" Measuring success isdifficult at best. In some cases we may not live to seethe fruits of our labors. On other occasions what seems a success may in time turn out to be otherwise. And there are many factors which may contribute to failurewhich are beyond our control. In spite of these complications, we would do well to examine our labors to see what improvements are possible in the way we do the Lord's work. Paul put it this way: "Now if any man builds upon the foundation with gold, silver, precious stones, wood, hay, straw, each man's work will become evident; for the day will show it,because it is to be revealed with fire; and the fireitself will test the quality of each Man's work. If anyman's work which he has built upon it remains, heshall receive a reward. If any man's work is burned up, he shall suffer loss; but he himself shall be saved,yet so as through fire" (1 Cor. 3:12-15).

These self-examinations are for our own good. Theyhelp prepare us for the day when God will examine us.Let us make good use of them that by His grace wemay pass that final test and enjoy eternal life.

In the past several months, several esteemed brethren have spoken and written on what it means to"walk in the light." Since I have respected theknowledge, wisdom and work of these men for manyyears, I have tried to pay careful attention to theresults of their study and understanding of God's Word. I offer this article not as a review of these brethren or their articles but rather as a means of clarifying the questions and explanations under consideration.

First of all, I should state that in my own preaching Ihave never affirmed...

1. That God requires perfect and impeccableknowledge or behavior in order for an individual to besaved. Such would be impossible and would negate thenecessity of grace and the shedding of Christ's blood. The very fact that there is a second law of pardon implies that even truth loving and truth seeking Christians would "miss the mark" from time to time.
2. That we must, in repentance and confession, specify each sin and imperfection. Again, such is humanly impossible and God nowhere even intimatessuch a requirement. There is no "prayer formula" which must be adhered to in order for God to acknowledge and accept our penitence.
3. That God will not provide in His providence time,opportunity and capacity for the faithful Christian torepent of his sins and confess them to those sinnedagainst and to God Himself. "The Lord is not slackconcerning his promise, as some men count slackness;but is longsuffering to us-ward, not willing that any should perish, but that all should come to repentance"(2 Peter 3:9). God is not up in Heaven looking down on Tom Oglesby just waiting for him to make one of hisfrequent mistakes and then "ZAP" him into Hell Fire.I am persuaded better of the love of God and so isevery conscientious Christian.

Those statements should eliminate some of the myths and straw men that have been erected in discussions of grace both in this generation and inthose of the past.

Having said that, let me move to some thingsimplied in the above mentioned articles that havedisturbed me because, so far as I can determine in mystudy, they lack the sanction and authority of God'sWord. Are these beloved brethren affirming...

1. That the Christian stands in the grace (favor) ofGod, has uninterrupted fellowship with Deity, and iscleansed by the blood of Christ WHILE IN THEVERY ACT OF SINNING AGAINST GOD?

Page 13

2. That the forgiveness of sins through the blood ofChrist is obtained BEFORE and or APART FROM repentance (change of direction and will) and confession in prayer?

If these are the conclusions my brethren havereached and are sharing with others, I am ready to signon the dotted line to deny them wholeheartedly. It ismy conviction that such conclusions are unwarrantedfrom the Scriptures and cannot be sustained by anappeal to scriptural authority.

The men referred to in this article have been and are spiritual giants and models to me in my preaching andservice to the Lord. I would not even whisper areproachful or disrespectful word in their direction, butin following their excellent example, I also must speakmy piece. Hopefully, these thoughts will stimulate continued study on these subjects.

In the two weeks ending Saturday, August 21st,1982 the Woodmar church of Christ in Hammond, Indiana, conducted a vigorous work of evangelismcentering in the little town of Monon, Indiana, justseventy-five miles to the southeast. The work was fruitful and productive but, even aside from that, ithad other very rewarding qualities as well. For onething, I believe that the work was entirely scripturaland proper. For another thing, it involved almost allthe members of the Woodmar church in one way oranother, thus it allowed everyone the strengtheningexperience of being directly involved in church growthand evangelism.

