The father was trying to teach his son to be moreaware of his messy eating habits. "You eat like a pig,son," said the father. Then remembering that his city-bred son probably didn't know what a pig was, heasked, "You do know what a pig is, don't you?" The little boy scratched his head and answered, "Isn't that a hog's little boy?"

Now there may be some ways in which we are like the "hog's little boy." Let's take a look. Sloppy Dress

"So Jacob said to his household and to all who were with him, 'Put away the foreign gods which are amongyou, and purify yourselves, and change your garments;and let us arise and go up to Bethel; and I will make analtar there to God, who answered me in the day of mydistress, and has been with me wherever I have gone'" (Gen. 35:2-3). Notice that when Jacob took his familyto an altar to worship God, they were told to "purifyyourselves and change your garments."

In Ex. 19:10-11 the Lord gave instructions to Moseson what the Israelites were to do to come into His presence. He told him, "Go to the people and consecrate them today and tomorrow, and let themwash their garments; and let them be ready for the thirdday, for on the third day the Lord will come down onMount Sinai in the sight of all the people." To comeinto the presence of the Lord meant something specialto these individuals, and they showed it by their actions in preparing for it.

How unlike Jacob and the Israelites are some members of spiritual Israel. Today the dress of some Christians suggest they see no greater difference inworshipping God than in attending a sporting event.To come into the presence of God is just anothercasual, everyday-type of event with no great importance.

What do you mean preacher? Do you mean to saythat a man has to wear a suit and tie before the Lord will accept his worship? Does a lady have to wear atleast a $30 dress before she shows respect for theLord? Are you saying it is a sin to wear blue jeans toservices? NO!

The point is that dress manifests attitude. There is atype of dress which suggests labor (Jno. 21:7). There isa type of dress which suggests royalty (Gen. 41:42).There is a type of dress which suggests harlotry (Prov.7:10). Why would a person wear one type of clothing toeat lunch at McDonald's, and another type of clothingto dine at the White House?

Now what does our clothing say about our attitudewhen we worship God? God has always demanded thefirst and the best. I may not have a suit to wear, but Ican wear the best I have. One can appear neat andclean, and thus show that he did put a little effort intopreparing to come before the Lord. When we come toworship God let's "dress up" instead of "dressingdown" because of the fact that we are coming into His presence.

Sloppy Actions And Ezra opened the book in the sight of all thepeople for he was standing above all the people; andwhen he opened it, all the people stood up. Then Ezrablessed the Lord the great God, And all the people answered, 'Amen, Amen!' while lifting up their hands;then they bowed low and worshipped the Lord withtheir faces to the ground" (Ezra 8:5-6). Why did thesepeople stand up, answer "Amen, Amen," lift up theirhands, and bow low to the ground? It wasn't because they were in a Richard Simmon's exercise class. All these actions were expressions of reverence for God.We see a lot of these same actions today in ourworship assemblies. We see people standing up to leave early. We see people answering those who are

whispering to them. We see people lifting up theirhands over the seats to pass children back and forth.And we see people bowing low their faces to the groundin pursuit of children crawling under the pews. Yet even though the actions seem to be the same, something appears to be lacking in the modern assemblies.

Why can a child sit in school for three hours with onetrip to the rest-room, but he can't sit in a church building one hour without three trips to the rest-room?And why does a child always have to go out during theinvitation song?

It's amazing what a preacher or teacher hears whiletrying to teach the Word of God. He hears peopletalking (even two or three pews back from him), theconstant clipping of fingernails (I believe some people must have fifteen fingers), and children racing theircars on the pews ("Boss Hogg will never catch theDukes"). No wonder a fellow occasionally has a lapse of memory.

It's also amazing what a preacher or teacher seeswhile trying to teach the Word of God. There's alwaysa few folks just looking around as if they are bored todeath. Then there are those who consider this periodtheir siesta time. And space doesn't permit us to consider all the funny faces of gumchewers and theantics of children.

What shall we say? "Let us show gratitude, bywhich we may offer to God an acceptable service withreverence and awe; for our God is a consuming fire"(Heb. 12:28-29).

Sloppy Manners "Do nothing from selfishness or empty conceit, butwith humility of mind let each of you regard oneanother as more important than himself; do not merelylook out for your own personal interests, but also forthe interests of others" (Phil. 2:3-4).How much do we consider "the interests of others" while we are in the church building? Do we talk anddisturb the worship of others? Do we bring cookies forour children to eat, and let them crumble them up into8000 little pieces without ever offering to clean up the mess? Do we push and shove our way out of thebuilding because of our eagerness to depart? Do wehelp to care for the building and the church's property,or do we contribute to its abuse and disfigurement?Let's practice the Golden Rule at all times. "Andjust as you want men to treat you, treat them in thesame way" (Lk. 6:31).

Conclusion The Proverbs writer said, "I passed by the field ofthe sluggard, And by the vineyard of the man lacking

sense; and behold, it was completely overgrown withthistles, Its surface was covered with nettles, And itsstone wall was broken down' (Prov. 24:30-31). The sluggard's sloppy field was representative of his ownsloppy character. We may say more about ourselves byour outward appearance and actions than we wish to

declare. Let's clean ourselves up!

THE MAILBOX ON THE CORNER

When brother Yater Tant proposed his "box in thevestibule" idea twenty-five years ago, as a possiblesolution for keeping brethren together who differedover church support of various projects competing forfunds from the church treasuries, we wondered thenwhy that should ever be necessary since we alreadyhad the mailbox on the corner. Anyone who wanted tosupport a college, benevolent institution or other suchproject, was at perfect liberty to do so without theadministration of funds left by the same individuals ina box in the vestibule. Now that brother Tant has proposed the same thing again, and there is considerable discussion in the papers about it, wecannot help wondering the same thing now we did thefirst time around.

Then and Now

The world has turned many times since the earlystages of the division among brethren over the relationof the church to private enterprises. No longer do the"issues" involve two or three easily identifiable practices. The practical differences are many todayJoy buses with reward motivation, puppet shows,fellowship halls, church owned camps, gymnasiums, acrobatic demonstrations, special singing groupsperforming for local churches and going "on tour", are common fare these days. Who can seriouslybelieve that a box in the vestibule is even a beginningplace to resolve differences of such magnitude? Then, as now, the basic problem comes down to Bible authority. Is the New Testament a pattern by whichchurches today must be regulated? What constitutesscriptural authority? How is it expressed? Is the silence of the scriptures permissive or prohibitive? The whole issue involves the nature, work andorganization of the church. The distinction betweenindividual and collective church action underlies much of the difference.

How are such differences to be resolved? The solution is the same now as it has always been: ARETURN TO THE TEACHING OF THE WORD OF GOD. The answer is EDUCATION. Not boxes in the vestibule. Not proposals of compromise. Ever sincethese issues intensified, there have been honest soulswho wanted to know and practice only what the Bibleauthorizes. There have been whole congregationswhich have taken a stand in favor of work which is clearly authorized in the Bible and in opposition to anything they cannot find there. In one five-yearperiod the editor had a part in helping twenty-fivecongregations get off the fence they were delicately trying to straddle. Since that time there has been anincreasing number of sound, active and growingchurches in that part of the country. How did thathappen? Teaching, my brethren, teaching. There werepublic debates, gospel meetings in which faithful men of God laid it on the line, church bulletins whicheffectively taught truth and caused brethren to studyfor themselves and periodicals which dealt with theissues. Let me tell you how it was NOT done. It wasnot done by compromise. It was not done by justpreaching principles without specific application. Itwas not done by passing by opportunities to teachthe people. It was not done by public speaking which entertained the audience and drew repeatedlaughter while failing to address serious issues and problems. It was not done by deception. It was notdone by leaving the brethren with the impression thatwe approved of what we really did not approve.

Narrowing the Gap

Brother Tant speaks of both sides attempting to"narrow the gap." Very well, that implies that eachside has something to discard and throw into the chasm so it can gradually be closed and a causewaybuilt. What will the "conservative-minded pro-institutional" churches have to give up to fill in the gap? Will they not have to abandon everycongregational practice for which there is no divineauthority? Has any of that really changed? Now, on the other side of the gap, just exactly what is it thatour brother thinks we have to give up? What item ineither teaching or practice can he sacrifice? Is he readyto give up on the distinction between the individualand the church? What error do we practice in churchcooperation? Is it still scriptural for churches in evangelism to cooperate concurrently by supportingpreachers directly in the field? If so, shall that practicebe sacrificed to the sponsoring church arrangement?What in our worship and work is unscriptural? Whatshall we discard into the chasm to fill it up?

