state's attorney I spoke with, one of the strictest. I immediately assessed that Judge Holford wasn't one to tolerate foolishness nordid he mince words in pronouncing hisopinions. He was stern, strict and stringent and, yet, waspossessed with an occasional tinge of humor which servedto relax tense situations. And, too, under that black judicialrobe I caught a glimpse of a kind and concerned grandfatherwho knew the merits of mercy and the value of a secondchance.Three casesstruck particular interest.

There was a young girl, a student at the University ofMaryland, who, on a dare, drove away from a local McDonald's Restaurant without paying for her food. AsJudge Holford read the charges several in the courtroom snickered and laughed (including the defendant) at the trivial nature of the crime, fully expecting the judge tothrow the case out of court as one not deserving time orattention. He did not. What he did without hesitation was to order the sheriff to handcuff the

young lady and take her to jail. The laughter stopped. Thecourtroom sat in stunned silence. And the girl? I'll never forget her look of panic and fear as she was briskly escortedfrom the room.

After a couple of hours she was called back into court. Inhandcuffs and in tears she stood before the bench. JudgeHolford said, "Young lady, it doesn't matter if you stoleone dollar or one thousand dollars worth of food—youstill stand guilty of stealing and are in jeopardy of facing a criminal record for the rest of your life.. .." After speakingfor several minutes and explaining the reasons for his ruling,he levied her a fine of $100 and ordered her to remain in custody until such a time as her father arrived for a private consultation in the Judge's chambers. It was obvious by herdemeanor that she had learned an invaluable (and costly) lesson.

Case number two involved a woman who had written several bad checks to a local supermarket chain. It was quickly evident that the court wasn't about to be lenient towards that kind of behavior. The Judge spoke sternly, "Mrs ________,have you never heard the commandment: 'Thou shalt notsteal?'" Going on, he said, "That commandment has been around for several thousand years helping to ensure a sane and safe society. But when people like yourself comealong who obviously have no consideration or concern forthat commandment or for others, societies' stabilitybegins to erode. " "For, " said the Judge, "You didn'tsteal from that grocery store—you stole from yourneighbors, your friends, your relatives. They will be theones to pay the higher prices that the store will charge inorder to recover its losses due to people, like yourself, whosteal. " After stating rather bluntly that decent people despisethieves, the Judge demanded that repayment be made andthat she pay a stiff financial penalty. (It's interesting to me thatthe Judge in reaching his decision found the Biblical code ofethics, not antiquated as some today may claim, but ratherquite appropriate. )

Finally, a twenty-six year old male, already incarcerated inthe state prison in Hagerstown, was now brought beforethe court on further charges. It seems that he had purchasedover $1, 500 worth of merchandise on credit from the J. C.Penney Company for which theyhad never received payment.

The Judge asked for an explanation. Over the next fewminutes this young man produced the greatest argumentation against the ills of gambling that I've ever heard. He had begun to gamble, at first wagering small amounts and then steadily increasing his bets. He confessed that he began to feel good when gambling eventhough he continually lost more money than he won. Hewatched as his whole life had become wrapped up in hisgambling habit. One thing led to another until he was forced to make purchases on credit, sell them and use themoney to help pay off his gambling debts. He needed cash. He confessed, "I then committed the cardinal sin of gambling. I wagered what I did not have. I know that I'vedone wrong and.... " He choked up and was unable to finish.

The courtroom sat in silence and many were caught up inthe emotion of the moment. The young man looked to theJudge who had reclined in his chair engrossed in thought.Judge Holford asked, "Mr.________ , how much money do you make in jail?" The defendant replied that he made90c: per day. The sentence then came swiftly: He would stayin prisonuntil at90c per day the $1, 500 debt was paid! TheJudge took notice of the situation that brought on thecrime but observed that such did not change the factthat hestillowed $1,500 to J.C. Penney. Restitution for the crimewould still have to be made, the consequences would still have to be paid. He was then handcuffed and escortedback to prison.

During all of this I couldn't help but think of Paul's passage in Romans 13: 1-4: Let every person be in subjection to the governing authorities. For there is noauthority except from God, and those which exist areestablished by God. Therefore he who resists authority has opposed the ordinance of God; and they who haveopposed will receive condemnation upon themselves. Forrulers are not a cause of fear for good behavior, but forevil. Do you want to have no fear of authority? Do what isgood, and you will have praise from the same; for it is aminister of God to you for good. But if you do what is evil, beafraid; for it does not bear the sword for nothing; for it isminister of God, an avenger who brings wrath upon the onewho practices evil. PS. In the event you are wonderingabout the case for which Iwas needed

After waiting for six hours—it was postponed. But I don't mind; for as long as the Honorable Judge BondHolford presides it will always be worth the wait to sit,listen, and watch first hand thatcrime still doesn't pay.

