The practice of having "prayer partners" (a juniorpartner, and a senior partner), as advocated by theCrossroads Church of Christ in Gainesville, Florida,and as implemented into the curriculum of satellite groups throughout the country, is based on a perversion of Jas. 5:16. The practice has caused me totake a second look at a sermon which I have been preaching for some thirty years. I used to call the sermon "One Toward Another", but for the purposeof this article, only the title has been changed, andthat not to protect the innocent, but to spotlight theguilty.

The philosophy in the "prayer partner" concept isfor a new convert to be paired off with a senior "partner", and have the "junior" partner confess his(or her), sins and shortcomings to the senior confessor. Aside from the fact that such a practice isbased on a blatant perversion of Jas. 5:16, I wouldencourage no one to be unequally yoked in such anarrangement. I would insist on such a partnershipbeing equal—"you tell me your dreams (in this case,sins), and I'll tell you mine."

We could even use the following verses as a referenceback to Elijah and Elisha, the older and youngerprophets of 2 Kings 2, but we would find no such"prophet partner" arrangement as is inherent in theprayer partner concept of modern theology. The samecould be said of other "partnership" examples found inthe Bible, such as Paul and Timothy.

If the admonition of James to "confess your faultsone to another, and pray one for another" requires (oreven permits), such an arrangement as the modern prayer partner concept, then just try to imagine theimplications we face when making the same application to similar passages of Scripture. Maybe those who would pervert one passage of Scripture arenot too concerned about what they would do with anyother passage, but I believe there are still those among us who are not only concerned about a statement of truth in context, but are also concernedfrom the standpoint of consistency. Let us examine afew parallel passages which employ the "one another"concept.

We are to "have love one to another" (Jno. 13:35).Does this imply that we are to have "love partners" inorder to carry out this divine injunction? We are to"consider one another to provoke unto love and good works" (Heb. 10:24). Does this sanction a "consideration partner" (junior and senior, of course),in order to provoke one another to love and good works? How about an "assembling partner"arrangement for Heb. 10:25? Did they have such asystem in Old Testament times when "they thatfeared the Lord spake oft one to another" (Mal. 3:16)?Or, would these passages allow "exhorting partners"as we endeavour to "exhort one another"?

Now that we are beginning to get the hang of this"partner" business, it won't take us long to find "teaching and admonishing" partners in Col. 3:16, "comforting partners" in 1 Thes. 4:18, "hospitality partners" in 1 Pet. 4:9, "forgiving partners" in Eph.4:32, "fellowship partners" (to go with our "fellowshiphalls") in 1 Jno. 1:7, "burden-bearing partners" in Gal.6:2, and "care partners" in 1 Cor. 12:25!

We have by no means exhausted the possibilities offorming various partnerships based upon the perversion of Jas. 5:16, but these are sufficient tokeep even our more liberal brethren busy for a few years, and discourage those who would not intentionally wrest a passage of Scripture to justifyanything. And, I have no intention of backing off in my efforts to persuade people that we do have a wonderful relationship in the family of God as we dotogether those things which are designed for our mutual good. I would also advise other brethren not tobecome "gun shy" when quoting the above mentioned passages, and deprive themselves of thefellowship they enjoy one with

another, just because some among us are placing anunscriptural emphasis on the "one to another" phrasefound in Jas. 5:16.

The following poem, which I wrote in 1961,expresses my sentiments toward my fellow "partners"in Christ, and I don't expect another twenty years tochange that sentiment.

TOGETHER, WITH ONE ANOTHER

Let us "consider one another", "care for one another," too;

Hebrews ten and twenty-four, part of this tells us todo. First Corinthians, Chapter Twelve, verse twenty-fivethe rest imparts;

Peter says, "Love one another", this we'd do with all our hearts. "Bear ye one another's burdens", from Galatians wederive,

Assemble, we, ourselves together (Hebrews ten,verse twenty-five).Exhortation for our brother, in this verse, our duty's seen;

Hospitality, toward each other (Romans twelve, andverse thirteen)."Pray for one another", too (James Chapter Five, andverse sixteen),

Striving always all together, from Philippians thiswe glean.Now, if we do the things here stated (James thisknowledge also gave),

We'll have cause to be elated, for our brother we may save. Some day, if faithful, we will be, caught up together inthe sky;

(From Thessalonians this we see), there to meet the Lord on high.Then heirs together we shall be, as here together wehave been;

With Romans eight this will agree, so let us strivethe prize to win.

P. J. Casebolt

THE PUCKETT MATERIAL ON THE HOLY SPIRIT

With this issue we present the first of three lengthyarticles by the late, lamented, Franklin T. Puckett onthe subject of the Holy Spirit. We thought it good alsoto include in this issue a tribute to Franklin T. Puckett written by Hoyt H. Houchen. I consider myacquaintance with brother Puckett to have been oneof the richest, most rewarding experiences of my life.He left us at the age of 66, long before we were readyto give him up. He left an example for other gospelpreachers worthy of emulation.

He was a self-made scholar. His study was both deepand wide. His preparation, on whatever subject, wasmeticulous. He sought to know his subject fully andleft no stone unturned when it came to refuting error.He stopped every leak, looked at every possibleobjection. He was eminently fair in his treatment of those who opposed him. His knowledge of the Hebrewand Greek text was extensive. His memory wasremarkable and we have heard him quote whole chapters without ever opening his Bible. If you readalong, you would find every word in place. We pointout these things in case some of the younger men who did not have the pleasure and profit of knowing him,should think that his material was carelessly throwntogether. While he was just a man, he was a godly, scholarly man who did his work well. What he said onany subject was worthy of serious consideration.

The subject of the Holy Spirit has always beendifficult. Deity is infinite and we are finite. Historically, brethren for the most part have stoodtogether in opposition to denominational dogmawhich demanded a mystical concept of the HolySpirit and His work in the conviction and conversion of sinners. We have stood as one against the Pentecostal-type sects with their purported tonguespeaking and claims of miraculous healing. But brethren have not always agreed on the subject ofhow the Spirit indwells the Christian.

For many years, I did not agree with the positionoccupied by Franklin T. Puckett on the subject of the indwelling. We discussed it many times, including the last few times we saw each other. I had always opposedthe denominational concept of direct operation of theSpirit in conviction and conversion and the Pentecostal claims of miraculous gifts today. I havehad three public debates with denominational preachers dealing with this subject and if the brethren were

dissatisfied with my work, they did not indicate it. But, in common with a number of men past andpresent, it was my conviction that the Spirit somehowindwelt the Christian separate and apart from the agency of the word. The last time I ever saw Franklin

T. Puckett was about three months before he died. We had lunch together and once again the subject of theHoly Spirit and his work in the Christian came up. Hesaid some things on that occasion which opened doorsof understanding for me which I had not consideredbefore and that resulted in a change of view once I hadtime to sort it out.

The material from him in this and the next two issues of SEARCHING THE SCRIPTURES was presented by him in the Thayer Street Lectures inAkron, Ohio about a year and a half before he died. Thefirst two articles were so thoroughly outlined, oftenwith complete sentences, that it was not hard to putthem in manuscript form. The third article was takenword for word from a tape recording. We will delete inthat article some rather extensive personal remarks hemade at the beginning of the speech. This we will haveto do in the interest of space. We are indebted toThomas G. O'Neal of Bessemer, Alabama for thesuggestion that this material be printed in the paper and for much of the work in getting it ready. We alsowish to thank Cecil Norman of Birmingham, Alabama for helping to decipher this material and for typing the manuscripts. Her work, as usual, has been expertlydone.

The GUARDIAN OF TRUTH has published inbooklet form the outlines of these three speeches andthey may be ordered from them or from ReligiousSupply Center. In view of the recent interest amongbrethren in this subject, evidenced by rather extensivewriting by some on the subject and by one writtendebate on the indwelling of the Spirit, it is our persuasion that this material not only ought to bepreserved, but that it constitutes a worthy addition toour source materials in probing into the matter. Thenature, person and work of the Holy Spirit is thoroughly considered and we ask the readers to studythe material carefully. Franklin T. Puckett would havebeen the first to urge that nothing be accepted as truthjust because he said it, but that each individual shouldweigh the subject in the light of the living oracles.

GOSPEL MEETINGS

Thus far (through the month of May) this year wehave been privileged to preach the gospel in nine meetings. All of these meetings have been well attended. We have preached to a number who werenot Christians. There have been fifteen to obey theLord in these meetings with many doors opened forfurther study after the meetings ended. We have found some good brethren who are hard at work for theLord. Every place is unique as to opportunities, attitudes and local problems.