On the other hand, if our brother really does notmean to give up anything, then is not his wholeproposal an exercise in deception? From discussionsnow going on among some of the "pro-institutional"folks it is being bruited about that some of us are ready to give up the fight and "come home." What is the source of this impression? Were the liberals right insaying it was all a big noise about nothing? I do notthink so. The underlying differences are as serious asthey have ever been. The issues must be resolved scripturally or they cannot be resolved at all. There isa place for negotiation and concession in politics, butnot in the religion of our Lord where unchanging principles are involved. "Thus saith the Lord" is stillthe final gap closer in every dispute. We are as readynow to strike hands with honest brethren on "that which is written" as we have ever been. We are as ready to discuss the word of God at every fairopportunity as we have ever been. But we are no moreready to accept

unscriptural teachings and practices now than twenty-five years ago.

Who Speaks For Whom?

This editor has never thought that he spoke for "thebrotherhood." I can only speak for myself. The same istrue for brother Tant. He does not represent anyonebut himself. He most certainly does not speak for me.And judging by the unusual response of letters, phonecalls and personal remarks we have received from overthe country since our March editorial appeared,brother Tant evidently does not represent the thinkingof a good many others. Judging from the articles appearing in other papers of late, it is evident thathe does not represent a number of other writers. Wehave seen and heard sentiments among brethrenwhich range from shock to sadness to outrage overthese proposals and their implications.

Our brother has no corner on willingness to talk andstudy with sincere brethren of a different persuasion.What we have never been willing to do is to evensuggest the possibility of compromise where any pointof truth was at stake. But now, brother Tant hasproposed that congregations may support and workwith both preachers who endorse institutionalism and those who oppose it, that they may share the pulpit,and that these same churches may alternate meetingswith preachers who both favor and oppose these objectionable practices. The evidence of this is in hisVANGUARD editorial of February, 1982 entitled"Almost!—But Not Quite." In this editorial he detailed efforts of two churches in Birmingham tomerge. One was "pro-institutional" and the other "anti-institutional." They sought merger on a nine-pointbasis which included his box in the vestibule idea. Consider the following items:

"3. Both preachers will be retained by the new congregation, alternating in their preaching assignments. ..."

"4. For five years following the merger, preachersinvited for gospel meetings will be asked on an alternating basis—first one from 'pro' group, then one from the 'anti' group."

"8. Meetings of other congregations (both 'pro' institutional and 'anti' institutional) in the city shallbe announced without discrimination..."

What was not detailed in these items was what liberties the preachers involved should have in theirpulpit work. Was a blanket of silence to be imposedso that years would go by without the congregationreceiving any teaching on scriptural authority, thenature, work and organization of the church and thedifference in individual and collective action? What of "sound speech that cannot be condemned"? Would the"whole counsel of God" have been welcomed? Or were there to have been limitations imposed on these preachers? If so, what self-respecting men could havebeen a party to such human bans? No wonder theeffort failed. The proposal raised more questions thanit answered.

An Appeal to Brother Tant

We bear no malice or ill-will of any kind toward Tant.We have known him a long time, enjoyed his company

in our home, been aided by him in many ways over theyears, and have read everything he has written for thelast thirty-five years. I respect Paul's admonition to Timothy to treat the aged men as fathers (1 Tim. 5:1).But as a student of the Bible and a preacher of thegospel, I have learned that men sometimes err grievously in the sunset years of life. Solomon is a casein point. We have seen men of our own time spend theirdeclining years lending their names and influences to causes which they opposed with clarity and effectiveness earlier in life. Thus they closed theirearly sojourn under a cloud which tended to darkentheir influence for good. I hope our beloved brother will not be offended by my citing the following""But speak thou the things which become sound doctrine: That the aged men be sober, grave, temperate, sound in faith, in charity, in patience" (Titus 2:1-2). My dear brother, I publiclyappeal to you not to leave the next generation withanother mess to clean up over the same issues which divided the Lord's people thirty years ago. As to your proposal, we do not need a box inthe vestibule. We already have a mailbox on the corner. What we all need is book, chapter and verse for all that we teach and practice.

"THAT THEY ALL MAY BE ONE..."

The conflict between the Jew and the Gentile is as old as Abraham. The conflict between the Jewish mind and that of the Gentile is obvious in New Testament scripture. In an effort to show that all men are underthe condemnation of God, Paul wrote in Romans chapter one concerning the total decadence of the Gentiles, in chapter two of the arrogant hardness of the Jews regarding the same principles, and finally inchapter three that "there is none righteous, no not one"(vs. 10) and "all have sinned and come short of theglory of God" (vs. 23). In showing that both Jew and Gentile were under the same curse of sin, he couldthen show that all men have need for a common Saviour and that "the gospel is the power of God unto salvation to every one that believeth, to the Jew firstand also to the Greek" (Rom. 1:16).

Early on, when the gospel was first preached, theGentiles were excluded from it. This in spite of the factthat its first spokesman, Peter the Apostle, had statedin his Pentecost sermon that "the promise is unto you, and to your children, and to all that are afar off, evenas many as the Lord our God shall call" (Acts 2:39), aclear reference to the Gentiles' acceptance before God.Peter was later convinced by a miracle from God that"God is no respecter of persons: But in every nation hethat feareth him, and worketh righteousness is accepted of him" (Acts 10:34-35), and resultantly thegospel was extended to include the Gentiles with the baptism of the household of Cornelius (Acts 10:47).Oddly enough, even after such a bold assurance, Peter was troubled about the acceptance of the Gentiles into the fellowship of the saved, for whencertain of the Jews came to Antioch from Jerusalem in Gal. 2, Peter, who had formerly freely associated withthe Gentile brethren, withdrew himself from their presence, causing even Barnabas to disassociate himself as well. The action incurred a severe rebuke from his fellow apostle Paul for his hypocrisy.

Paul, who describes himself as "the apostle to theGentiles," (Rom. 11:13) has much to say about the Gentiles' acceptance by God in the letter to the Ephesians. Says he, "But now in Christ Jesus, ye whosometimes were far off (Cf. Acts 2:39) are made nigh bythe blood of Christ. For he is our peace, who hath madeboth one, and hath broken down the middle wall of partition between us..." (Eph. 2:13-14). He further argues this point to the Romans by saying, "For theyare not all Israel which are of Israel, neither, becausethey are

of the seed of Abraham are they all children..." (Rom.9:6-7) and "He is not a Jew, which is one outwardly;neither is that circumcision which is outward in the flesh; but he is a Jew which is one inwardly; andcircumcision is that of the heart..." (Rom. 2:28-29).

The irony of all this is seen in the fact that eventhough the gospel first came through the Jews and theGentiles were at the beginning excluded, almost theopposite later became the case. The Gentiles were farmore receptive to the gospel message than were theJews and even today it is a rare occasion when one ofthe children of Israel accepts Christ as the chosenMessiah. Paul gave strong indications that such mightbe the case when he argued, "and if some of the branches be broken off, and thou (Gentiles), being awild olive tree, wert grafted in among them (Jews), andwith them partakest of the root and the fatness of theolive tree; boast not against the branches. But if thouboast, thou bearest not the root, but the root thee"(Rom. 11:17-18). "And they also (Jews), if they abidenot still in unbelief, shall be grafted, for God is ableto graft them in again" (Rom. 11:23).

I preached in a gospel meeting recently at the fineExpressway church in Louisville, Kentucky. At the first service I was introduced to a young man namedBob Darnell. He was a handsome lad with a thick tuft of black hair crowning a distinctively olive complexion. Soft-spoken, mild mannered, his friendliness did not atall detract from his obvious humility. I had seen him inthe audience and had judged already his interest by hisunusual attention to the lesson. Following the servicesmy friend Connie Adams told me about the youngman and his rather distinctive case.

"Bob Darnell is Jewish," brother Adams said, "he isbright and intelligent and is interested in what isright." As he continued his explanation I caught agleam in his eye that bespoke of his concern andinterest in the young man. "Jerry Parks and I, along with others, have been studying with him for almosttwo years and have found him to be very perceptiveand concerned about our differences." He went on to say that the young man had requested a Bible studywith the two of us following the services on Wednesday evening.

I continued to watch him with much interest, like all of us are prone to do with those not of our persuasion or nationality. His natural warmth and respect wereobvious and his comments concerning the sermonswere not as lavish as they were sincere and I wasimpressed. I was likewise impressed with his attitudetoward the Bible, particularly his willingness to studythe New Testament. I wondered if the situation were reversed whether or not I would have the same kind of objectivity and lack of bias. Upon further investigation I learned that he readily admitted thatJesus was an historical figure and that he was an outstanding one at that. He was greatly impressedwith his teachings and could not account for the factthat a mere man could so influence the entire course of mankind just by what he said and the way he lived.Furthermore, he was at a complete loss to explain how that this Jesus fulfilled so many of the Old Testament prophecies contained in his own Jewish Scriptures. Hisown personal honesty had lead him to confront hisRabbi with such fulfillments and he freely admittedthat his Jewish mentor had not dealt with them to his satisfaction. The Scriptures were at work on his heart!