The Woodmar church did not serve as a sponsoringchurch; it did not solicit and disburse funds for otherchurches. It evaluated an evangelistic opportunity,and planned and executed a work in a nearbycommunity which resulted within two weeks in the establishment of another church of Christ.

How The Work Was Carried Out

Several months ago Chuck and Taddian Davis of theWoodmar church worked with a relative, Mrs. Sally Estill, of Monon, in an effort to convert her. Theyenrolled her in a Bible correspondence course offered by the Griffith church. Several weeks later, after thecompletion of this course, Mrs. Estill visited withChuck and Taddian Davis in their home and was further encouraged to obey the gospel. Mrs. Estill wasbaptized into Christ at Woodmar at that time. Afterreturning home Mrs. Estill had a difficult time worshipping since there was no local church of Christ.This necessitated her returning to Hammond or driving south to Lafayette.

Meanwhile, consideration was already being given by the Woodmar church to the fact that there was a sizable area in north central Indiana which had no known faithful church of Christ. Monon lay near thecenter of this area. Discussion continued for several months about how this need might best be met.

About a month before the actual work commenced,John Brewer, evangelist at Woodmar, and the elders,Paul Valentine and Howard Thatcher, began makingtrips to Monon for planning purposes. Local newspapers and business offices were contacted andpeople were interviewed in an effort to evaluate the need and assess community receptivity to the workwhich would be done. Local religious interest andaffiliation was considered. One reason for choosingMonon over neighboring communities for the base ofoperations was due to its religious unrest. Many peoplein Monon objected to the "politics" within the local churches where each seemed to be run by a clique, andoutsiders had little opportunity for input.

The communities were contacted to learn what was required for door-to-door solicitation to be conducted within the framework of legality. Newspaper articleswere published in the Monon News, and the Francesville News beginning about two weeks before thesurvey was begun.

On about the 9th of August workers set uptemporary residence in a campground just outsideof Monon and began the task of surveying andinterviewing as many as possible of the residents ofMonon, Buffalo, Reynolds, Monticello and Francesville, Indiana. A gospel meeting was conductedbeginning the 16th of August in a rented store front indowntown Monon.

After two weeks of survey work, home Bible studiesand gospel meeting activity the workers returned totheir homes leaving a newly formed church of twelvemembers and dozens of prospects.

A Teamwork Effort

An impressive thing about this effort was its teamwork! Most of the work was done by Woodmarmembers—old and young, experienced members and neophytes. A few preachers from other congregationslent a hand. The Woodmar workers consisted of the elders, Paul Valentine and Howard Thatcher, thepreachers, John Brewer, Ron McBride and Tom Cains,and other members including Gerald Fraiser, BruceSheline, Ed Sheline, Calvin Sheline, Allen Sheline, RonDaulton, Bob Starr, Rob Starr, Rick Hill, Ed Campbell, Herman Reed and Charles Davis. These are the ones who actually did the canvassing. In addition, they were assisted by Dennis Lynd of Lexington, Illinois; Art Adams of Portage, Indiana; Dale Pennock of Elgin, Illinois; Jeff Knutilla of Birmingham, Alabama, and Tom Hickey of Griffith,Indiana.

The planning for the overall project was done by theelders, Thatcher and Valentine, and by one preacher,Brewer.

Groundwork and physical maintenance for the project was extensive with the setting up of a campsite

Page 14

and the renovation of the store front meeting place.Charles Davis loaned a Winnebago motor home, BobStarr loaned a camping trailer and Ron McBride loaned a pop-up camper for use as sleeping quarters forthose who were working. The renovation of the building included removal of store fixtures and partitions, repairing broken water lines, doing someelectrical work, installing one partition, installing abaptistery, building furniture, setting up chairs,painting the interior and exterior of the building,painting and erecting signs advertising the church andgeneral cleanup. Those who helped with the physicallabor included Howard Thatcher, Paul Valentine, JohnBrewer, Chuck Davis, Ed Campbell, Herman Reed,Ron McBride, Dave Jamison, Pam Jamison, BobStarr, Rob Starr and Dan Starr.