In January we presented a series of lessons onDangers Facing the Church. This was at Madison,Indiana where Gary Sandusky continues to do anexcellent work. In March we worked with Frank Himmel

and the Metairie, Louisiana church. They have sometalented members and are working together harmoniously. Some brethren came from greatdistances to support the effort and a good number ofnon-members attended. Also in March, we were privileged to work again with the strong and growing church at Middlebourne, West Virginia where RonnyMilliner preaches. There are four excellent elders whoshepherd this flock. They have growing pains and have plans to erect a new and larger meeting house. Ispoke 14 times that week.

In April I worked again at Gulfport, Mississippiwhere Glenn Melton is laboring diligently. While thechurch there is small, there is the most optimisticattitude there we have seen in that place. Telephonecanvassing has produced a number of students for aBible correspondence course and many home studieshave grown out of that. Members worked hard and brought a number of acquaintances to the meeting.

Also in April I preached in a meeting at Shepherdsville, Kentucky, just five miles from our home at Brooks. Rick Christian is the energetic preacher. Heably directed the singing in the meeting. A good number of community people, including some business acquaintances, attended. This church is served by two elders. Also in April it was a pleasure towork with the fine church at Olney, Illinois in thesoutheastern part of the state. They have about 160 inattendance with four able elders and with Roger Hillis,who resigned his work as a Pharmacist, serving as a local preacher. Several men in that congregation are preachers of ability and do much good work in thesurrounding area. I spoke 14 times that week, also.

In May we were with the Wildercroft church inRiverdale, Maryland, in the Washington, D.C. area.Our son, Wilson Adams, had just moved there to workas local preacher. They are served by three elders whoare obviously men of knowledge and competence. Theirattendance runs about 110 on Sunday mornings. Theyare blessed with excellent facilities for future growthand with a number of talented members. Again, inMay it was my pleasure, along with Gene Frost, topresent four lessons during the week of the Rader-Massey debate at Manslick Road in Louisville, Kentucky. Gene Frost presented four excellent speeches on Humanism and I was asked to presentfour lessons on Premillennialism. The debate was well attended, as were the morning sessions. Donnie V.Rader, local preacher at Manslick Road, had preparedwell for the debate and ably presented and defendedtruth. The debate was a good one with perfect orderprevailing. My last meeting in May was at ChristianChapel at Kettle, Kentucky. This is located a few miles south of Burkesville, Kentucky and about a milefrom Dale Hollow Lake. Raymond Castillo left hisadvertising business to enter his first full-time work.He is capable and hard working. Three elders overseethis flock. This is the congregation with which the lateRoss O. Spears was working at the time of his death.On Friday night of the meeting a severe thunder stormknocked out the lights just before service was to begin. We conducted

the whole service with only the light of two candles anda flash light. The lights came back on during theclosing announcements.

The gospel is still the power of God to save the sinner and to build up the saint and I am thankfulfor every open door to preach it. We must work whileit is day for the night cometh when we shall work no more.

Our beloved friend and brother in Christ, Franklin T.Puckett departed this life on January 16, 1975.Although seven years have passed since his departurefrom this world, those of us who knew him, loved himand respected him are still mindful of him. His bodywhich lies in the silent grave had housed our dearbrother in the Lord for sixty-six years. But this is notall of Franklin Puckett that remains upon this earth.

Franklin T. Puckett was a personal friend of ourfamily, and our lives have been enriched by havingknown him. Sentiment makes it difficult to write about a true friend. He was kind, gentle, yet unwavering inhis convictions.

Never shall we forget our earliest association withthis great man. In 1953 I was preaching for the Centralchurch in Amarillo, Texas. We invited brother Puckettto preach for us in a meeting. The church there was in acrisis over the issues of the sponsoring church arrangement and church supported benevolent institutions. Brother Puckett did his usual splendid job of preaching, and he devoted one night during themeeting to a study of the "issues." At the close of thatparticular service, a brother who had become mosthostile because of what brother Puckett had preached,vented his contempt in the foyer by abusing brother Puckett in a loud and boisterous manner. Brother Puckett, the gentleman and Christian that he was,silently placed his finger over his own lips as a signalto the vociferous brother to hold his voice down. During all of the brother's ravings and rantings,brother Puckett was kind and smiling. This was an incident which exemplified his courteous demeanorand coolness of temperament under such agitatingcircumstances.

I shall never forget our farewell at the train depot onthe last night of that meeting. Our firm hand shake,our tear-filled eyes and his words of encouragement stand out in my memory. We both knew that my time at Central was short. Across the nation the issues had reached a serious crisis. What a sad occasion it was as he boarded the train on that lonely night. As I watchedthe train pull slowly away I thanked God for such aman. Even after twenty-nine years, I choke with emotion as I recall that sad farewell. A few days later Iwas asked by three of the elders who were for thethings I was opposing to leave. Two others elders wereconservative and did not go along with their decision.Although brother Puckett's sermon was the climax of what had already been developing, in the years thatfollowed we would joke about him getting me "fired."In January of 1975 when the news of his death reached us, my wife and I sat for a few moments weepingtogether, sharing his memory.

Franklin Puckett left more than a silenced tongue inthe grave. He left a lot of sunshine and happiness. Hehad a good sense of humor. When we would meet ondifferent occasions he never failed to mention some humorous incidents concerning our boys when theywere small children.

He left us the memory of a pure life, a noble character, and a true friend. He has left us the radiating influence of a Christian and the work of a faithful gospel preacher. Where this man lived and worked, souls have been saved and churches have beenmade stronger. He was a friend of young people andendeared himself to many of them across the country.All who knew him, young and old alike, cherish his memory. Yes, he has left us far more than a coldmotionless body in a quiet cemetery.

Seven years have passed and Franklin Puckett ismissed. The writing of this short tribute expressessome appreciation of brother Puckett's life but it also reminds us that the influence and work of a greatcharacter will continue to live long after he has departed. The examples of those who have gone before us should instill within us a greaterdetermination to please our Heavenly Father as wecontinue our march toward "Zion, the beautiful city ofGod."

The spirit of Franklin T. Puckett has departed to bewith God but he has left far more upon this earth thana decaying body. He has left a memory that will long continue in the hearts of us who knew and loved him.

Introduction—The Person of the Spirit

Many different theories are taught concerning the Being and functions of the Holy Spirit. Until recentlylittle has been said on the subject within our ownranks, leaving us with hazy, ill-defined ideas concerning the Spirit and His work. Now, we find ourselves rather suddenly drawn into all kinds of controversy over matters once considered fullyunderstood among us. If anyone had suggested a fewyears ago that churches of Christ would be troubled bythe alleged mystical influences, emotional experiences,inexplainable powers, and miraculous operations thathave always characterized Calvinistically oriented sects, I would not have believed it.

Some are claiming and defending certain mysticaloperations of the Holy Spirit in the Christian which are separate from and in addition to that which He accomplishes through His teaching in the gospel.Consequently, we have been caught unprepared forthe barrage of claims made and arguments presented inaffirming these operations, and must now re-examineour concepts in the light of Biblical teaching. It isfitting, therefore, that we study this subject carefullyand prayerfully.

I want to thank the elders of Thayer Street churchfor arranging this program and for inviting me tospeak. In this first lecture, I want to discuss the HolySpirit as a divine Person. This will necessitate some investigation of the godhead.

The Godhead

The term "godhead" is found three times in the KingJames version (Acts 17:29;Romans 1:20; Col. 2:9). InRomans 1:20, the term is rendered "divinity" in the American Standard version. While three different Greek word forms are used in these passages, all ofthem are derivations of theos, and denote "Deity,divinity, the divine nature, the divine majesty, thatwhich pertains to God, godhead." They define thequality or character of the essence, substance, or being of one who is God. The godhead (or godhood),therefore, is made up of such Beings as are of divine nature and possess divine majesty. Illustrate: Manhood, childhood, etc.

The term "God" is frequently used in the general sense of the godhead or deity. Things attributed toGod are often attributions made unto deity rather thanto some particular personality. The Scriptures reveal aplurality of beings in the godhead (Gen. 1:1). "Elohim"is plural in form. Plural meaning: "The gods." Singularmeaning: "The deity." (Gesenius' Hebrew Lexicon).

The plurality of deity is seen in the pronouns ofGenesis 1:26.

The divine personalities constituting this plurality are Jehovah (The Father), Jesus Christ (The Word-Son), and the Holy Spirit (Mt. 3:16, 17; 28:19; Romans15:30; II Cor. 13:14). Each of these individual Beingspossess all the qualities and attributes of divinity, and each is individually called God (I Cor. 8:6; Titus 2:13;Acts 5:3, 4). The Father is not the Son, and the Son isnot the Father, and neither the Father nor the Son isthe Holy Spirit. Each is a separate, distinct Beingpossessing all the qualities of deity. All of these divineBeings together constitute the one God, or the godhead. As there is one man (humanity, or mankind),even so there is one God (divinity, or godkind); and asthere are individual beings in that one humanity, sothere are individual Beings in that one divinity. The Holy Spirit is one of these divine Beings.