When Wednesday night came he was anxious for theclass, showing his anticipation by reminding both brother Adams and myself about our commitment following the services (little did he know that we wereas anxious as was he). When the time came and most ofthe people had departed the building, we entered one ofthe classrooms and took our seats. He had several questions concerning forgiveness and its relation tothe sacrifices in the Old Law. Brother Adams fielded each question with kindness and verve, all thewhile making sure that the young man read the answers for himself out of the Bible, and addingsimple but forceful illustrations to further enhancehis understanding of each scripture. Before long itbecame obvious to me that Bob had reached the stagein his learning that he no longer could withstand thesigns of the Messiahship of Jesus. The gospel hadhim upset with his current state of affairs!

Brother Adams told me, now in his presence, abouthow they had researched the Scriptures and had seenthe many prophecies therein as they were fulfilled inthe birth, life, teachings, death, burial and resurrectionof Jesus of Nazareth. The recollection of it seemed to wipe away every objection he had had to the receptionof Jesus as the Messiah, We then went to the conversion of Saul of Tarsus and showed this young Jewish man how that there were similarities between his case and that of his Jewish ancestor. He was visibly shaken by the comparison. We sought to showthat, like Paul, he must show his courage and deal forhimself with Jehovah and that without regard toancestry, heritage, or religious background, he mustnow regard what Jesus said, that "he that loveth father or mother more than me is not worthy of me."

His eyes filled with tears; his jaw became rigid andset; he looked past both of us and into himself. Iquickly called his attention back to the conversion ofhis countryman Paul. I asked him to consider carefullythe question put to him on this occasion by thepreacher: "And now why tarriest thou? Arise and bebaptized and wash away the sins, calling on the name of the Lord."

Again the flush of tears filled his eyes. There was a prolonged silence, the kind that is thick, pregnant withimportant reflections because of the specialness of theoccasion. You could almost hear the heartbeat of the two concerned Gentiles, and the Jewish lad who was sointently contemplating his future. Could he? Dare he turn his back on his religious training at the synagogue? Could he again face his parents? Wouldthere be expulsions because of this decision? Howwould such a decision affect his future? I am sure all these questions flashed before his mind as he staredstraight through us.

Suddenly, with great courage and a determined look, he said, "I am ready!"

I can hardly speak of the occasion without thefeeling of joy rushing through my mind. It was a rareoccasion. I have seen many people obey the gospel andI have rejoiced at each and every one of them. But there was a specialness to this one. The confessionnever had more meaning to me than it did now. Connie

W. Adams, a Gentile preacher, a man dedicated to thecause of Christ, a preacher of righteousness, asked thisyoung Jewish lad, "Bob, do you believe with all your heart that Jesus Christ is the Son of God?"

"Yes sir, I surely do!" came the answer.

And he baptized him into Jesus Christ.

As they dressed I could hear the conversation plainly as I stood and waited. "You realize," said thenew brother in Christ, "that I will need you now morethan ever?" Brother Adams' assurances were tender,kind, believable. As they came out we all embraced. Iasked if I might read a passage.

I could almost hear the voice of another Jewish convert nearly 2,000 years ago, as I read, "For we areall the children of God by faith in Christ Jesus. Foras many of you as have been baptized into Christhave put on Christ. There is neither Jew nor Greek,there is neither bond nor free, there is neither male norfemale: for ye are all one in Christ Jesus. And if ye beChrist's, then are ye Abraham's seed, and heirs according to the promise." We prayed; as brethren inChrist are wont to do.

I left the building that night with greater faith in the gospel, with a new realization of the power that is in it,with a renewed zeal for its proclamation, and with a new brother in Christ, a Jewish man named Bob Darnell.

One of the common characteristics of the so called

"Latter Day Revelations" is their accommodating

nature. Usually the recipient of such revelations is

conveniently told to do the thing he or she desires to do

or has already predetermined to do. It seems that it

always works in such a way as to accommodate the

receiver. Often, a person is seeking some kind of

approval for his or her belief or action, thus either

wittingly or unwittingly, conjuring up a revelation

from God to give His stamp of approval on that

which the person has already decided to do.

This is typical of those involved in various types ofcharismatic religions. Yet it certainly is not somethingnew. Throughout the years there have been a certainnumber of people who could be persuaded to followsome man because they believed that God was giving"Latter Day Revelations" through that person. Whocould forget Jim Jones and the Guyana tragedy! Howcould he get such a following? Simple, he convincedpeople that God was speaking through him. Think ofthe infamous "Rev. Moon". How could he acquire sucha following of naive and idealistic young people?Again, the answer is the same. He convinced thesepeople that God was speaking and working throughhim in some special way. Why is there such an attraction for the "PTL Club" and the "700 Club"? The answer is always the same. They have convinceda certain number of the populace that God is speakingthrough them.

In each of these cases, God supposedly told theindividual to do the things the person wanted to do.Thus. Jim Bakker builds a resort in North Carolina;Oral Roberts builds a university in Tulsa; "Rev,"Moon acquires a fortune in property in New York aswell as other parts of the world; and Jim Jones travelsto Guyana to create his Utopian society.

Let me assure you, this type of accommodatingrevelation is not new. The master of this type ofmanipulative activity would have to be Joseph Smith,the Mormon "prophet". Without a doubt, JosephSmith had one of the most creative minds in all the world. Because of his clever audacity and brazenness,Smith would often find himself backed into a corner with seemingly no way to remedy his problems. Hisanswer was always the same. A revelation from Godjustifying his conduct or requiring his followers toaccommodate his need.

Most latter day revelators follow a similar pattern.They start out with rather ambiguous and conservative revelations. Smith's revelations were no different. The Book of Mormon, his first attempt atrecording his revelations, has been described as "chloroform in written form". In this revelation, heclaimed that God gave him the inside story on theorigin of the early inhabitants of the American continent. But as we get into some of the later revelations, such as "Doctrine and Covenants", it becomes apparent that Smith became more and more glib and quick on the draw with his accommodative revelations. Permit me to give you afew colorful and perhaps even humorous examples ofwhat I am talking about.

In September 1830, shortly after Joseph Smith started his church, his power was challenged by hisassociates, Oliver Cowdery, one of the witnesses of the golden plates, thought there should be a sharing of theapostolic gifts and that he, like Smith, should giverevelations. How was Smith to treat this threat? Simple, Just get another revelation saying that he wasthe only one that should receive the revelations. Thatis exactly what he did. Thus we find recorded:

"Behold I say unto thee, Oliver. . .no oneshall be appointed to receive commandments and revelations in this church, except my servant Joseph SmithJun., for he receiveth them even as Moses. .. .But thou shalt not write by way ofcommandment, but by wisdom: And thou shalt not command him who is at thy head, and at the head of the church." (Doctrine / Covenants, Sect 28).

Thus, if there had been any doubt as to who was thehead of the Mormon church, Smith quickly removed the doubt along with the threat by this accommodativerevelation.

Next, let us turn back the time to August, 1831.Smith, along with Sidney Rigdon and a few others, were traveling back to Kirkland, Ohio from "Far West" (Independence, Mo.) where he had dedicated the"Temple Lot". This is where the Mormon temple wasto be built in that generation, according to Smith'sprophecy, which never came to pass. They weremaking the trip from Independence to St. Louis by canoe on the Missouri River. For some unstated reason the canoe that Smith and Rigdon were riding in wasoverturned and the two of them almost drowned,whereupon Smith received the following revelation onthe bank of the Missouri River:

"And now, concerning my servants, Sidney Rigdon, Joseph Smith Jun., and Oliver Cowdery, let them not come againupon the waters, save it be upon the canal, while journeying unto their homes; or inother words they shall not come upon thewaters to journey, save upon the canal."(Doctrine / Covenants, Section 61).

I believe I might also receive such a revelation if I found myself going down for the third time. Now I ask you, is that not a revelation of convenience?

Now let's proceed a few years to August, 1936. Atthis point Smith was in deep financial trouble, which wasn't all that uncommon for him. In addition to the $13,000 debt on his Kirkland Temple, there were otherdebts totaling over $40,000 that were about due.About this time Smith read an article in the Painsville Telegraph concerning a vast treasure buried beneathan old house in Salem, Massachusetts. This is whereSmith had spent his childhood days treasure hunting;so the article was intriguing to say the least. In hischildlike simplistic approach to things, he evidentlyfelt assured that he could find the treasure and thus solve all his financial woes. Realizing that it would beviewed by his followers as unseemly for him to be offon a treasure hunt, he made the trip under the pretenseof a "missionary tour" back to Salem. When theyarrived in Salem he was faced with the awkward task of explaining his true objectives to those who weretraveling with him. How was he to solve this problem.Easy, just conjure up another revelation, which hequickly did.