Many of the Woodmar women got involved in thiswork of evangelism, too! Florence Murphy, TaddianDavis, Rena Valentine, Colleen Thatcher, Margaret McBride and Eva Clark lived in the camp for two weeks and did the cooking and laundry for the men.Others who also worked in the camp for shorter periods included Maria Daulton, Dorothy Sheline, DotBrewer, Maria Timez, Sister Sisnaros and Vicki Lynd.Besides these, since this work was being done reasonably close to Hammond, the ladies of the congregation who stayed at home cooked and preparedmuch of the food that was sent to the campsite. MariaDaulton coordinated the planning and sending of thisfood. Also, several women of the DeMotte, Indiana,church prepared food and sent it for one of the evening meals.

Results Of The Work

In addition to the strength imparted to the workersthemselves, the following results have been observed:

1. A church was established in Monon beginningwith Sally Estill.
1. Ten precious souls were baptized into Christ.
2. One erring member was restored.
1. One person made a definite commitment to place membership with the congregation. Others indicatedan interest in placing membership as soon as they hadfulfilled commitments made to other congregations.
2. Ron McBride will begin preaching regularly forthe group there.
3. About twenty future Bible studies have beendefinitely arranged in Monon.
1. About seven future studies have been arranged inFrancesville.
1. One study has been arranged in Buffalo.
2. Six studies have been arranged in Reynolds.

1. Thus far, ten studies have been arranged inMonticello. There is a prospect for beginning a studywith a "charismatic study group" which has previously met in the area.
2. Twelve students enrolled in correspondenceBible courses (9 at Woodmar, 3 at Griffith). Dozens ofother enrollment cards were distributed with prospectsfor many other enrollees.
3. Special classes will be conducted in Monon eachweek for new converts.

1. Approximately 100 serious Bible discussionswere conducted in the area during the survey and themeeting. About 25 of these were detailed studies.
2. The possibility is being entertained for a religious debate on the subject of mechanical in- strumental music. The disputants will probably beeither Art Adams or Dennis Lynd meeting a Christian church preacher.
3. One denominational preacher attended the meeting, and brought a prospect with him.
4. There are serious prospects for four or fiveothers placing membership with the Monon church.
5. The editor of the Monon News invited John Brewer to write a weekly newspaper article for hispaper at no charge.

Community Response

There were absolutely no reports of unpleasantexperiences by any of our workers—no one was cursed,no doors were slammed, no one was killed and no onewas dog-bitten! Compared to the work of the apostles, this was a "piece of cake."

Many of the local business people expressed favorable comments about the nature of the work. The police department was cooperative and offered to helpin any way they could. Many religious people thoughtit was "wonderful" that the people would give time todo that kind of work.

Cost Of The Work

It would be difficult to assess the monetary cost ofthe labor involved in this work, but the Woodmarchurch spent about $2,000 in incidentals includingadvertising, building repair and cleanup, production ofteaching materials for distribution, etc. Comparingthese dollars with what churches often spend on otherworks of evangelism, this is readily seen to be a verycost-effective technique of preaching the gospel.

Skills Required

Emphasis has already been given to the fact thatthis was a teamwork effort of a local congregation. Nospecial skills were required to obtain these results.There were no Bible-college professors involved in thework; there were no skilled debaters stalking thestreets in search of polemic contestants. The work wasdone by average members of an urban congregationtogether with its elders, preachers and a few volunteers from other churches.

In this writer's opinion, the beauty of this system ofevangelism lies in its simplicity, and in the fact thatthe Woodmar church has shown what a typical churchcan do when its members care about the spiritualwelfare of others and manifest a working love for souls.I commend the zeal of this church as an example forothers to imitate.

(This experience was not a new one for the Woodmarchurch. Every year for several years it has taken on asimilar challenge with similar results in areas rangingfrom west Tennessee to Iowa to the northwestern United States to southwestern Canada.)

This writer feels he has profited immensely from avery limited association with the Woodmar church in

Page 15

some of this work, chiefly in having had the opportunity to see what can be done when God's pattern for working through the local church is followed with zeal.