The Identity of the Holy Spirit

(1) The Holy Spirit is not:

Some mystical, indefinite, indefinable, ethereal-

like substance that enshrouds and permeates the

universe like a fog or the atmosphere.

A mere "influence," or a vague, impersonal

power released in response to human needs.

The mind, temper, or disposition of God or

Christ.

The Bible, or the New Testament, or the written

word of God.

The Holy Spirit revealed the Bible. The Holy Spiritis the Revelator; the Bible is the Revelation. The Bibleis the product of the Spirit, but it is not the Spirit.

(2) The Holy Spirit is:God (Cf. Acts 5:3 with Acts 5:4; Mt. 12:28 with Luke 11:20). Eternal (Hebrews 9:14). Omnipresent (Psalm 139:7-10; I Cor. 6:19). Omniscient (I Cor. 2:10,11; John 16,13,14). He possesses divine power. He creates (Gen. 1:2; Job 26:13; Psalm 104:30). He works miracles (Mt. 12:28; I Cor. 12:8-11). He inspiresprophets (I Peter 1:9-12; II Peter 1:19-21). He teaches men (John 14:26; I Cor. 2:13). He possesses divine attributes of power, holiness,grace, goodness, knowledge, will, judgment, and truth(Romans 15:13; Hebrews 10:28; Neh. 9:20; I Cor. 2:911; 12:11; Acts 15:28; John 14:16, 17; 16:13). These attributes are not the Being of the Holy Spirit, butthe Being possesses the attributes and performs the actions which are affirmed of Him.

We must clearly discern this distinction between theattributes of the Holy Spirit and the Being of the HolySpirit. Lying back of all attributes is the one to whomthey belong. We have to think of the Holy Spirit asexisting before we can attribute to Him modes of activity and qualities of character. He to whom thesequalities and powers are attributed must of necessitybe a divine Person, for such can only be attributed toone possessing both divinity and personality.

The Person of the Holy SpiritWebster defines person as: "A being characterizedby conscious apprehension, rationality, and a moral

sense." The Holy Spirit is an individual character, andpossesses conscious apprehension, rationality, and amoral sense; therefore, the Holy Spirit is a person.Actions are attributed to the Holy Spirit which canonly be performed by a person. He hears (John 16:13).He shows (John 16:13-15). He speaks (I Tim. 4:1). Hebears witness (John 15:26; Romans 8:16, 17). He givescommandments (Acts 13:2; 16:6). He delivers law (Romans 8:1, 2). He can be grieved (Eph. 4:30). He canbe vexed (Isaiah 63:10). He gives life (Gal. 6:8). Heglorifies (John 16:14).

The Holy Spirit, therefore, possesses personality and is a Person. Personality requires individuality, andindividuality demands locality, and locality necessitates separation and distinction.

The Scripture distinguishes the Holy Spirit fromboth the Father and the Son. He is a separate, distinct, individual Person in the godhead (Mt. 3:16, 17; 28:19),and as such possesses definiteness of Being and thedistinctiveness of locality, or sphere of operation (John14:26; 15:26; 16:7).

In order that we may have a better understanding ofwhat the term "person" means, I want to deal with itsdefinitions more extensively. Person—Originally it designated a mask, and was derived from per (through)

+ sonare (to sound, hence, "to sound through." In itsetymology, it developed through the followingmeanings: "Mask, actor, character acted, any assumedcharacter, then, to anyone having character or station,and finally to any individual having rational being."Person—"A character, individual, body" (SKEAT,

Etymological Dictionary of the English Language,

p. 436).

Person—"A character or part, as in a play; a specifickind or manifestation of individual character." "A being characterized by conscious apprehension, rationality, and moral sense" (MERRIAMWEBSTER, New International Dictionary, p. 1827).Person—"An individual substance of a rational nature" (Substance, Being, Existence). Substance isused to exclude accidents. Substance is used in two senses—primary and secondary. Primary substance—Concrete substance as existing in the individual (Father, Son, Holy Spirit). Secondary substance—Abstract substance as existing in genus and species(Godhead).

Person is predicated only of intellectual beings. Aperson has: Substance—Being, Existence, Reality.Completeness—whole, that which is a part does notsatisfy the definition. Self-existence—Continue by, of, or in one's self—not in another. Individuality—Excludes the universal. Rationality— Excludes the non-intellectual. (A. VAN HOVE, Catholic Encyclopedia, Vol. XI, p. 726). According to this source, there are five marks which are necessary to make or constitute a person.

Personality—"Quality or state of being personal, or of being a person and not a thing or abstraction; thatwhich makes a being a person: personal existence oridentity" (MERRIAM-WEBSTER, New International Dictionary, p. 1828). It is "a term applied in philosophy and also in common speech tothe iden

tity or individuality which makes a being (person) whathe is, or marks him off for all he is not" (Encyclopedia Britannica, Vol. XXI, p. 255). "The natural sense of the word 'person' is undoubtedly individuality" (Ibid.).

Personal—"Of or pertaining to a particular person;affecting an individual." "Done in person, without theintervention of another; direct from one person to another." "Exclusively for a given individual;; as a personal letter" (MERRIAM-WEBSTER, New International Dictionary, p. 1828). Notice the particularity and individuality of any being that canbe defined as a person. In all of these definitions emphasis is placed upon a person being an individual,one possessing individual identity. The substantiveterm "individual" is defined: "A particular being or thing as distinguished from a class, species, or collection." "An indivisible entity" (WEBSTER, Seventh New Collegiate Dictionary, p. 428). "An indivisible entity or a totality which cannot be separated into parts without altering the character and significance of these parts" (MERRIAMWEBSTER, New International Dictionary, p.1267). Richard Whately, English theologian and logician of the XIX Cent., says: "An object which is inthe strict and primary sense one, and cannot be logically divided, is called an individual" (Ibid.).

Now let us see what we have learned. The Holy Spiritis a divine Person. A person is an individual, rationalbeing. That which is an individual is an indivisible entity.

So, the Holy Spirit as a person can no more bedivided into parts and parceled out in bits amongthousands of people, or diffused into an abstract forceor impersonal power, and each portion still be the divine Person, than a man can be cut into pieces andscattered in chunks over the earth, or incinerated andthe ashes thrown into the wind or sown upon thebosom of the seven seas, and each particle still be the human person. According to the meaning of the termperson, any attempt to divide the divine Being(Person) among thousands of people will result inaltering the character and changing the significance ofevery feature of the Holy Spirit.

There must, then, be an explanation of the work ofthe Holy Spirit in convicting and converting the aliensinner, and of His influence and power in edifying andcomforting the saved, that will not call for a distribution or diffusion of the divine Person among allthose affected. Without it a true concept of the divinePerson (Holy Spirit) will be destroyed and He will bereduced to an impersonal power. The Holy Spirit as a Person is not and could not be a measure of the Spirit,whether "baptismal, miraculous, or ordinary." Unlesswe can see the difference in the person of the Spirit, and the gifts and powers which He bestows, we shallend up in total confusion.

The Person Of The Holy Spirit AndThe Omnipresence Of Deity

When this definition of the term "person" is made,someone is always sure to raise the question: "Butwhat about the omnipresence of deity?" Omnipresencedoes not equate omniperson. If omnipresence means omniperson, and if the presence of God is everywhereand in everything, then, the person of God is everywhere and in everything. If the divine Being, or person, is diffused everywhere and found in everything, this adds up to the pagan doctrine of Pantheism. If Pantheism be not true, then, thedivine Being is not omnipresent in person! May I point out that while God is omnipresent in some senses (Psalm 139:7-10; Proverbs 15:3), He is notomnipresent in other senses (Gen. 4:16; II Kings13:23; 24:20; Jer. 23:39), and in no sense is the divine Person omnipresent.

The Presence of the Holy Spirit

There is a difference in person and presence. While

there are circumstances and places where it could be

said a divine Being was present in person, it does not

follow that one's person must be in a place where it is

said His presence is found. Illustration: Vespasian, et

al. God's presence is found in many places through the

medium and instrumentality of His creations, laws,

works, agents, appointments, etc., while His divine

PERSON (the eternal Being Himself) is in heaven.

God called unto Moses from the burning bush (Ex.3:4), but He did it through an angel (v. 2). The Lordsaved Israel (Ex. 14:30; Psalm 106:8), but He accomplished it through "the angel of his presence"(Isaiah 63:9). The Lord went before Israel in a pillar ofcloud by day and a pillar of fire by night to lead themin the way (Ex. 13:21), but He led them through themedium and instrumentality of an angel (Ex. 14:19). Itwas not God Himself who was in the pillar of cloud,but His angel whom He had sent; yet that which wasaccomplished through the angel of His appointment,was attributed unto Him. In the Mosaic dispensation,God was said to dwell between the cherubims (Ex.25:21, 22; Num. 7:89; I Sam. 4:4; II Kings 19:14, 15), but who would say that the divine Being in persondwelt in that physical location? The Jews referred tothis dwelling of God between the cherubims as the Shekinah, which is defined as follows: "Shekinah, shekai-na (Talmudic Hebr., 'abiding (of the divine presence)');" (SHAFF-HERZOG, Encyclopedia of Religious Knowledge, Vol. X, p. 389). This should besufficient to show a difference in person and presence.