"I, the Lord your God, am not displeasedwith your coming this journey, not withstanding your follies. I have much treasure in this city for you, for the benefitof Zion. . . . I will give this city into yourhands, that you shall have power over it,insomuch that they shall not discover yoursecret parts; and its wealth pertaining togold and silver shall be yours. Concern notyourself about your debts, for I will give you power to pay them. . . .And inquire diligently concerning the more ancient inhabitants and founders of this city. . ."(Doctrine / Covenants, Sect. 111).

Smith searched for over a month to no avail. Finally,when the true nature of the trip was revealed, hisfollowers shook their heads in disbelief. One Mormon writer later wrote, "We speak of these things withregret." Eventually, the incident was forgotten, butobviously on this occasion, his revelation of convenience got him into a lot of trouble.

None of this, however, slowed Smith down, and the revelations continued to pour out whenever they wereneeded. Such was the situation in July, 1843. Smith was now living much more dangerously. He and hisfollowers had been run out of town after town, finallyending up in Nauvoo, Ill., where he built his "Mansion" as he had done in Kirkland. By this time, the practice of polygamy, or "Celestial Marriages",was well under way. The "Mansion" served to housemany of these "lady" guests. Emma Smith, Joseph's real wife, was well aware of his indulgences, but neverapproved. As a matter of fact, on a number of occasions she became very hostile about the matter.Back in Kirkland, for example, in 1835 she furiouslydrove Fannie Algers (Joseph's first plural wife) fromthe house when Miss Algers was no longer able toconceal the consequences of her "Celestial" relation with the prophet. On another occasion, Emma caughtJoseph embracing Eliza Snow in the upstairs hall of the Nauvoo mansion. Emma went into a rage chasingMiss Snow down the hall. In her flight, Miss Snow felldown the stairs, seriously injuring herself. Emmapursued, chasing the frightened young lady out of thehouse in her night clothes.

Well, obviously something had to be done. Josephwas not about to give up his sensual night prowling, sowhat was he to do? Or need we ask? You guessed it,there was need for another revelation. But this revelation would have to be a real gem if he wasto convince his skeptical wife. So this time he outdidhimself with his revelation, even mentioning Emma byname. He started out laying the groundwork:

"Therefore, prepare thy heart to receiveand obey the instruction which I am aboutto give unto you. . .For behold, I revealedunto you a new and an everlasting covenant;and if ye abide not that covenant, then areye damned; for no one can reject thiscovenant and be permitted to enter intoglory."

Smith goes on in the revelation to mention the pluralwives of David and Solomon stating that "in nothing did they sin," Then the revelation goes on to mention Emma:

"And let my handmaid, Emma Smith,receive all those who have been given untomy servant Joseph, and who are virtuousand pure before me. . .And I command minehandmaid, Emma Smith, to abide and cleave unto my servant Joseph, and to none else. But if she will not abide this commandment she shall be destroyed, saiththe Lord; for I am the Lord thy God, and will destroy her if she abide not in mylaw." (Doctrine / Covenants, Sect. 132).

Emma was not very happy with the revelation, but theLord had spoken, so there wasn't anything for her todo but to try to bear up under a very dishearteningsituation. The revelation goes on but this is sufficient to make our point concerning revelations of convenience.

We cannot help but wonder how people can be sogullible as to be led away from the word of God by suchfoolishness. But such actions are common and the cause must either be ignorance of God's word or else a lack of faith in God' word. The New Testament claims to be a complete, sufficient and final revelation for man. Jude says that it has been once for all deliveredunto the saints (Jude 3). Other passages to considerwould be Jno. 14:26; Gal. 1:8,9 2 Tim.3:16,17; 2Pet. 1:3,4; 2 Jno.9. Let us simply have enough faith tobe obedient to the gospel that God has entrusted to us.

THE GOSPEL OF CHRIST—TEACHING

Paul said, "For I am not ashamed of the gospel ofChrist: for it is the power of God unto salvation to every one that believeth; to the Jew first, and also to the Greek. For therein is the righteousness of God revealedfrom faith to faith: as it is written, the just shall live byfaith" (Rom. 1:16-17). There are several declarations thatthe Apostle makes in these verses.

(1) One is that he is not ashamed of the gospel of Christ. Many today could not make that statement because they are afraid and ashamed of Christ and of hisgospel. Paul affirms that the gospel is God's power. These verses show that salvation is conditional upon man's part, that is, he must believe, which is used here to embrace all that is necessary to becoming a child of God.The universal plan of salvation is shown in these verses,because the gospel is God's power to save both the Jews and Gentiles. (2) Since this gospel is God's power to save, itsuggests that someone is lost. That one who is lost isman—you and I. When man is lost and One can save him, it is good news to him. Since man is lost in sin and Jesus Christ came to save him, it surely is good news tothe human family that the gospel is its hope of salvation. The Scriptures call the gospel "glad tidings" or good news. In Rom. 10:15, the record says, "... how beautiful are the feet of them that preach the gospel of peace, and bring glad tidings of good things"!

In verse twelve Paul said, "For there is no difference between the Jew and the Greek: for the same Lord over all is rich unto all that call upon him."; and then in the nextverse he quoted a passage from Joel 2:28, when he said,"For whosoever shall call upon the name of the Lordshall be saved." He proceeds to show that one cannot callupon the name of the Lord in whom he does not believe,and that he cannot believe in him of whom he has not heard, and that one cannot hear without a preacher. A preacher cannot preach unless he is sent with "gladtidings" to preach. Paul's language is, "How then shallthey call on him in whom they have not believed? Andhow shall they believe in him of whom they have notheard? And how shall they hear without a preacher? Andhow shall they preach, except they be sent? As it is written, How beautiful are the feet of them that preachthe gospel of peace, and bring glad tidings of good things! But they have not all

obeyed the gospel. For Esaias saith, 'Lord, who hath believed our report? So then faith cometh by hearing and hearing by the word of God (Rom. 10:14-17).

(3) The gospel which is good news or glad tidings tothe sinner must be taught. Jeremiah prophesied the gospel was to be taught in language like this, "Behold, thedays come, saith the Lord, that I will make a new covenant with the house of Israel, and with the house ofJudah: Not according to the covenant that I made withtheir fathers in the day that I took them by the hand tobring them out of the land of Egypt: which my covenantthey brake, although I was an husband unto them, saith the Lord; But this shall be the covenant that I will makewith the house of Israel; After those days, saith the Lord,I will put my law in their inward parts, and write it in theirhearts; and will be their God, and they shall be my people.And they shall teach no more every man his neighbor,and every man his brother, saying, Know the Lord; forthey shall all know me, from the least of them unto thegreatest of them, saith the Lord: for I will forgive theiriniquity, and I will remember their sin no more" (Jer.31:31-34). The Hebrew writer quotes this in Heb. 8:8-11. In giving the great commission, Jesus commanded his disciples to teach his will unto people. In Mt. 28:18-20, Christ said, "... All power is given unto me in heaven and in earth. Go ye therefore, and teach all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son,and of the Holy Ghost: Teaching them to observe allthings whatsoever I have commanded you: and, lo, I amwith you alway, even unto the end of the world." This shows that Christ wanted his gospel taught unto men,and even after they had obeyed it, he wanted them taughtsome more. Christianity is a teaching process. No man,regardless of who he may be, gets to the point that he cannot learn more of the will of the Father. Mark records this incident in language which is found in Mark16:15, "And he said unto them, Go ye into all the world,and preach the gospel to every creature." (4) The gospel is not only God's power unto salvation, but it is also the medium through which God draws men unto himself. In John 6:44, Christ said, "No man can come to me, except the Father which hathsent me draw him: and I will raise him up at the last day."To come to Christ, he said the Father must draw menunto him. But I raise the question, "How shall God drawmen to Christ?" The answer is found in these words in the next verse, which is quoted from Isaiah 54:13, "It is written in the prophets, And they shall be taught of God.Every man therefore that hath heard, and hath learned ofthe Father, cometh unto me." Please note, that they were to be taught of God. When they were taught, they would hear, then learn and then come unto Christ. The thing they would hear and learn was the thing which theywere to be taught, which was the gospel—they were tobe "taught of God."

Teaching, hearing, and learning appeals unto the mindof man. They appeal unto that part of the mind known asthe intellect.

Ours is a world in which many want to appeal to thelost with something besides or in addition to the simple gospel story of a crucified and risen Lord. Instead of making an appeal with the gospel of JesusChrist which is able to save the soul (Jas. 1:21), losthumanity is being appealed unto with what is calledthe "social gospel". The emphasis is being put on thesocial; not the gospel of Christ.