ONE THING I HOPE TO SEE

H.M. Phillips

I may never see it, but that within itself does notkeep me from hoping to see it. I, too, realize that theword "hope" carries in it the desire and expectation. I do not believe it to be impossible for this to happen. I know it would be a great thing if it did come to pass. Hundreds would rejoice with me. Much good would bedone. The Lord would be pleased and the cause of theLord would be exalted. Here it is for all to consider: A discussion of some vital issue in which each of the speakers or writers would stick to the issue, andnot deal in slurs and wisecracks against his opponent.

Then, too, it would be well for them not to brag toomuch on self, or refer to the degrees, or the standing of prominence in his own profession; how much he knowsand what a power he is in most all lines; or how he hasso bewildered other opponents as to make it almostsure that no one need expect to get anywhere with him.

Then, in getting the discussion arranged, it will bepleasant to hear no background reference about theopponent, nor ridicule of his religion, or the people whohonestly believe it to the best of their knowledge. Thisdoes not come within the issue.

I have heard many discussions and been in a fewmyself, and I am persuaded that it seems hard formost all to keep from saying or acting some way so asto lead from the issue. But that is a reason why that specific proposition should be stated, and then keepthe issue clearly before the mind as the discussion proceeds. Let each one stay with the issue and answerthe arguments made. I may never see this done, but itcould be done, and it would cause people to likediscussions instead of disliking them. Keep in a goodhumor, and do not abuse the opponent; discuss whatyou are supposed to; and let me know when you will dothat—I want to be there. (Gospel Advocate, June 10,1948).

Send all News Items to: Wilson Adams, 6334 Auburn Ave., Riverdale, MD 20737

Page 16

FIELD REPORTS

J. WILEY ADAMS, 103 Ridgeland Dr., Warner Robins, GA 31093.Since February 1, 1982, the Westside church of this city hasproduced a weekly television program of 25-minute duration using the local cable TV channel 12. Believe it or not this time cost us $5 perweek. This opens up a lot of room for thought as to the possibilitiesin other areas where cable TV has a free channel for continuous weather, time and localadvertising with stereo background music.All public services are free which include church functions such as gospelmeetings. Commercial announcements cost $1 per line up to fourlines. This means that local people do watch such a channel or elseadvertisers would not spend their money on such. The Cox Cable Co.has told us there is a viewing potential of 44,000 people in this town of50,000. Only cable subscribers will be able to view the program.We have an ideal time—5:35 p.m. to 6:00 p.m. At this time we are notcompeting with prime time programming on network stations. Our timeis between Robins AFB report and channel 2 Atlanta news whichuses the cable at that time.

We have purchased our own equipment and produce our own programs at the church building where we can arrange things like we want to. We had a young man here for awhile who had his ownequipment and he introduced us to this type of program. He is now a student at Florida College but before he left he helped us to select andto purchase about $2,000 worth of equipment and helped to train twoyoung men to operate the equipment. They do a good job and otheryoung men want to learn. It has generated some enthusiasm amongtheyoung as they naturally seem to understand this type of thing.

If the station produced our programs at the studio the cost would be$100 per month which in itself is not bad. But by having our own setupwe can in a year and a half own our equipment by what we save. Thisequipment has other teaching possibilities in conjunction with the localprogram of work. The video camera, power case and the video cassetterecorder can be used to record gospel meetings, special subjects, andcan be brought into homes and played back through one's own TV set. We pass this information on to readers of STS at the request of the editor. It just might be that some who read this can use this for theirown local situation and will discover that having a local TV program isnot out of range financially. If you desire further information pleasewrite to us.

DEAN BULLOCK, 1102 N. Mound, Nacogdoches, TX 75961. Ihave moved to Nacogdoches from the Tyler area (Lindale) to preach forthe Mound and Starr church. Robert Harkrider continues with the congregation. However, he will devote more time (than in the past) to teaching advanced Bible courses, classes for university students,writing Bible class literature, speaking on lecture programs and ingospel meetings. I am glad to be in Nacogdoches, and to be associatedwith Robert Harkrider as a fellow preacher in the growing work atMound and Starr.