Christ promised to be present in every assembly ofthose who are gathered in His name (Mt. 18:20), butwho would say the Person is literally in everyassembly? The assembly is by His divine appointment(Mt. 18:20; Acts 20:7; I Cor. 11:33; 14:23; Heb. 10:25).While assembled we are to sing and make melody in ourhearts to the Lord (I Cor. 14:26; Eph. 5:19; Col. 3:16).In the assembly we pray unto God (Acts 12:5). Therewe observe the Lord's supper, which is a communion of the body and blood of Christ (I Cor. 10:16). Whenwe contribute to the work of the Lord, we give untoGod (II Cor. 8:1-5; Phil. 4:17, 18). When and whereverwe serve the Lord, whether as individual Christians oras local congregations, we do so before His divine presence (Col. 3:17-24; Mt. 28:20), but He in personis in heaven at the right hand of God (Eph. 1:20; I Pet.3:22; I Tim. 6:13-16).

Now, if both God and Christ can be present throughthe instrumentality of their agents, works, and appointments, without being present in person, whycannot the Holy Spirit also be present through theinstrumentality of His teaching, influence, work,gifts, and appointments, without being present inperson? More will be said about the unity and oneness of the Holy Spirit as a divine Person in subsequent lectures.

The Holy Spirit Collaborates In The Work Of Deity

In the physical creation God (Jehovah) planned it(Jer. 51:14, 15); God (the Word-Son) executed it (John 1:1-3; Col. 1:16; Heb. 1:1, 2; Cf. I Cor. 8:6); God (theHoly Spirit) assisted in it (Gen. 1:1, 2; 2:7). Hegarnished the heavens (Job 26:13). He renewed theface of the earth (Psalm 104:30).

In the spiritual creation God planned it (Eph. 1:8-11);Jesus executed it (John 4:34; Eph. 1:3-7; II Tim. 1:9,10; I Pet. 1:18-20); the Holy Spirit revealed it (John16:13; Luke 14:49; Acts 1:8; 2:1-4; I Cor. 2:9, 10; Eph.

3:1-4).

Conclusion

The Holy Spirit is a divine Being—one of the godhead or godhood. As a divine Being, He is a Person possessing all the qualities of personality. Personalityrequires individuality, and individuality demandsseparation and distinction. As a Person, He possessespower and influence.

Power and influence are attributes of the HolySpirit, but not the Holy Spirit Himself. His power andinfluence may be relative and distributive; they may beuniversal or local. Distributions of power, bestowal ofgifts, and exercise of influence, may, by metonymy, bereferred to as the Holy Spirit. Such references are to beunderstood in the sense in which they are used, and notmade to do violence to the basic meaning of the termsemployed. In such cases, the presence of the HolySpirit through the medium and instrumentality ofmeans is to be understood, rather than the person of the Holy Spirit Himself. As an individual Being, the Holy Spirit cannot be divided into bits or distributedin measures without destroying the very concept ofpersonal identity. As a divine Being, He cooperateswith other members of the godhead in carrying out thedivine will.

NEXT MONTH—The Gift of the Holy Spirit

As the years rush by, we are reminded time and again of the fact that our stay here on this earth is buta temporary arrangement, "for we know that if the earthly house of our tabernacle be dissolved, we havea building from God, a house not made with hands,eternal, in the heavens" (II Cor. 5:1).

Early on the morning of April 21, 1982, S. B. Hartsell peacefully laid his armor down and went to bewith the Lord, having spent nearly 84 years and twomonths in his fleshly tabernacle. I have felt honored tohave this man as a father-in-law, a brother in the Lord,and a friend.

He was born to Alexander Bradford and MaryFrances (Crump) Hartsell February 23, 1898 inHaynesville, Louisiana. He lived in that small community all his life, but his influence reached intofar places. He married Nicie Sue Davis May 21, 1921.Ten children were born: Ardece (Sanders), Anne (Iverson), S.B., Jr., Floy (Fitze), Huey, Earl, Horace, Flora (Tant), Glenn and Carmen (Allen).

Part of the godly influence of S.B. and Nicie Hartsellcan be seen in the fact that three sons are (or havebeen) gospel preachers. Huey (Mt. Olive, Alabama),and Earl (Broadmoor, Nashville, Tennessee) now preach. Horace is now president of Pensacola Community College (Florida). Three daughters married preachers. Anne (to John Iverson, CollegeStation, Texas), Flora (to this writer), and Carmen(To Cal Allen, who has done full-time work with thechurch). It was a dream come true when these six menworked together in a gospel meeting with the Haynesville church in 1969. A grandson, David Hartsell, and a grandson-in-law, Gil Johnson, also preach.

Papaw has always been a friend to men who stoodfor the truth, encouraging them any way he could.Such were oft the recipients of Hartsell hospitality. More than once have I sent some preacher and hisfamily, traveling across the country, to the old homestead, knowing they would be well received. Andalthough the records are in some forgotten drawer, webelieve brother Hartsell's service as an elder spanned some 40 years.

Only God can measure the fruit of this man's life. The Haynesville church was a strong influence fortruth when institutionalism swept away most area churches. He converted others to Christ (including hiswife and others in her family), who have now broughtforth other generations.

Among loved activities was attending gospelmeetings, and though slowed by age in recent years,the Hartsells still went to meetings in Arkansas andLouisiana as they were able. Another great love was story-telling. Papaw enjoyed gathering the grandchildren (42 in all), the great-grandchildren (24),and anyone else who would listen, to tell of the adventures of by-gone years, often adding a moral atthe end of the story. These stories are so rich that ourson, Jeff, recorded several a few years ago. Therewas no "generation gap" between this old gentleman and his descendants, but rather a mutual love and respect. Gospel singing also characterized family gatherings.

I was truly sorry that I was not with the family asLloyd Atherton spoke to virtually all the family and ahost of brethren and friends who gathered on April 23,but Papaw wanted me somewhere else—preaching thegospel to a small congregation in distant Chico,California. Eight of the grandsons (David, Scott andSteve Hartsell, George, Bill and Bob Sanders,Randy Smith and Jeff Tant) bore the earthly remainsand placed them beneath the pine forests of northwestern Louisiana to await the final call. Papaw's faithful wife of over 60 years is now living with a daughter and son-in-law, Mr. and Mrs. GeorgeSanders at 300 Gary, Haynesville. These few wordsare wholly inadequate to tell of a humble servant ofGod, but I did want to share them with you. "Blessed are the dead who die in the Lord..." (Rev. 14:13).

Many Christians believe that the Lord's supper maybe served in both assemblies (assuming a morning andevening service) for worship on the Lord's day.However, after much study, I have reached a differentconclusion on the matter. Now, I am convinced thatonly one serving of the Lord's supper is authorized by the Holy Scriptures.

Unfortunately, those of us who oppose the "secondserving" are often misrepresented by the brethren who practice it. Therefore, before I explain my position onthe issue, let me first state what my position does not require:

1. It does not require that the Lord's supper be served before the sun goes down on Sunday. In fact, myposition allows it to be served anytime between midnight Saturday and midnight Sunday, i.e., anytime on"the first day of the week" (Acts 20:7).
2. It does not require that every member of the localchurch be present before the Lord's supper can be served in an assembly for worship on Sunday. However, itdoes require that every member (who is present in anassembly when the Lord's supper is served) be assembled for the purpose of "breaking bread", i.e., par taking of the Lord's supper (Acts 20:7; I Cor. 11:33).
3. It does not require that the "second serving" ofthe Lord's supper be withheld from those who mustpartake of it to avoid violating their conscience. But,my conscience will not permit me to serve it to them inthe second assembly (Rom. 14:23).
4. It does not restrict the number of assemblies, i.e.,forbid more than one assembly on the Lord's day. The authority for more than one assembly on Sunday isestablished by other passages (Acts 2:46; 5:42).
5. It does not require that the "second serving" bediscontinued because some brethren miss the 1st assembly for no valid reason knowing that they canpartake of the Lord's supper in the 2nd assembly. Thatparticular abuse is not the real issue; rather, the issue to be resolved is whether there is divine authority forthe "second serving" (Col. 3:17).