The result of the social gospel is seen in the attemptsthat are being made to draw a large crowd withanything other than the gospel of Jesus Christ. Sometry to draw a big crowd with ice cream suppers, hamburger suppers, big buildings, big named preachers, social position and distinction, celebrities,coffee and donuts in the "fellowship hall" which is nothing but a kitchen and banquet hall. These are but afew of the efforts that are being made to get peopleto attend the services of some so-called church claiming to belong to Christ. All have heard of effortsto get people on the church rolls with chicken suppers,ice tea and ice cream and cake. If an effort of this kind is successful, those who are gained are as dead as thechicken, cold as the ice cream, and weak as the tea.Furthermore, to draw people with these means alsomeans that they will have to be kept with these means.If people are drawn to Christ with food and entertainment, they will have to be kept with foodand entertainment. When the food and recreation stops, so will those drawn by such.

One can read in the New Testament of great multitudes that followed Christ. Of those in the multitudes very few followed Christ because of histeaching. Many were present to get a meal. Of some,Christ said, "... verily, verily, I say unto you, ye seekme, not because ye saw the miracles, but because yedid eat of the loaves, and were filled" (Jno. 6:26). Whenthe going became a little rough for some of them, the record says, "From that time many of his discipleswent back, and walked no more with him" (Jno. 6:66).It was upon this occasion that Jesus asked his disciples, "Will ye also go away" (Jno. 6:67)? Yes, theMaster had those following only for the loaves andfishes.

All have heard the saying that "the way to a man'sheart is through his stomach." Many young ladieshave won their husbands by appealing to the stomach.While this may and will work to get husbands, it will not work in the kingdom of God!

Men are foolish indeed to attempt to win people andconvert them to Christ with anything but the gospel ofChrist. The material things of this earth are but for atime, but the word of God, which is the gospel of Christwill remain when the worlds are on fire and the elements melt with heat.

I challenge your attention to investigate the book ofActs and see how the church grew rapidly in the firstcentury. The contributing factor was that the gospelwas preached wherever the disciples of our Lord went.It is interesting to note that there is not the first caseof conversion recorded in the New Testament in which the word of God was not at first preached unto thosewho were lost.

The gospel is God's power unto salvation. Man was not able to save even himself. He could not direct his own steps (Jer. 10:23). By his own wisdom, he did noteven know God. Paul said, in I Cor. 1:21, "For after that in the wisdom of God the world by wisdom knewnot God, it pleased God by the foolishness of preachingto save them that believe."

Since man is not able to save himself; he did not evenknow God through his own knowledge, it would seemthat man should be willing to let the Lord direct him inthe salvation of his precious soul. Man's will and wisdom will not save his soul. The gospel of Christ isthe salvation that Jesus Christ provided and it will save the souls of all the lost of earth if they will butturn unto the Lord and be willing to be saved upon the terms set forth by Christ in the gospel.

NEHEMIAH: RISE UP AND RESTORE The Place of Prayer in Spiritual Revival

In the last several articles we have seen Nehemiah as a leader in spiritual restoration. To make application ofthat principle we have examined several of our needsfor spiritual restoration and revival in the kingdomtoday. We have catalogued at least 5 great needs in thechurch today: (1) zero growth, (2) fragmentation inparties, (3) materialism, (4) stability of the home andmarriage relationship, and (5) the development of aninner relationship with the living Lord. It is this lastneed that we wish to examine in this article. Nehemiah 9 is a record of the prayer, from Verses 5-31, that theLevites had for the people. Needless to say, the heartof an inner relationship with the Lord is built onprayer. Yet, for the prayer life of a believer to be whatit ought to be there must be something much deeper inthe heart to produce a vital and living fellowship withthe Father. This basis for a living relationship withGod is also seen in this 9th Chapter. Now, let us begin our study together this month by defining what wemean and what the need is for this knowing of God.

The Need to Know God

The fact that we can be so very busy in the work ofthe Master and never know Him comes as a surprise tomany. Yet, it is the truth, as we shall see. Our God is apeople orientated being. He made man in His ownimage, and He walked with him in the garden in the cool of the evening to have fellowship with him. But man's sin broke that fellowship and man hid himself from God. As Nehemiah points out in Verse 7, God sought out Abraham because God wanted fellowship with man. It was His desire to develop a nation fromwhich we could enjoy a special and unique fellowship,as well as bring a Savior into the world so that all men might overcome the sin that severs the fellowship.Then, as Nehemiah continues the history, we see God in Moses building the Tabernacle. Why? So that Godmight better dwell with man and might havefellowship with him. Then, as the Kingdom of Solomonwith its glory reached its zenith, God fellowshippedman in the Temple with its rites, ceremonies, pomp andsplendor. Even that was still incomplete, so in thefullness of time, God did the ultimate to have fellowship with man. God came in human flesh and tabernacled with us. All of this was Heaven's gradualplan to bring man into fellowship with Him. Still, allthrough that period of time and up until today, it didseem as though the harder God tried to fellowshipman, the less interest man had in his heart in knowingthis God who was seeking him so cleverly. The heart ofthe Jew was always turned toward the doing of a ritualand never toward knowing his God. Yes, over and overthe Jew was condemned for doing the right thing inreligion. Why? Because his sin was that he never everloved or sought to be near his God.

Maybe we can illustrate our plight in the churchtoday with this crude example. My wife and childrenthink I am the best thing since sliced bread. So, oneday I come home from holding a gospel meeting andthey do not even look up when I walk in the house."Well, what's everybody doing," I ask? "Oh, we arewriting a book about how great you are!" they allreply. Of course, I am somewhat amazed. But, I waitaround for everyone to quit what they are working on and sit down and talk to me. Alas, they do not havetime to talk to me about it. Finally, after several dayshave passed, they have finished their little book, andnow I just know they are going to sit down with meand talk to me about what was going on while I wasaway. But now, they have all started to memorize it, and they are going around all the time quoting whatthey have written about me. Before too long theystart making outlines and giving expositoryexplanations of what certain paragraphs meant. At this point I have just about had it. I plead with themto stop what they are doing and sit down with me,and tell me what is going on in their lives. "Well, wecan't do that now," they reply. "We have to start thedoor-knocking campaign." "What?", I ask. "Sure, we are going to start telling everyone in the neighborhood what a great fellow you are." Of course, before too long people are meeting in the living room and they are all talking about me, and more andmore people are coming. My wife has not had time toput her arms around me in months and my childrenhave not climbed up to sit on my lap for ages. Nobodyeven knows that I live in this house any more. Oh,they wave as they come and go. But, nobody caresthat I want to spend some quiet time with them andshare thoughts and our love for each other. Well, before too long, you

would probably not be surprised to hear me say, "Ihate your stupid little book, and your going, and yourtelling, and I wish you would just forget it all."

Do you suppose that this might possibly have beenthe feeling of the Lord when he said in Amos 5:21: "Ihate, I reject your festivals, Nor do I delight in your solemn assemblies. Even though you offer up to meburnt offering and your grain offerings, I will notaccept them; I will not even look at the peace offeringsof your fatlings. Take away from me the noise of yoursongs; I will not even listen to the sound of your harps.BUT LET JUSTICE ROLL DOWN LIKE WATERS AND RIGHTEOUSNESS LIKE AN EVER FLOWING STREAM." Their worship here was not anidolatrous worship, but nevertheless it was condemned. It was even the right kind of worship, butthe people didn't really care anything about the objectof their worship. It was only a self-righteousworthiness of performing their ritual. They were ageneration of people that were so busy playing religion that they could never take time to know theirGod! Now, are not our own lives too often just like this? We are so busy with a combination of materialevents and ritualistic religious acts that we too neverhave time to sit down daily and read, study,meditate and pray with our God? Our Lord longs tobe with people. Am I too busy getting up a Sundaymorning sermon to spend an hour with the object ofthat sermon? I am going to teach a Bible class, but Ido not have time to spend in preparation, andanyway, so what if I have no time to spend in prayerthat I might know God?

We have substituted a multitude of things for knowing God. We have substituted doctrinal soundness for knowing God. We have substituted singing without a piano for knowing God. We havesubstituted personal evangelism for knowing God. Wehave substituted the Lord's Supper for knowing God. The Jews didn't care if they knew God or not; theyjust wanted to be sure they were doctrinally correcton the subject of the Sabbath day. A woman,according to the Talmud, could not pluck a hair fromher head on the Sabbath because plucking hair was alot like plucking wheat, and plucking wheat was reaping, and reaping was work which was forbiddenon the Sabbath. Also, you could not move a footstoolon the Sabbath because the woman might find a particle of dust under the footstool, and if she did, shemight want to remove it. If she removed the dust,that was the same as digging in the dirt, and digging in the dirt was the same as sowing seed, and thatwas work which was forbidden on the Sabbath day.Do you see why the Lord would say, "I HATE YOUR SABBATHS! You do not care about me, theonly thing you care about is legalistic approach to yourritual." Would it be possible that we could be guilty ofthe same thing? Would it be possible that our lack ofprayer, which Nehemiah saw so necessary in spiritualrevival of the people, has been unacceptable? Could itbe that we too are so concerned about things that areright and good within themselves, that we have forgotten what it is like to spend time with the Lordin a quiet, meditative moment?