STEVE DIAZ, Rt. 1, Box 1210, Leesburg, FL 32748. The Centralchurch of Christ which formerly met at the American Legionbuilding in Leesburg, now has their own building. It is located at 309Michigan Avenue. This is two miles east of downtown Leesburg,just off of Hwy. 441. Because of this move we will be known as theMichigan Avenue church of Christ. For further information write thechurch at P.O. Box 2207 Leesburg, FL 32748 or call (904) 728-0715.

MIKE MILES, c/o New Bremen church of Christ, 17 S. Walnut St.,New Bremen, OH 45869. This is to let the readers of STS know that there is a congregation meeting in New Bremen. We are located about45 miles north of Dayton on State Route 66, ten miles west of I-75 between Sidney and Wapakoneta. To our knowledge there is no othercongregation between Fort Wayne, Indiana and Columbus, Ohio, norbetween Toledo, Ohio and Dayton which is standing for the truth. Atpresent we have 17 Christians and 10 children. Our average attendanceis in the thirties. We have been having good results from our Dial-A-Bible-Moment program averaging 20 calls per day. This work wasstarted in September, 1981 by Walt and Marsha

Hazelwood and Jenny Baltes. They met for a year in the Hazelwoodhome having one baptism during that period. In August of this year asuitable location was obtained in which to meet and the first service held. Mike Miles moved to begin working with the congregation atthat time. The building is located at 17 S. Walnut, one block east ofState Route 66, and one block south of route 274. Our times of services are Sunday morning at 9:30 and 10:30 and Sunday evening at 6:00.Wednesday Bible Study is at 7:30 p.m. If you know of any in this areathat need to be contacted, please call Mike Miles at (419) 629-2573,or Walt Hazelwood at 629-2171. When traveling, please come andworship with us.

DAVID ODOM, 2108 Ella, Beatrice, NE 68310. A few months ago we lost over 3/4's of our support. This had come from one congregation which had supported us for the past five years. We still lack $1,200 per month in making up that support. My family consists of eight members and I have been driving a dump truck to make endsmeet. The work in Nebraska is in need of men who will come and stay.We have been here five years now and are quite interested in staying.There are only four conservative groups in this state, two of whom donot have men to work with them full time. My family and I travel to Grand Island, 137 miles from Beatrice, every two months to workwith the brethren there. They number approximately twenty. We here atBeatrice average in the thirties. During the past five years I haveconducted sixty two Bible studies in private homes, and have baptizedfifteen people, all adults. I try to keep an average of six home Biblestudies going per week. The Lord's kingdom is small in this area, but there are many souls to be saved. If you can, please help us spread the"good news" here in Nebraska. You may contact me at (402) 223-4307(after 10 p.m.) and for reference, Harold Fite at (713) 578-7163; 21339Park Tree, Katy, TX77450. Thank yousomuchfor your consideration.

OLLEN T. ROMINE, 6532 Richard Dr., Brooksville, FL 33526. InApril I started working full time with a group that met at the Civic Center in Spring Hill, Florida. This work was started back in 1980. InJune of this year we rented a commercial building on Mariner Blvd.,just .one block off of Spring Hill Dr. We purchased some pews,speakers stand, seats etc. We only had access to the Civic Center forSunday services. However, since moving into this location we havehad considerable growth in numbers. The Deltona Corp., developers ofSpring Hill, in west Hernando County, is giving us a four acre lot tobuild on. If there are any individuals (not churches) who would like tohelp us it would be appreciated.