Here are two arguments that support my conclusionthat only one serving of the Lord's supper on Sundayis authorized by the Word of God. Please study themcarefully:

1. ARGUMENT ON ACTS 20:7—

a. Paul preached only one sermon ("speech"singular) in Troas "on the first day of theweek". b. He preached that sermon "when the disciplescame together to break bread", i.e., whenthey assembled to partake of the Lord's sup per. c. Therefore, the disciples in Troas assembled

only one time to partake of the Lord's supper. 2.ARGUMENT ON THE EXCLUSIVE EXAMPLE IN ACTS 20:7—

a. Acts 20:7 records only one serving of theLord's supper on the Lord's day. b. This is the only passage that establishes thefrequency for partaking of the Lord's supper. c Therefore, only one serving of the Lord's sup

per on Sunday is authorized by this passage. Along with these arguments, please consider the following questions which have a direct bearing on thisissue. It is my hope that those on both sides of thismatter will diligently search the Scriptures to find the answers to these questions:

1. If more than one serving of the Lord's supper onSunday is taught in the Bible, why were the Corinthianbrethren commanded to "tarry one for another" (waitfor each other) when they assembled to eat the Lord's supper (1 Cor. 11:33)?
2. In what way is the divine authority for the"second serving" established: direct statement or command? approved example? or unavoidable conclusion?
3. Why do some of those who practice the "secondserving" appeal to the Old Covenant (Num. 9:6-13;etc.)—which has been done away in Christ (2 Cor. 3:714; Col. 2:13-17; etc.)—for their authority rather thanto the New Covenant?
4. What passage authorizes one saint (or a fewsaints to partake of the Lord's supper in an assemblywhere other saints are present but are not partakingwith him (or them)?
5. Does the phrase "the disciples came together tobreak bread" mean that only some of those assembledcame to partake of the Lord's supper, or does it meanthat all who "came together" did so for that purpose (Acts 20:7)?
6. If the brethren are obligated to serve the Lord's supper in a 2nd assembly for those who missed the 1stassembly on Sunday, why aren't they also obligated toserve it in a 3rd assembly for those missing the otherassemblies who are still able to partake late on the firstday of the week? How about a 4th, 5th, 6th, 7th, etc.,assembly for those unable to partake in the earlierones? What passage authorizes two servings but notmore than two servings?
7. If the brethren are authorized to serve the Lord's supper more than once on Sunday, why isn't each Christian also authorized to partake of it more thanonce on Sunday?

My position on this matter requires me to refrainfrom partaking of the "second serving" under all circumstances. Also, I cannot serve it to those whowish to partake of it in the 2nd assembly, lest I beguilty of helping them to do what I consider to bewrong (2 Jn. 9-11). However, I do not forbid othersto serve it to them if they so desire.

I am not attempting to force my position on thisissue on the brethren who disagree with myconclusions. In like manner, I do not wish to havethem force their views on me. Let all of us follow the principle found in Romans 14:5—"Let every man befully persuaded in his own mind"!

LOOKING AT "ANOTHER LOOK AT THE LORD'S SUPPER"

It is obvious that what we shall say has to do with anarticle by Brother David Powlas which is included inthis issue of SEARCHING THE SCRIPTURES. In the outset, please know that this writer has no enmitytoward Brother Powlas, but counts him as a friend. Infact, we, here at Perry, helped support him from March-December, 1977, in preaching the gospel. Heis a good, sincere Christian; but we believe he is wrong on this matter and wish only to help him to seehis error, while at the same time hopefully helpingothers. We certainly have no desire to misrepresenthim in order to make his position look worse. It is badenough as it is when stripped of all the five pointswhich he says his position does not require. In eliminating these five points he makes our task easierin replying.

We take our stand on this axiomatic statement: ANY INTERPRETATION OF SCRIPTURE WHICH ALLOWS A CHRISTIAN TO IGNORE AND DISOBEY A COMMAND OF THE LORD WITH A CLEAR CONSCIENCE, IS ERRONEOUS!If Brother Powlas is unable to attend the morningworship, and is able to attend the night service, hewill ignore that opportunity to commune with the Lord. In so doing, he puts himself in blatant disobedience to the Lord's own command, "This do inremembrance of me" (Lk. 22:19; 1 Cor. 11:24), sincehe admits in his number one thing not required by hisposition that"... it may be served anytime between midnight Saturday and midnight Sunday, i.e., anytime on 'the first day of the week' (Acts 20:7)." Hence, the above axiom being true, David's interpretation of Acts 20:7 is erroneous because hesays in plain English in his point number 3, "But, myconscience will not permit me to serve it to them inthe second assembly (Rom. 14:23)." Also, in the nextto last paragraph of his article he says, "My position on this matter requires me to refrain from partaking of the 'second serving' under all circumstances." Hence, my brother's position on this matter forces him into contemplated direct disobedience, with a clear conscience, to our Lord's command. His interpretation of Acts 20:7 is erroneous!We are glad to see that Brother Powlas did not in hisarticle claim, as some who hold his position do, that hewould be "excused" for the entire week if he could not attend the morning service. The scripture nowheresays so. Neither did he seek refuge in some imaginary

"providential hindrance," of which there is no such thing. God does not oppose God. (See my article inMarch, STS)

Now, to Brother Powlas' two arguments on Acts

20:7. He uses an old fashioned syllogism in his firstargument to prove that the disciples assembled onlyone time to partake of The Lord's Supper. This is all any disciples do today, except in one place we heard of, brethren require all present at both services to partake. Only those who assemble for that purpose, doso. It is a first opportunity for all who assemble forthat purpose. Hence, there is no such thing as a "second serving!" It is a straw man, easily demolished.

His second argument is another syllogism intendedto prove the exclusiveness of the Acts 20:7 example. Itis, in reality, proving the same point as his firstsyllogism, but calling it by another name, "only oneserving" instead of "assembled only one time to partake." We object to the word, "serving," when applied to the Lord's Supper. It is the language of Ashdod, invented by these brethren to use in fighting a straw man. They know that we do not contend for a second partaking by anyone; yet, hespeaks of being misrepresented. "Serving" is a confusion of terms implying a servant apart from apartaker, but since all assembled to partake are partakers, there is no servant. Some of these brethren try to make the church the servant, but the church is the sum of all the partakers. This makes theservant serve itself!

But syllogisms are tricky things and can be used toprove almost anything. A classic example is: (1) No cathas 8 tails. (2) One cat has one tail. (3) Therefore, sinceno cat plus one cat equals one cat, and 8 tails plus onetail equal 9 tails, one cat has 9 tails! Now, try this onefor size: ARGUMENT ON ACTS 20:7—

a. Paul preached only one sermon ("speech"-singular)in Troas "on the first day of the week." b. He preached that sermon "when the disciples came together to break bread," i.e., when they assembledto partake of the Lord's Supper. c. Therefore, the only time a sermon can be preachedon the first day of the week is when the disciplescome together to break bread!

Who will buy this conclusion? Who needs a syllogism to prove that the disciples came together tobreak bread? Acts 20:7 says so; but the syllogisms areneeded to get the words "all" and "only" in the text. This is sophistry, and illustrates the extremes to whichbrethren will go in an attempt to support an erroneousposition.

Now, to Brother Powlas' questions as numbered by him:

1. We have already registered objection to the term"serving," but to answer his question, only one serving to each disciple is taught, and those in authority in the congregation have an obligation toprovide the opportunity for every member. At Corinth, they were commanded to "tarry for oneanother" because he was rebuking them for turning the Lord's Supper into a common meal and eatinglike animals in a disorderly

manner.

1. There is no such thing as a "second serving" taughtin the Bible. When absentees from the morning service assemble to partake at the evening service, it is the "first serving" for them. It is authorized by directcommand (Lk. 22:19; 1 Cor. 11:24).
2. The Passover was a type of the Lord's Supper. Wesimply provide for the absentees from the morning ser vice, just as Moses provided for absentees from the 14Nisan Passover. Why do these brethren appeal to O.T.examples of obedience in Abraham, Noah and others,to examples of disobedience in Adam, Cain and Israel,to the gopher wood in the ark in opposing instrumentsin worship, to the "strange fire" on the altar in opposing instruments in the worship and substitution ofwater for wine on the Lord's Table, and then balk atthe example of Moses in Num. 9:6-13? When BrotherPowlas answers this question, he will have answeredhis own number 3 question. We do not go to the O.T.for authority to do anything; we go there for exampleof methodology in doing what we are commanded to doin the N.T., just as Jesus did when he appealed toDavid's example (Mt. 12:3; Mk. 2:25; Lk. 6:3), and asPaul when he appealed to Israel's example (1 Cor. 10:111).
3. Communing with the Lord in the bread and cup isan individual duty for citizens in the kingdom (Lk.22:15-19), regardless of the presence or absence ofothers.
4. Acts 20:7 says "the disciples came together"meaning the disciples who came together; no more, nofewer. To read "all" into it is to pervert the passage.The expression, "to break bread" is an incidental descriptive phrase used by Luke to record the events ofthe occasion, equivalent to "went to worship" or assome say, "went to church." Brethren err when theyuse it in an exclusive sense, for it is obvious from thecontext that in addition to breaking bread, they heardPaul preach and prayed in giving thanks for the breadand cup. Paul taught the Corinthians and Galatians togive on the first day of the week (1 Cor. 16:1, 2), andsince this act of worship is confined to the first day ofthe week the same as the Lord's Supper, who is to saythat the Troas disciples did not contribute also? If so,singing would be the only one of the five acts of worship left off, if they did not also do that. Why exalt partaking of the Supper above the other four acts of worship?
5. Acts 20:7 does not limit the number of assemblies. No passage authorizes "servings."
6. The "brethren" are not authorized to "serve" the Lord's Supper. "Brethren" has been studiouslyused by Brother Powlas instead of "church," with obviously the same meaning. It is not the brethren's Table; it is the Lord's Table. The scripture is silentas to par taking more than once on Sunday, and everyargument in favor of such can be with equal forceapplied to giving. Those who do it should double their contributions!