How much do we pray? Would we spend an hour eachday in prayer? Maybe some do. Would we spend anhour every day reading our Bibles together with our families? Maybe some do. Would we have a place, atime, and a desire to give a part of every day to talkingwith the Lord about the large and small things of our lives? God desires us TO COME TO HIM! Worship isdefined as "to kiss toward." Also, as a small child thatclimbs to the lap of its father or mother to share somequiet private moments of love and devotion. Do wethink of our God as our Father?

Because we have spent so much time trying to get members of the church to attend services three times a week, we have by default fallen into the trap ofdefining a "faithful Christian" as "one who attends three times a week." But some do go farther, such as"he or she is one who attends and teaches a Bible class." Still others, even farther, such as "one whodoes personal work." But you see in all of our definitions we are leaving out the heart of man seekingto know and express his thanksgiving, praise,adoration and love to a God who is his Father. Yes, weall know what it is to talk with our earthly fathersabout life when we are disturbed and perplexed. Butuntil we can develop that yearning that Jesus exhibited in His life to talk to the Father daily aboutevery aspect of his earthly life, we have not reallydefined "faithfulness." Isn't it strange that if we coulddevelop such relationship with God, our assembling three times a week would take care of itself? No, notreally. We can never direct the hand until we motivate the heart.

Our next article will discuss a necessary ingredientthat makes this relationship possible.

It seems that in recent years religious debates havefallen out of fashion even among the people of God. Inview of the commands to ". . .be ready always to give an answer..." and ".. .earnestly contend for the faith.." (1 Pet. 3:15; Jude 3) as well as the examples of Jesus, Paul, Stephen and many other disciples, this isa discouraging and unprofitable development. In thisarticle, we will attempt to uncover some of the reasonspeople in general (and some brethren in particular) areopposed to religious debates. We encourage eachreader to examine his own attitude while seeking toconform his mind to the word of God.

Some people oppose religious debates because of themistaken notion that such violates the teaching of theBible. They point to passages such as Romans 1:29 and 2 Corinthians 12:20 in which "debates" are condemned. However, a study of the context and themeaning of the Greek words translated "debate(s)" inthe King James Version will reveal that honourablediscussion and debate are not under consideration but rather strife motivated by contentious aims! A religious debate could degenerate into what these passages condemn, but it certainly shouldn't and doesn't have to. Far from condemning debating fortruth, the Bible encourages and commands it!

Others oppose religious debates because of theabuses they have witnessed or heard about. It is truesome preachers use debates to showcase their egos and are not so much interested in defending truth as inpromoting self. It is also true that some debaters, even those defending truth, conduct themselves in an unworthy and un-Christian manner. Such ought notto be, and those who perpetrate such abuses will haveto give an account of themselves to God. However,these abuses do not negate the fact that honourabledebate engaged in by gentlemen is an excellent and scripturally approved way of seeking and determining truth! The church, elders, and the Bibleare abused, but we do not dispense with them on thataccount.

Some people, including some brethren, opposereligious debates because their minds are closed, andthey do not want to hear the "other side." They havemade their choices and wish to hear nothing further,even further study from God's word. They are not likethe noble Berean Jews who ". . .received the word with all readiness of mind, and searched the scripturesdaily. . ." (Acts 17:11) You may find this hard tobelieve, but there are probably those whose minds areso closed that they will not even read this article.Hearing truth and error side by side is an excellentway of learning truth and discerning error. Publicdebates provide such an opportunity.

Page 13

Some preaches and other religious leaders opposedebates because they recognize that their practice andteaching is unscriptural and cannot stand the test ofpublic investigation. If one is unsure of the authorityof his position, he may find it easier to ignore ratherthan debate those with whom he disagrees. Such insecurity is evident in a refusal to find some respectable forum for public discussion.

Christ and His disciples debated both privately andpublicly (Mark 12:18-27; Acts 6:8-10; Acts 15:2-7; Acts17:1-17; Et Cetera). In following their example, wemust always be careful not to abuse public debate andto conduct ourselves in the proper manner whether asdisputants or members of the audience.

Would you like to hear public discussions of religiouscontroversies? Does the opportunity to hear both sidesof an issue with open minds and open Bibles appeal toyou? Let us never be so smugly satisfied that we do notcontinually and eagerly search for Truth. How aboutit, brethren and friends! Are we building walls toprotect our little religious fiefdoms, or are we diligently seeking the truth? Think about it!

Unity is stressed in the Scriptures. Jesus prayedthat all who believe might be one, that the world mightcome to believe (Jn. 17:20, 21). Paul exhorted theCorinthians "that you all agree, and there be no divisions among you, but you be made complete in thesame mind and in the same judgment" (1 Cor. 1:10).In spite of these encouragements to singleness ofmind, disagreements frequently occur. How shall wereact? Perhaps a study of some New Testament casesof disagreements among the disciples will help.

Doctrinal Differences

The disciples differed on circumcision (Acts 15). Thiswas among the first doctrinal disputes in the Lord'schurch. The question of whether Gentiles (theuncircumcised) were to be accepted as subjects forbaptism had recently been settled. Now certain brethren contended that circumcision and adherence to the Law of Moses were essential to salvation. How was the issue to be settled?

It was determined to have a meeting of the elders of the church at Jerusalem (whence the advocates ofcircumcision came) and the apostles to look into thematter. After much discussion, Peter took the floor and related his experience at Cornelius' house (Acts10). Since God had made no distinction between Jew and Gentile with reference to their hearing the word ofthe gospel, giving them the Holy Spirit, and cleansingtheir hearts by faith, Peter could only infer that for thedisciples to make such a distinction would be wrong.He further reminded those gathered of the practicalimpossibility of being justified by the law; that all whoare saved are saved by grace. Paul and Barnabasfollowed, relating signs and wonders God had donethrough them among the Gentiles. Finally James spoke, quoting direct statements of Scripture,reminding his audience that several of the prophetshad foretold the days when the Gentiles would benamed among God's people. He concluded, "Thereforeit is my judgment that we do not trouble those who areturning to God from among the Gentiles" (Acts 15:19).

How shall we settle doctrinal differences? Certainly not through conventions or councils. Some appeal toActs 15 as their authority for such. But this meeting was not composed of delegates, nor does the Bible evenhint that any kind of voting took place. The decision was made by inspiration, not election. Whatever doctrinal differences exist among the disciples todaywill only be settled when we go to the inspired word ofGod and accept what is written therein. Whether bydirect statement, approved example, or necessaryinference, we must have "book, chapter, and verse" forall that we practice and teach.

Have you noticed that no new revelation was neededto settle the question of circumcision? The decisionwas made on information already available. Truly God"has granted to us everything pertaining to life andgodliness" (2 Pet. 1:3).

Judgmental Disagreements

Not long after the meeting in Acts 15 Paul suggested to Barnabas that they return and visit thebrethren in the cities where they had preached on theirfirst tour. Barnabas was desirous of taking John Markalong with them, but Paul refused because John Markhad earlier deserted them. "And there arose such a sharp disagreement that they separated from oneanother, and Barnabas took Mark with him and sailed away to Cyprus" (Acts 15:39). No point of doctrine wasinvolved here. It was a matter of judgment regardinghow best to do the Lord's work.

Many such judgmental matters arise within a congregation: which preacher(s) to support, what means of teaching to employ, how best to divide andschedule Bible classes, what order to follow in thepublic assemblies. Unfortunately brethren often disagree on these things. Even in churches with elders,those overseers may not always be in accord as towhat is best.

How shall we settle these disagreements? Here are afew suggestions. First, we must always give attentionto any Biblical principles involved (e.g. God's view of the qualifications and work of the preacher, or theorderliness He expects in public worship). Then weneed to consider the overall purpose or goal we aretrying to accomplish. Consideration should also begiven to what suits our particular situation: what wecan afford, what skills we have to utilize, what special

needs we may have. The fact that a thing works well atone place does not guarantee its success at another.Listen carefully to the voice of experience. One of thefallacies of majority rule in the church is that it givesthe novice the same voice (vote) as the most seasonedveteran in the Lord's army. And by all means, "Let thepeace of Christ rule [act as arbiter] in your hearts" (Col.3:15). Finally, we need to learn not to pout or rebel if wedo not get our way.

Personal Disputes

"And an argument arose among them as to which ofthem might be the greatest" (Lk. 9:46). The disciples' disagreement was not over a doctrinal question, nordid it involve matters of judgment about the Lord'swork. It was simply a personal dispute as to which ofthem would be the greatest in the kingdom. As is often the case in such disputes, all were in the wrong. Jesuspointed out that unless they were converted and became as little children, they would not even enter thekingdom, much less become great in it.