CEDAR RAPIDS, IOWA ANDY DE KLERK, 401 Bullard Parkway, Temple Terrace, FL 33617. My family and I (along with the family of Calvin Watson ofBrilliant, Alabama) have decided to move in May of 1983 to the CedarRapids, Iowa area to spread the gospel. There are only five churches ofthe Lord in the entire state. There are 128,000 people living in the CedarRapids—Marion area. My great desire to move there is not as a result ofwhat some seem to think, the "glamour of missionary work." I havedone this kind of work for the past twenty years or more. I know what itis to be lonely, disappointed and discouraged. I also know what athrill there is to see the seed planted and to see it grow and begin toblossom into a "fruit bearing tree"—a Christian. We've been in the barren fields of South Africa, and now after six years of labor in Tampa weyearn to return to the fields, but this time to the fields of Iowa. It isessential for Calvin Watson to move with us. Calvin is 36 years oldand was an active member at Henderson Blvd. in Tampa where I havebeen preaching. Calvin now preaches in Brilliant, Alabama. Calvin left a $4,000 a month job to devote his life to preaching. Both of us will need support for our families. Calvin will be working in the Marion area (pop. 20,000) and myself in Cedar Rapids. We will worship together in a central place. I will gladly furnish as many references concerning my work as requested. The brethren at Henderson Blvd. will welcome anyenquiries. In regard to Calvin feel free to contact myself, Harry Pickup,Sr. at (813) 985-5772, the Henderson Blvd. church at (813) 876-2237, orthe church in Brilliant, AL on Hwy. 129 By-Pass 35548. My number is

(813) 985-5998. Pray for us and consider our appeal to you for supportand please, if you can, make a favorable decision concerning our needs.

Page 17

SOUTH AFRICAN DECISION

RAY VOTAW, P.O. Box 801, Springs, TVL. A couple of weeks agoI received a "summons" from the Chiawelo church in the huge blackcomplex of Soweto outside Johannesburg. This church has been standing with the "liberal" churches in South Africa. I was instructed to bring white brethren with me for a "discussion on thedivision in the church of Christ." Dr. Almo Horn of the South African Bible School (liberal) was also instructed to come and bring whites with him. I invited Basil Cass, Jim Lovell, Les Maydell and Paul Williams to accompany me and we arrived at the assembly hallof the Phuthalushaka School in Chiawelo on the appointed day. Iwent prepared for a debate on the "institutional issues." Dr. Horn and his cohorts were very much in attendance. We all simply satand awaited the developments. A faithful black brother from theDiepkloof church, William Bologo was called upon to speak. Hedelivered a good lesson on Unity and forcefully pointed out theinnovations which had actually caused the division. I was surprisedthat William had been called upon to speak. Expecting a rebuttal Iwas really surprised when another faithful brother, Frank Ramovhuyo of Mofolo was asked to take the "second service"—Lord's Supper and contribution. In typical black fashionit was not difficult for Frank to turn this into another opportunityfor an assault on "institutionalism." He lambasted the idea of taking the money of the church and building such things asOrphan's homes, homes for the aged and Bible Colleges. (I'm sure Isaw Al Horn "duck").

Brother Petros Tshivhase, of the Chiawelo church then arose to speak and I sort of gripped my papers waiting for the debate tobegin. But brother Tshivhase in essence said: "Thank you white brethren for coming. However, we didn't call you here to ask you anything. We called you here to tell you something." He continuedby saying, "Back in 1965 brother Ray Votaw met brother JamesJudd in a debate in Benoni. In this debate things were introduced tothe church in South Africa that we had not heard about—Human institutions and giving the money of the church to unbelievers. Thisbrought about division. Until then the church was united. So we'regoing back to the way we were before this debate and without these"new" things we will be united—just the church of Christ." He thenspoke—apparently in consensus with all the faithful black brethrenpresent—and said, "You white brethren can go do what you think isbest with this division among yourselves. We of Soweto are going tobe one." The services were dismissed. They didn't even call on me for closing prayer. Ha!

Get the picture, brethren. This was something "engineered" completely by the black Christians in Soweto. We whites had nothing whatsoever to do with it. In their own way not only did theycompletely discomfit Dr. Horn and company but they also rebukedme and those with me for not doing more in bringing about unity."How could they talk to us like that," you might ask? Easy. You seethese brethren are free children of God and the faithful churches in Soweto are completely autonomous. None of the Christians thereare receiving American dollars or money from the whites. What I'msaying is that we could hold nothing like support over their heads and thus "control" them. Thank God! May their tribe increasethroughout the world! Yes, these brethren are aware of the fact thatwe whites brought the gospel to South Africa. They appreciate itand constantly demonstrate that appreciation. But "lackeys" they are not.