In conclusion, we have no desire to force Brother Powlas to do anything. We would like to persuade him to abandon an interpretation of Acts 20:7 which forceshim to disobey Lk. 22:19 with a clear conscience. WithAdam Clarke, we observe "how unbecoming thissacred ordinance to be the subject of dispute, partyspirit, and division! Those who make it such must answer for it to God." (Commentary on First Corinthians, Vol. 6,1843)

"Then were there brought unto him little children,that he should put his hands on them, and pray: andthe disciples rebuked them. But Jesus said, Sufferlittle children, and forbid them not, to come unto me:for of such is the kingdom of heaven. And he laid hishands on them, and departed thence" (Matt. 19:1315). On one occasion the disciples came to Jesuswith the question about who is the greatest in thekingdom of heaven. "And Jesus called a little child tohim, and set him in the midst of them, and said, VerilyI say unto you, except ye be converted, and become as little children, ye shall not enter into the kingdom of heaven" (Matt. 18:1-10).

It would be good if more faithful workers in theLord's vineyard would remember that little children can be taught and encouraged to some day be faithfulworkers in the vineyard of the Lord. In fact, adultsmust have the teachable nature of the child to be reached with the gospel. It is a very serious thing tocause a child to be influenced to go astray as hematures. It is also very serious to cause a man with achild-like humility to be led into religious error orungodliness. It would be good for us all to read thefirst ten verses of Matthew eighteen again and again.

Some fortunate little children have parents who areChristians. These concerned parents see that the littleones attend worship regularly. There are teachers toteach them the wonderful words of life. Why are somany of these children of church members lost whenthey become adults? Something goes wrong, and whatever it is is a serious error. Let us do a little searching for the rock of stumbling because we all want to know. We love our children, or do we?

Some parents may fail to teach at home, expectingteachers at the meeting house to take that responsibility. There is no way to take the duty fromparents (Eph. 6:4; Col. 3:21; 1 Tim. 5:14). Parentshave the children more. They must not get "too busy"to talk to their children about Jesus, the apostles andprophets, and all other Bible characters. Principles of righteousness and the facts of the Biblestories should

be impressed on each child's mind (2 Tim. 3:15). It isamazing what children can learn if they have a good teacher. It is very important that the teaching be donein those early tender years.

When should Bible stories be told? They can learnBible stories as early as nursery rhymes can be learned. If not, why not? They can learn the storiesand many bible verses before they are mature enough to grasp all the meaning that is there for them. They learn early to believe and love the stories, andthe meaning and application to their lives will come when the need arises. Train up a child in the way heshould go (Prov. 22:6). Let preachers, class teachers,and especially parents work to fill the young mindswith truth.

If children have had stories read to them from pleasant little children's books they may object toyour getting a Bible story book. They want you to readfrom one of their little books that they have heard sooften. The Bible story book will become just asprecious to the child if it is read from regularly. Youare capable of turning your child's mind to such a book, are you not? Maybe you wish now that the happyreading period had first been from the Bible storybook. Remember that you can tell Bible stories as well as read them. You may still read their other littlebooks. Much reading to a preschool child helps himbecome a good pupil at school, and time thus spentgives the sense of awareness of your love. It gives thelittle one a wonderful sense of security. Talk to yourchild. Read to your child. Listen to his questions andcomments. There is real joy for the parents in this, too.

Children grow up in a short time. They are soon oldenough to go to school What are you to do with themduring worship? Many provide paper and pencils forthem to take notes on the sermons. Please remember that this is a difficult assignment. Without parentalguidance and oversight this will hinder their learningrather than help. I have seen some young people do anamazing job of grasping the thoughts and writing them. Mothers, you may not realize how foolish theirwritings may be as they entertain themselves ratherthan listen if you do not see their papers. Do you watchthem as they look at one another's papers and laugh,missing the sermon and developing irreverence?

Some seem to think that sermons must be boring tochildren. Children listen to teachers at school, do theynot? Imagine an adult class in which the pupils are given something to color while the teacher talks.Would the coloring hinder the learning process? I wishfor the children's attention when I try to teach them. Ihave spent hundreds of hours in Bible drills withchildren. The children were encouraged to have nothing in their hands but to look at me and give metheir undivided attention. If such a class keepsmoving, the children can stay with you and learnmuch. It is my advice that children be taught to listento sermons with open eyes and empty hands.

It would be a wonderful thing if children would sit infront of their parents if not with them. If childrencould form the habit of sitting near the front early in life it could be pleasant on through their youth. Ingospel meetings occasionally a church is found inwhich a fine group of young people sit at the front andlisten. This is pleasant to see. When the adults,including their parents, are sitting behind them theyare more likely to listen. Beware when the young sit atthe very back. Remember that we all are to serve Godwith reverence and godly fear (Heb. 12:28). Young people can be good listeners.

Indianapolis, Indiana, the city where I presently liveand preach, has its share of drug problems. During themonths of September, October, and November of 1981,an extensive campaign was waged to counteract drugabuse. An article appeared in the November 1981 issueof Indianapolis Monthly magazine, written by SharonPearcy. The following quote reveals the intent of thedrug abuse campaign: "To curb abuse in the Indianapolis area, Marion County Prosecutor SteveGoldsmith and the Hook Drug Company joined forceson a 10-week public service campaign which beganSeptember 8 ... Created by MZB, Inc., Advertisingand Public Relations, the campaign message 'Drugs: It Takes Guts To Say No' has been aired on local television and radio stations, newspapers and billboards. Estimated value of services and time given bythe media is $400,000."

Indeed drug abuse has reached astronomical proportions in our society—among young and old alike. Our youngsters have peer pressure exerted uponthem on almost every front: at school, play, on thejob, etc. It takes a lot of courage for them to say no!Perhaps here would be a good time to make a commentabout the use of the slang word "guts," as is used in theslogan at the Indianapolis Campaign Against Drugs.It means courage, stamina, endurance. I shall not use it again but substitute it with one of the synonymsjust mentioned. Gospel preachers, elders, deacons,teachers, Christians in general, need to be very carefulin the use of the slang terminology that is so prevalentin our society today.

Not only does it take courage to say no to the use ofdrugs, alcohol, tobacco, etc., but a number of other things that Christians and their children are confronted with in this wicked society. We must learn to say no to a good number of things and teach our children to do likewise. The word no "expresses dissent, denial, or refusal." Observe with me just a few of the things we must say no to.

DRUGS

More needs to be said about this problem because ofthe danger involved with our children. As time goesby, younger and younger children are experimenting with all kinds of dangerous drugs. Sharon Pearcy stated in the aforementioned article: "Recent studies indicate that by the time Indiana high school studentsreach their senior year, 63 percent have experimentedwith illegal drugs. Many begin using drugs at or beforethe age of 11." It is interesting to note a word thatPaul groups among "the works of the flesh" (Gal.5:1921). That word is "witchcraft" (vs.20). It is derived from the Greek PHARMAKIA (English pharmacy).By definition it has the connotation of medicine ordrugs used in conjunction with sorcery and the occult.With the increased use of drugs we have seen the risein the occult and those who practice Satan-worship. Byall means we must implore our children to stay awayfrom such, saying no to drugs and the awful consequences they bring—both physical and spiritual. Paul said concerning the works of the flesh,

"that they which do such things shall not inherit thekingdom of God" (Gal. 5:21).

TEMPTATION

It is an undeniable fact that we must learn to say noto temptation. James said, "But every man is tempted,when he is drawn away of his own lust, and enticed"(Jas.l:14). We cannot blame God because He "cannot be tempted with evil, neither tempteth he any man"(Jas.l:13). Temptation proceeds from none otherthan the Devil himself (Cf.Matt.4:3; I Thess.3:5). Whenour Lord was tempted by the Devil He said no on everyoccasion (Cf.Matt.4:l-ll). We have the great example of Jesus in saying no to the temptations that arise in our lives. "For we have not an high priest which cannot be touched with the feelings of our infirmities;but was in all points tempted like as we are, yet without sin"(Heb.4:15). We also have the encouraging words from the pen of the apostle Paul. "There hath no temptation taken you but such as is common to man:but God is faithful, who will not suffer you to be tempted above that ye are able; but will with the temptation make a way to escape, that ye may be ableto bear it"(I Cor.lO:13).