According to Matthew's account, Jesus went on to explain how His disciples are to settle personal disputes (Mt. 18:15-17). The first step is for the offended party to privately seek reconciliation. That rules out bitterly holding a grudge and waiting for theother fellow to make the first move, as well as slandering him at every opportunity. Elsewhere Jesus taught the one who had wronged his brother toseek reconciliation (Mt. 5:23, 24). If these efforts fail,one or two witnesses should be called in. If that fails, it is to be told to the church. If the one in the wrong still refuses to listen, he is to be withdrawn from.

Paul dealt with the same problem in 1 Cor. 6. He suggested selecting a wise brother who would be ableto decide the case. In any case it would be better tosuffer the wrong and be defrauded than to submit thematter to unbelievers for judgment.

May God help us to minimize our differences. Whenthey do occur, let us resolve to go about settling themas God would have us do.

WHAT IS A CHILD WORTH?

"In New York City, where I grew up, a child is worth$25,000 a year in welfare payments to an institution. Ifthat child gets adopted, he is worth exactly nothing tothem. So New York has the lowest adoption rate in thecountry."

The man who said that is Glenn Hester. His book,Child of Rage, speaks passionately of what the fostercare system in the United States did to one humanbeing, according to a review in The Tennessean, Oct. 1, 1981. It's not a pretty picture.

Hester was born out of wedlock and by the time hewas three, he had been in four orphanages in New YorkCity, At eight, he became the victim of a homosexualrape by a staff member of one of these orphanages. Byten, he had gone through a couple more institutions andfour foster homes.

"By the time I was a teenager," he relates, "I hadseen and been the victim of so much violence, I became violent myself. At thirteen, I was put in a juveniledetention center. At seventeen, I was in a place for the criminally insane. The guards entertained themselveswith violence. I was the youngest person there.

"Murder would go almost unpunished there. Therewas no such thing as justice. One time, I spent twomonths in solitary confinement in chains. I could go tothe bathroom at 6 a.m. and 6 p.m. They fed me mush. Ihad dysentery. They would clean up the place onlyevery two or three days."

Hester, whose survival is described as "something close to a miracle," (Though I deplore the practice of equating the remarkable with the miraculous, I'm almost moved to concur with that description.) nowhas a heating and air conditioning business and isusing every opportunity to cry out against the foster care system.

"They are interested in that money," he states. "They aren't interested in the welfare of the child. Heisn't going to get any emotional support. He isn't going to get any love. We are just raising children whowill fill our prisons."

Whether you agree or disagree, that sentiment isfrom someone who's been there. Perhaps we shouldadd our voice to his and demand that legislation bepassed to change this abusive system.

What is a child worth?

"$25,000 a year to an institution."

The ancient prayer of David may appropriately

grace our lips: "Thou hast seen it; for thou beholdestmischief and spite, to requite it with thy hand: the poorcommitteth himself unto thee; thou art the helper ofthe fatherless . . . Lord, thou hast heard the desire of the humble: Thou wilt prepare their heart, thou wilt cause thine ear to hear: To judge the fatherless and theopposed, that the man of the earth may no more oppress" (Psalm 10:14,17,18).

A MODERN THORN

Does forgiveness of sin for the alien require faith,repentance and baptism? Seems to be an elementaryquestion for the average member of the church as anaffirmative answer is immediately given. In application, however, there is growing difficulty forsome, the issue becomes quite thorny. Thetroublesome area involves divorce and remarriage.Must one involved in an unscriptural second marriage,one formed while the former mate is yet living andwhere divorce resulted from something other thansexual infidelity, dissolve that marriage in order tobecome a Christian? Is baptism valid in the absence ofrepentance and does repentance require dissolution ofall unscriptural second marriages?

Repentance is a prerequisite to scriptural baptismand involves a quitting and turning away from sin.Such is worked by "godly sorrow" (2 Cor. 7:10) and produces a changed life moulded in the righteousnessof Christ. As one repents there is a complete turn around affected with the penitent's will being submitted to the will of God in all things. One who isa gambler will have to quit, a prostitute will have tocease and desist in her pursuits and an adulterer will have to quit committing adultery. Now that is prettysimple, repentance demands this kind of change.Where these known activities are established as sin,quitting is essential to baptism, if such is to affectremission of sins.

Conceivably, one might be justifiably refusedbaptism. When one refuses to repent of admitted sinand persists in a sinful course there is no need tobaptize. Let us suppose the local gambling czar presents himself to be baptized after learning the fundamentals of the gospel. In the course of discussion he informs he has no intention of curtailing these activities because this is his living andbesides this, he is not convinced it

is sin anyway. Would there by any need to baptizehim? An admitted prostitute wants to be baptized butdeclares her intention to continue making her living inthis way. Any need to baptize her? A couple in anunscriptural marriage, a second with no scripturalground for divorce and with the former mate yet living, admitting such is the case and refusing to end therelationship, maybe arguing they are not sure it iswrong if they continue to live as man and wife. Anyneed to baptize them? The issue is in reality repentance. Will baptism wash away sin which is unrepented? Scripturally, we must answer, no!

Does this conclusion require an investigation ofthese or other specifics, where they do not presentthemselves as obvious, as a prerequisite to scripturalbaptism? No. It does, however, admit to certain actions and relationships which indicate obviousrebellion to God's will and unwillingness to conform.Where such is the attitude, God's plan is of no effect, itis nullified.

The consequences of unscriptural divorce and remarriage are multiple and far reaching. Problemsfrom such are a constant experience in most congregations. These are not relieved nor resolved bycompromise of truth, neither by ignoring or puttingthe matter on hold until a consensus of judgment isreached. The fact of different positions does not justifya maintaining of open minds or a refusal to acceptplain and simple conclusions demanded by Scripture.If this has merit we would be undecided about baptism, instrumental music, and any number ofother matters which continue mooted. Dedication to truth and safety within its unchallenged precinctsnecessitates conviction and a position. We need to quitgrinding any personal axe, trying to justify what wehave already decided, serving self in this matter, ifsuch is the case, and accept the truth and the consequences of it. The Lord still said, "Whosoever shall put away his wife, except it be for fornication, and shall marry another, committeth adultery: and whosoever marrieth her which is put away doth commit adultery" (Matt. 19:9). I believe just what hesaid, don't you?

To: all men attending the monthly business

meetings. Subject: saving time when discussing various proposed programs, ideas, projects, etc. orwhen asked to perform some task. Much

of our time is taken up in expressions of disagreement to ideas brought forth. In order to savetime, from now on instead of a lengthy verbalization ofthose objections, please simply refer to the number ofsaid objection listed below (each man will be givensuch a list, with extra copies going to those most likelyto wear them out). Example: Brother A says "I'd like to see us buy some

filmstrips" Brother B says "Number 1"

and his point is made. LIST OF OBJECTIONS FOR USE IN ALL BUSINESS MEETINGS (to be expanded as new objections are raised) #1—Jesus and/or the Apostles never used those

things and they did all right without 'em. #2—We've never done it that way before. #3—We've always done it this way.#4—We tried to do it that way once before and it

didn't work. #5—People/things are different nowadays-that

won't work. #6—I just never have been any good at it.#7—I'll do anything else but don't ask me to

#8—I don't do anything unless I'm told. I gotchewed out once for steppin' out on my own.

#9—I forgot all about that,#10—I just don't think that that is that important. #11—Get somebody else this time. #12—I'm so busy I can't get to it right now. Maybe

later.

#13—I thought I told somebody else to do that. #14—Let's discuss it in detail at the next meeting-we're out of time. The above is free to use to the glory of God!

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

FIELD REPORTS PAUL A. BRUCE, 502 Main Avenue, St. Maries, ID 83861. The church here in St. Maries, Idaho has now been in existence for ten years. This is the only church in this area that stands up for thetruth and opposes the doctrine of institutionalism. Presently we have 16 members with attendance in the twenties. We have several visitors coming to our services and have many Bible studies going on during the week. The brethren here have a good attitude and are growing spiritually, However, I have had to inform the brethren here thatunless I receive more support in the near future that, because of myfinancial obligations to my family, I will be forced to move, When wediscussed the situation of the needed support with the congregation,they all voiced their hopes that we would be able to remain. Several ofthe members are now writing letters and calling churches in otherparts of the country to see if they could help us. They expressed theirconcern that brethren elsewhere might not want to or be able to help,and they are afraid that once again they will be without a preacher. Tosome of you who have heard many preachers, you may be thinkingthat they can get someone else in a few weeks. This is not the casehere, where they have had only one other preacher before me. He onlyremained here for one year. Now they face being alone again. It'sdiscouraging, and makes them feel that they might not be importantenough to merit help. I have grown to love these people as my ownfamily. This work MUST go on, but it will only if you can help. Myfamily and I have sold almost everything we had to be able to comehere. The members have given us food, money, and clothing to helpus. My family of six has lived on $500 to $700 per month for the lastseveral months. But the Lord has helped us through the toughestmonths. Can you possibly help us? For more information you may call: Barney Cargile of Post Falls, ID at (208) 773-9734, or Samuel Dawson

of Amarillo, TX at (806) 352-2809, or Henry Kirkland of Napa, CAat (707) 253-0215. Or you may call me at (208) 245-2698. For yourcareful consideration, I thank you.