CARLOS CAPELLI, Casilla 83, 1665—Jose C. Paz, Buenos Aires, Argentina. On July 16-22, I visited the congregation in Mendoza (sixteen hours away by train) and stayed with brotherand sister Fernando Venegas. I visited with all the brethren there and discussed the Lord's work in Argentina. Here at home theLord has richly blessed our efforts. On August 15 another twosouls were added to our spiritual family. These two had previouslybeen with the Pentecostals. This family lives in Boulogne (40kilometers from Buenos Aires). Boulogne has a population of tenmillion people and I am thinking that we should begin a church inthis city. I ask your prayers. Also the church in Albany, Oregonnotified me that they must discontinue their $250 per month support. So I am in need of that support again. Could you help? Ifyou have any question about

my work feel free to write and inquire. I will be happy to answer anyquestion and supply references.

PREACHER NEEDED LYNCHBURG, VA—The newly established Westside church ofChrist in Lynchburg is in need of a full-time man to work with them.The church began meeting in this city back in July. Lynchburg is abeautiful city in the foothills of the Blue Ridge mountains. It is avery conservative area being the national headquarters of the Moral Majority and the residence of Jerry Falwell. There is much workthat needs to be done in this area. Because we are small we cannot provide full support. If you are interested in this work pleasecontact Larry Powell at 1203 Westridge Cir., Lynchburg, VA 24502, or call (804) 237-3445.

DEBATE TAPES AVAILABLE VOYD N. BALLARD, 3046 North Ashby Rd., Merced, CA 95340—The debate at Grants Pass, Oregon between J. T. Smith andmyself has been professionally recorded and is available to readersof this paper at my cost which is $25.00 for the complete set of eighttapes. The first two nights were on classes and women teachers andthe last two nights were on the cup question. We each had two 30minute speeches each night, making a total of 16 speeches.

JIMMY TUTEN, 7911 Country Dr., Mobile, AL—Hoyt H.Houchen was with us in a meeting August 1-6 with interest andattendance at an all-time high. Everyone was edified, uplifted andfilled with renewed zeal as a result of brother Houchen's efforts. I just closed a meeting with the Belfast church in the Richlands, VA area. Attendance was better than my three previous meetings inthat area and the cooperation of the brethren at Richlands was excellent. Brethren came from throughout the tri-state area. HerbBraswell, who has preached in this area for several years is movingto Dexter, Maine in April, 1983. He needs $300 a month supportbeyond what is now secured. Inquiries about him may be directedto Joe Wimmer, Cedar Bluff, VA (703)-964-5433. That means the Belfast church will need a preacher then. Any interested may contact brother Wimmer at the above address. Visit with us at Tillman's Corner in Mobile. Early Worship (9 AM and 10 AM) and easy access to M0 make is convenient to drop by on your waythrough Mobile.

PREACHER NEEDED PISCATAWAY, NEW JERSEY—The Piscataway congergation has need of a full time worker for the Lord. We are a groupof about 50 meeting in the suburbs of New York City, near the cityof New Brunswick. We will be able to provide partial support.You may reach us by writing to: R. E. Pflaum, 3 Yorktown Rd.,Somerville, NJ 08876 or calling 201-359-1928; or B. T. Jones 201873-3286.

NEW MEETING HOUSE DICK BLACKFORD, P.O. Box 225, Owensboro, KY 42302—After meeting in the Owensboro Junior High School for almost fouryears, the Westside church is now in a new building and is no longerat the mercy of the school-board. The building will seat 225, whichgives us room to grow. September was especially good for the workhere. Three elders were appointed and deacons will probably be appointed within the next two weeks. Four were baptized, three restored and one identified. Some of these came in a gospel meeting with J. F. Dancer. Several home studies are currentlyunderway and the congregation began mailing a monthly bulletincalled THE LAMPLIGHTER. A spirit of unity prevails among the members and things look brighter than they have looked duringthe short history of the congregation. Pray for us that we will notget sidetracked. The building is located on Highway 60 West, near

the Wendell Ford Expressway. We like to have visitors.

IN THE NEWS THIS MONTH BAPTISMSRESTORATIONS(Taken from bulletins and papers received by the editor)	267 97