PLEASURES OF SIN

Paul revealed to Timothy several things that men would be doing in the last days, when perilous timeswould come. One of these was that some would be "lovers of pleasures more than lovers of God"(Cf. II Tim.3:l-5ff). The majority of folks today are intent onfulfilling their sensual appetites and enjoying physicalpleasures. "You Only Go Around Once In Life," is themodern rendition of the old Epicurean philosophy of"Eat, Drink, And Be Merry." Christians must learn tosay no to the danger of participating in the pleasures ofsin. We read in the New Testament a good example of someone who had the courage to say no to the pleasures of sin. "By faith Moses, when he was come to years, refused to be called the son of Pharaoh's daughter; Choosing rather to suffer affliction with thepeople of God, than to enjoy the pleasures of sin for a season "(Heb. 11:24-25). Let us go and do likewise, having the courage and stamina to say no to the pleasures of sin.

PARENTS TO THEIR CHILDREN

It is an awesome responsibility for fathers and mothers to rear their children in an acceptable manner,one that pleases the Almighty Father (Cf.Eph.6:l-4;Col.3:20-21; Titus 2:4-5). One thing that we as parentsmust learn to do is say no to our children when thesituation warrants it. I see many parents who can not(or will not!) say no to their children regardless of whatit is they want. This is a tragic mistake. Some parentslet their children go anywhere and do anything theywant. This is not good and such parents must learn tosay no on certain occasions, if they are to "bring theirchildren up in the nurture and admonition of theLord." Do you have control of your children or do theyhave control of you? Do you have the courage to say nowhen you know something is not in their best interest?May God help us to wake up and say no more often.

ARE YOU SAYING NO?

It is a surety that Christians, those of us who havebeen washed in the blood of the Lamb, must say no tomany things in life. Are you doing so? Am I? Or, havewe begun to give in and say yes to things that will surely bring about our spiritual demise? Let us notwave the white flag of surrender but have the courageto say no to the temptations the Devil hurls in ourpath. Let us instill in our children the courage andstamina to say no whenever they are tempted to dowrong. Let us strive to bring up a generation of young people who have the determination to resist the Devil."Finally, my brethren, be strong in the Lord, and in thepower of his might. Put on the whole armour of God,that ye may be able to stand against the wiles of thedevil" (Eph.6:11-11ff).

Death is pictured in a variety of ways in the Bible.Often it is called a "sleep" which pictures the not sounpleasant aspect of death. But death is pictured inthe scriptures as unpleasant and undesirable. Paul wrote, "The sting of death is sin; and the power of sinis the law" (1 Cor. 15:56). There is an image captured inthose words of a horrible beast that has a fatal sting.That sting, Paul called "sin". Sin is a poisonousstinger that kills. This is very similar to saying, "Thewages of sin is death" (Rom. 6:23).

Sin is the world's greatest fatality and at the sametime it is the least feared danger men face. Men sinwith impunity. Sinners continue their course of life,knowing the condemnation pronounced on them byGod. Christians justify sin in their own lives and tolerate it in those they favor. But there is nothingworse than sin. Name all the illnesses and diseases common to mankind and nothing is as bad as sin. There are several ways it stings.

1. There is the sting of physical death. The sinner has no hope at death. He may hope thatGod will overlook the sins he or she has committed but there is absolutely no promise of such. Sadnessand sorrow surround the death scene of a sinner. His loved ones and his friends, who pled for him to leavesin and get right with God, shed tears of sorrow, thebitter fruit of the sting of death. One who escapes thecondemnation of sin by obedience to God eliminates the sting of physical death—for thoughthey die physically, they live, their lives being hid"with Christ in God" (Col. 3:3).
2. There is the sting of the fear of death. There used to be an old song, "Everybody wants to go toHeaven, but nobody wants to Die!" How true that is. But all men will die. Death is the common and ultimate terminus of all humanity. There is a fear ofdying that we all experience, at least at some time in our lives we do. Perhaps it is because it is an experience one has but once and none has the powerto tell us what it is like. The fanciful stories of those who claim they were dead and were brought back tolife have no more authority than human testimony ofany kind. The word of God does not tell us. But itdoes tell us that we do not need to fear death. The Hebrew writer affirms that Christ destroyed the onewho had the power of death, Satan, and delivered "allthem who through fear of death were all their lifetime, subject to bondage" (Heb. 2:15). Whenone is right with the Lord, the fear of death is ob

viated by the Lord Himself.

1. There is the sting of a guilty conscience. The sinner has a guilty conscience which results from sin.Paul affirmed that the whole world is guilty because ofsin, saying that the world will "be brought underthe judgment of God" (Rom. 3:19). The feelings ofguilt in sinners eliminates any reply to God. No one can claim God is responsible for sin. Once an individual sins, the guilt of conscience begins to sting. This is God's arrangement for motivating the sinner to remove that sting. The conscience is cleared only by the blood of Christ and by obedienceto Him. The Hebrew writer again said, "let us drawnear with a true heart in fullness of faith, having our hearts sprinkled from an evil conscience: and having our body washed with pure water" (Heb. 10:22). That washing of the body is the command tobe baptized. Peter comments on this passage: "that aforetime were disobedient, when the longsufferingof God waited in the days of Noah, while the ark was apreparing, wherein few, that is, eight souls, weresaved through water: which also after a true likenessdoth now save you, even baptism, not the putting away of the filth of the flesh, but the interrogation of a good conscience toward God, throughthe resurrection of Jesus Christ" (1 Pet. 3:20-21).
2. There is the sting of spiritual death. Sin stings with a poisonous effect on the soul, separatingit from God, thus making life impossible. (See Isa.52:1-2). This is the death of which Paul speak to theEphesians. He said, "And you did he make alive, when ye were dead through your trespasses and sins, wherein ye once walked according to the course of this world" (Eph. 2:1-2). These are appropriately called "unburied dead," who are deadthrough the sins and trespasses they have committed.This death is not final. Men may receive life fromGod by obedience to the Lord's requirements. Paulspoke of those believers who turn ed from the weakand beggarly elements of the world as walking in a"new lite.' The act which turns man in to this new life is baptism (Rom. 6:3-4).

The sting of death is removed when sin is removed.The removal of sin from one's life is done by the Lordthrough the blood of Jesus Christ (Rom. 3:24-26). Theconditions men must meet in order for the stinging poison of sin to be nullified include obedience to everycommand God gave. Starting with faith in Christ andculminating in baptism for remission of sins, one is freefrom sin. The stinger of death is removed and one livesanew. This is what Paul called "victory' . "But thanksbe to God who giveth us the victory through our LordJesus Christ" (1 Cor. 15:57).

Let each of us who read think long on the question ofsin. Nothing is more final than death. Nothing is moresure than death and the judgment (Heb. 9:27). Nothingis sadder than one standing in God's divine presencefilled with sin and iniquity. Remove the sting of death now.

Please Renew Promptly

It is not pleasant to recall the sixties when the "Hippie" element was rebelling against "the establishment." But there was coincidental with the youth rebellion, one against scriptural authority bythe majority of our brethren in the church. True, thesecond rebellion had its guerilla tactics reaching back more than a score of years earlier. The spiritual rebellion came out with aggressive forces and joinedbattle with their opposition in the sixties. To me it isevidence there was another rebellion in the camp of"sound" brethren in the area of the caption of thisarticle—a revolt against the hymn books published by"unsound" brethren resulting in the departing fromscriptural guidelines of psalms, hymns, and spiritualsongs. I shall cite a few examples from one hymn book.

PSALMS

A psalm is a "sacred song" used primarily in praiseto, and to the glory of God. How does "I want a goldmansion that's silver lined" fit the definition and purpose of a hymn? The sentiment bespeaks thefulfillment of earthly cravings for material things thatone has never enjoyed. Too many songs are light if notbordering on the flippant and do not meet the definition of psalms.

HYMNS

Hymns, too, are "songs of praise addressed to God".Songs focusing primarily on the self satisfaction andglorifying the singers miss the characteristics of hymns. Take notice of how many songs give moreprominence to the singers than to God and Christ.

SPIRITUAL SONGS

"Spiritual songs are the songs of which the burden isthat which is revealed by the Spirit". So the first demand of "spiritual songs" is that they must be totally scriptural. Too many songs are obviously unscriptural. "Saints Go Marching In" reminds us of the wickedness of the Mardi Gras and the athletic teams of New Orleans. I verily believe a few song leadingbrethren would lead "Yankee Doodle" if the publisher included it in its book. Too many songs have no scriptural lesson to "teach and admonish". Songs sofast and complicated the parts cannot keep up are fitonly for quartets and other entertaining groups andare bereft of any spirituality.