JIMMY TUTEN, 7911 Country Dr., Mobile, AL 36609. The first ofApril finds the work at Tillman's Corner moving into full swing.More involvement on the part of the brethren in the work is evident. Wehave completed some work on the building and on the land. We are atpeace. During the first three months of 1982 we baptized three andhad three restored. Also six identified with us, Come visit us! Phone

(206) 666-5769.

KEITH WARD, Rt. 2, Box 736, Lake Butler, FL 32054. On January 1,1982, I began work with the Danville church near Lake Butler, FL.Danville is two years old, young in membership, but positive in outlook.We have begun a weekly article in a local paper, put a tract rack in the laundromat, begun door knocking, and improved our class teaching. Asa result, we have had some visitors and a greater interest by our ownmembers. I am interested in hearing about some inexpensive methodsof getting the gospel out to people. At this time I am still short $400 a month in support. If you can help, please contact me.

LOREN T. STEPHENS, 325 Kessler Blvd., Seymour, IN 47274. After five and a half years with the church here in Seymour, I will be movingto work with the West Main St. congregation in Easley, SC the firstweek in June, 1982. The work here has been encouraging and profitablespiritually. During the last five years there have been 18 souls baptized,45 confessions of sin, and 34 to place membership. There was an overall increase in membership from 56 to 75, with a similar increase in contribution. The congregation now has

Page 17

elders and deacons, and is for the most part peaceful and working for the continual growth of this local church. The elders have askedBro. Jerry Sayre, of Johnson City, TN to come and work with them here. Should you be traveling between Indianapolis and Louisvilleplease stop in and worship. We are located on the east side if I-65 at

U.S. 50. Our services are at 9:30 a.m. and 6 p.m. on Sundays and

7:30 p.m. on Wednesdays.

TROY ADAMS, P.O. Box 506, Ellsworth, ME 04605. I have beenback in Maine since last November and am still in need of additional support. It has been a tough winter for my family of seven (ourheating bill in January was $350). I presently am in need of $1,500per month. If you cannot help on a continual bases, please considerhelping on a temporary basis. For references please contact: RalphSmart, 516 Union St., Bangor, ME 04401; The elders of the TempleTerrace church of Christ, 501 Bullard Pkw., Temple Terrace, FL33617; The elders of the Hillview church of Christ, 7550 Charlotte Rd., Nashville, TN 37209; The elders of the Highland church ofChrist, 1226 Highland Blvd., San Antonio, TX 78210; of the eldersof the Annandale church of Christ, 4709 Ravenworth Rd., Annandale, VA 22003. You may phone me at (207) 667-9661.

KENNETH E. THOMAS, 401 24th St. W., Bradenton, FL 33505. The Manatee County church of Christ has had a weekly radioprogram for several years now. We have a fifteen minute tapedsermon followed by a live call-in portion of 45 minutes. Often wewonder how much good a radio program is accomplishing sincewe rarely see the attendance increase by any large amount.

Some months ago following a series on liberalism, I received a call from the preacher for a congregation of our black brethren in Sarasota, FL, inquiring if I would be willing to preach in a gospelmeeting there for a week, I replied that I would be happy to if I could "declare the whole council of God." The preacher assured methat he had talked it over with the elders and they wanted to be ashe stated it, "A model New Testament church." The preacher's name is J.W. Green.

Knowing a little about their background in "liberalism" and their association with others of the more liberal congregations in thearea, I was shocked and happy to know that the radio program hadmade them re-evaluate their position and to make the decision to turn back from any and all unscriptural activities. I pulled no punches during the week, I preached on the organization and workof the church, the difference between individual and collective responsibilities, fellowship, marriage, divorce and remarriage, masonry and some first principle lessons. Several from the "liberal" church at South Trail in Sarasota came several eveningsuntil the preacher from South Trail came one evening. He and I had a mini debate at the back door where he sought to justify the"sponsoring eldership" with the foolish statement about "no authority for fertilizer on the preacher's grass either but we do it anyway" argument. He had been called on to lead prayer thatevening. The next night I told them about our discussion at the back door of the building and showed them why they should notask him to participate in their services as such is bidding Godspeed to his error. I fully expected to be called during the meeting and asked not to return to finish out the week. I even stated such and then commended them for their willingness to accept the rebuke and study every action in the light of truth.

Two firsts took place that week. (1) I was the first white man topreach a meeting there, and (2) this was their first meeting to run through a Saturday night. There was no doubt another first asmembers of the Manatee County church as well as members from Palmetto, Osprey and Sarasota (where Herbert Fraser nowpreaches) turned out to support the meeting. They asked thepreacher from Palmetto, Ken Weliever, to speak up the last eveningof the meeting if he wished. He did and admonished them to continue to seek truth and commended them for having me in themeeting.

Recently, the Manatee County church had a black brother for ameeting—F.O. White. While he was here he visited Bro. Green. Bro.Green talked of the pressure the "liberals" were putting on him. butaffirmed that he was going to stand for the truth to put it in his words, "If I have to eat dirt." I asked if they had discontinued having social function in the building annex. He showed me a lettersigned by the elders and himself to the effect that this was no longerto be a part of their functions.

We believe they intend to be a faithful congregation and are seeking to be scriptural in all their activities. They continue to listento our radio program and have stated their desire for me to preachin another meeting. Yes, radio programs do good! We have seenother examples of the good the program is doing. There are still good and honest hearts out there who will respond to the truth of Christ if only we will preach it plainly, without compromise and inlove.

The Manatee County church has experienced good growth and has an active program of work. We are in the first phase of ourbuilding program. Potential for future growth looks good! Anyonevisiting in the area is invited to come and worship with us.

FOREIGN WORKS CARLOS CAPELLI, Casilla #83, 1665 Jose' C. Paz, Buenos Aires,Argentina. I was invited to preach a gospel meeting in March inValdivia, south of Chile. The church there is well with 25 members who are zealous for the Lord's work. I had to provide the expensesfor that meeting from my own pocket. Following the meeting wevisited the Efrain Perez family in Vina del Mar. We had not seenthem for seven years. Also I visited the Santiago church along withthe congregation in Puente Alto. Back in Argentina at Mendozathere was a meeting with Bro. Partain. The attendance was around30 each night. Three were baptized. The congregation here atJose' C. Paz continues to do well and is at peace. The Hueytown, ALchurch has notified me that they will have to discontinue their $200monthly support in May. So I will need to seek additional help formy support. May God bless each of you.

CHARLES HOUSE, P.O. Box 1031, Douglas, AZ 85607. We are happy to report that one was baptized in March at the congregationat Agua Prieta, Sonora, Mexico. Membership at Agua Prieta is 41with Sunday attendance running around 100. Many visitors are coming to the services.

PREACHERS NEEDED COOKEVILLE, TN—The Jere Whitson Rd. church is looking for a full-time preacher to begin working with them around August 1,1982. House and support are available. Anyone interested maywrite the church at 329 Jere Whitson, Cookeville, TN 38501. Or call

(615) 823-2258 or 528-5382.

RICHLAND, WA—The Tri-City church of Christ in Richland,WA needs a preacher. We are a new congregation and can furnishpartial support. Contact Sterling Harper at (509) 547-8027 or JoeBricker at 588-3307.

PREACHERS AVAILABLE STAN WENCK, 2700 W. 96th PL, Evergreen Park, IL 60642. Ihave part-time experience and am interested in getting into full-time work. I am 36 years old. Phone (312) 422-8746 after 5 p.m.

DAVID L. WALDRON, 5643 Newberry St., Wayne, MI 48184.After working with the small church in Clare, Michigan for eight years, I came to work with the Palmer Rd. congregation in Westland, Michigan last November as a "fill-in" until Bro. B.G. Echols could move up from Texas this summer. As of July I will beable to work elsewhere. I have been in full-time work for over 11 years, and part-time work 12 years prior to that. I have workedmainly with small congregations where outside support wasnecessary, but would be glad to talk with any church in need of apreacher. I am able to provide a portion of my support by means ofNavy retirement. Phone me at (313) 326-0690.

IN THE NEWS THIS MONTH

BAPTISMS		443
RESTORATIONS		162
(Taken from bulletins and papers received by the editor)