Why Are So ManyUnscriptural Songs Published?

Not even "poetic license" can make such songs meetthe scriptural demands. Some attempts at editingunscriptural sentiments out of songs are often crude, andwith a familiar song are disconcerting to one who knows the original wording. First, let us look at the

listed publishers and authors. In the hymnal I studiedStamps-Baxter Music Company are publishers andowners of seventy-nine of the songs. Since pretelevision days these people have been publicentertainers. Just have some hint of some scripturerelated thought for appeal to the public and they couldcare less whether their songs meet scriptureguidelines. Consider their song, "Kneel At The Cross", verse 1, "Kneel at the cross and pray and 'begin life anew'" teaches salvation in answer to prayer. The fine print explanation under the title, "The Christian's prayer" just might be noticed by one in a hundred. "For my sin-sick soul Jesus heard and answeredprayer, now I'm walking free as air", verses one andtwo. "Hand In Hand With Jesus", another StampsBaxter production.

Using Other Publishers' Songs

Other song publishers noted in the book I examinedare The Rhodeheaver Co., Nazarene Publishing Co.,Church of God, E. L. Jorgenson, Standard PublishingCo., and other denominations and private publishing companies.

Other Unscriptural Teachings In Songs

"Why Do You Wait?", verse three, teaches feelingthe Spirit. "Take My Hand And Lead Me", versethree, says, "Let me each day thy Spirit feel". Editingout the capital S does not change the message intendedby the writer. "I am coming now to receive theanointing divine", a gift of the apostolic age, is foundin verse four, "O To Be Like Thee". "It Won't Be Very Long" teaches (verses one and four), "It won't be verylong till we all die, Jesus comes again, and the earthwill be destroyed". This same message is soundedforth by pre-millennialists and denominational prophets. I do not have "Precious Memories" of angelsvisiting my soul (verse one). Little if any spirituality isfound in such songs as this. "Just a Little Talk WithJesus", verse still says, "I was lost in sin and a littletalk with Jesus made me whole". Jesus commanded to “preach the gospel to every creature" but the chorus of"On The Jericho Road" says, "There's room for justtwo, no more and no less". This is another example ofantiscriptural sentiments. And no wonder when weconsider the publishers.

Brethren, I do not write to be hypercritical. But I fear for the future of the Lord's church in respect to itsvocal music in view of present day trends. The hymnbook I reviewed has some wonderfully spiritual songs.But I decry what the unscriptural ragtime songs aredoing for our worship now. And if such a trend continues I predict some one will ape the denominations in introducing "Hard Rock GospelSongs" into worship by the saints to God. We cannotcontinue to borrow and adapt unscriptural songs fromdenominations and entertainment groups and have"psalms, hymns, and spiritual songs" in our worship to God.

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

FIELD REPORTS

DENNIS H. WILSON, Box 2740, Florida College, Temple Terrace,FL 33617. After quitting my secular job in Owensboro, KY last year,my family and I moved to Florida College so I could get sometraining in various Bible subjects. However, I financially cannotremain in College another year and must look to begin full-timework in preaching the gospel I am 24 years of age with a wife andtwo children. I have preached in the Tampa area at North Streetand also in Florida at Lake Okeechobee and at Punta Gorda. For references please contact brethren: Dick Blackford, Owensboro,KY; Ken Green, Hunstville, AL; James Cope, Temple Terrace, FL;or Colly Caldwell, Temple Terrace, FL.

LYNN D. HEADRICK, 1503 Coffman Dr., Athens, AL 35611. Beginning July 1, 1982, I plan to leave secular work in order todevote full-time to preaching the gospel. Since August 1, 1969, Ihave served as Dean of Students at Calhoun State CommunityCollege. Concurrently, I have preached in the Athens-Decatur area.For the past ten years I have worked with the church on Jackson Dr. here in Athens. This faithful congregation is presently assisting fourteen preachers in various parts of the world. In addition tothese preachers, the church will begin in July to support me so thatall my time and energy may be used to teach and preach the word.For this I am thankful and pray for the wisdom to conduct myselfas becometh a preacher of the gospel. I am also thankful for a faithful wife to encourage the work. Malcolm Andrews, Bennie Lovell, and Billy Lovell serve as overseers at Jackson Drive.

WENDELL M. POWELL, 2121 Edna Dr., Savannah, TN 38372. I desire to relocate with a sound work. I am 38 years old, married, andwe have three children. I am in my eleventh year of full-timepreaching. Contact me at the above address or call (901) 925-6006.

LESTER COMSTOCK, 1111 Hickory Lane, Cocoa, FL 32922.After completing five years with the church in Punta Gorda, FL,the decision was made to relocate. We left the congregation there in unity and good standing. We began our work on April 4, 1982with the congregation that meets at 512 S. Plumosa St., in Merritt Island, FL. This is a sound congregation and the futurelooks bright. The work presents many challenges but there is harmony within the body and there is a willingness to get the workdone. At present time attendance runs in the sixties. We have a finemeeting house that will seat upwards to 120. There is a classroomannex with rooms for all ages. With the help of God, our zeal andprayers, this congregation will grow. When in the area please worship with us.

DAVID PATTERSON, 9018 E. 74th Terr., Raytown, MO 64133. Atthis writing I am in need of $400 per month support. We are a small church of about 35 just east of Kansas City. We are the only soundchurch in this city of 40,000. Due to the collapse of the auto industry, the church here is no longer able to continue my supportat the present level. Although the work is small, much good hasbeen done and we have high hopes for the future. Our goal is $1500per month total support. My wife and I live in a modest home in Raytown near the building. We have a daughter who is two yearsold and a baby on the way. I'll be glad to furnish references toanyone interested in the work. Please call (816) 353-3816.

KEITH CLAYTON, 55 East St., Bristol, VT 05443. After nearlytwo years of meeting in the living room of Jay and MarleneVrooman (at 71 Mountain St., Bristol, VT), the Addison Countychurch of Christ has moved to new, rented quarters. We now rent anupstairs room on Route 116, just east of Bristol Village, 4/10 of amile from a landmark known as the Lord's Prayer Rock. Althoughwe receive few visiting brethren, we felt that those who do come our way ought to be made aware of the new location. We have signed atwo year lease and expect to remain there until we outgrow the facility. Our worship and Bible study times are Sunday at 10 a.m.(worship), 11:15 a.m. (Bible study), 6 p.m. (worship), and Wednesday at 7:30 p.m.

REPORT FROM ARGENTINA FERNANDO VENEGAS, Casilla 122 C.C., 5500 Mendoza, Argentina, South America. We want to report that we had a good gospel meeting in February with Bro. Efrain Perez doing thepreaching. As a result of this effort two persons were baptized. Then in March we had a weekend meeting with Wayne Partain from SanAntonio, TX, We are happy to report that during this meetingthree were baptized. Brother Partain presented good sermons that were of great spiritual benefit to all. I continue to have Bible studies in different homes.

A word about Argentina... Argentina is in a conflict at the presentwith Great Britain over the "Malvinas Islands." The nation is in suspense for the danger of war. Until now all is calm, and we praythat there will be peace. We have other problems that demandsolutions such as unemployment and inflation. Please help us prayfor our country and for our rulers.

PREACHERS NEEDED SUCCASUNNA, NJ—The church which meets in Succasunna is seeking a preacher to work with them on a full-time basis. This is asmall congregation with an average attendance of 30-35 and will beable to provide partial support. If interested you may contact the brethren here by writing to the church of Christ, P.O. Box 683,Stanhope, NJ 07874. Or you may call any of the following men: ClintKingsley (201) 347-2046, Wally Ottersbach (201) 361-3357, or Mario Costa at (201) 398-7187.

MEMPHIS, TN—The congregation that meets at 3090 North Trezevant St. would like to have a full-time preacher. We are self-supporting with an average attendance of about 45. We prefer anexperienced man who can organize personal work and devote agreat deal of time to it. If interested please contact the congregationat the above address or call Richard Jackson at (901) 372-6187.

A NEW CONGREGATION BILL DODD, Rt. 5, Box 142-A, Oxford, MS 38655. A new congregation was started late last summer at Glen Allen, AL, five miles east of Winfield. The attendance is running in the twenties.Their contribution is very good for a small group. Brother CarlosBarnes has resigned as an elder at Pleasant Grove in Birmingham,AL, and is now working full-time with the new group. He is doing avery good work. Glen Allen is my home territory, and I know of thetremendous need for a sound work there. Gus Nichols and V.P. Black helped to lead most of the area into apostasy.

IN THE NEWS THIS MONTH BAPTISMS 323 RESTORATIONS 107 (Taken from bulletins and papers received by the editor)