And One More Thing—you parents who have youngsters in school—find out when district court is in session in your area. Take aday offand take your son ordaughterto observe for themselves the seriousness of lawbreaking. It will be one of the most profitable days you'll ever spend.

READ YOUR BIBLE TODAY

OUR LIGHT AFFLICTION

The task was distasteful to Paul. He found it necessary to defend his apostolic work at Corinth, not toenhance his own importance, but to certify the genuineness of their conversion and standing before God. Itwas difficult to do this without creating the appearancethat Paul was elevating himself. Such was not the case.That is what Second Corinthians is all about. Paul had become the object of severe criticism from a few whohad come to Corinth and cast reflections upon Paul andhis work. They indicted his very character. Whatever hesaid or did was misconstrued by these false brethren.

In that circumstance, Paul said "We are troubled onevery side, yet not distressed; we are perplexed, but not in despair;persecuted,but not forsaken; cast down, butnot destroyed" (2 Cor. 4: 8-9). Paul said all of this was"for your sakes" (v. 15) and provided the channel for theflow of God's grace to them. Such problems would haveintimidated lesser men. But how did Paul view these problems? He said "For our light affliction, which is butfor a moment, worketh for us a far more exceeding and eternal weight of glory; while we look not at the thingswhich are seen, but at the things which are not seen: forthe things which are seen are temporal; but the thingswhich are not seen are eternal" (2 Cor. 4: 17-18).

Did you hear what he called all these things? Light afflictions. It was bad enough to be misrepresented. Itwas humiliating to have to defend the genuineness ofhis apostleship before a people whose very spiritual lifewas due to his tireless efforts among them for a yearand half. For the sake of the gospel, his own life wasoften in jeopardy. "For we which live are alway delivered unto death for Jesus' sake" (2 Cor. 4: 11). "And whystand we in jeopardy every hour... I die daily... I havefoughtwith beastsat Ephesus" (1 Cor.15: 30-32). Herewas a man who was beaten, often a prisoner, scourgedfive times, thrice beaten with rods, once stoned and leftfor dead, shipwrecked three times, spending a night anda day clinging to scraps of wreckage to save his life, indangers from Jews, Gentiles, in the city, in the wilderness, among heathen, in the sea and among false brethren. He was often weary, sometimes in pain, in anxiousvigils, hungry, thirsty, in fastings, cold and withoutenough cover to warm him upon the ground in somestrange place. You mean all that happened to Paul? Yesit did. Now read 2 Cor. 11: 22-23. Tell us again, Paul:What were all these things? He called them "light afflictions. "

The reason he could view them in this manner was because he recognized a cardinal truth many of us forget. He knew the value of each. He walked between what was temporal and what was eternal. He knew thevalue of each. He walked "by faith, not by sight. " Weplace such heavy emphasis on what is seen: our bodies,our houses, yards, cars. Yet all of these are perishing.What was a light affliction in the realm of the temporalif it led to the salvation of lost men and women and if it served to prepare Paul to "depart and be with the Lord"?

The practical applications of this are many. Preachers are sometimes prone to feel sorry for themselves andlament their misfortunes at the hands of their own brethren. They are misunderstood, unappreciated,overworked and underpaid. Why, with all their talentthey could have stood the business world on its ear had they not made the supreme sacrifice of giving the brethren the advantage of their great ability! Well, gentlemen, have you ever been stoned and left for dead? Everreally been hungry? Do you have a comfortable place todwell? Have you been in prison lately for preaching thegospel? Do you think your afflictions are heavy? Paulthought his were light when viewed from the vantagepoint of the eternal verities with which he dealt. Eternalverities were the catalyst which impelled Paul's preaching. My brethren, we must look beyond the seen and embrace the unseen.

Parents often are frazzled with the everyday annoyances of our existence. We work hard to provide betterthings for our children than we had. Children requireattention, much of our time, a generous amount of ourlove and concern, and are unwittingly the cause of muchanxiety. I see young mothers wrestling with small children in services. They have worked hard just to getthem ready to be there. Often, they hear very little ofwhat is said. They are fearful that their little ones aredistracting to others and sometimes wonder if it is really worth all the hassle. Oh yes, young mothers. Lookbeyond the seen to the unseen. Remember Paul? Hewouldhave called that a"light affliction. " And it is"butfor a moment. " Ask those of us whose children are now grown and have babies of their own. Parents, whileproviding for the things which are temporal, please donot neglect the things which are eternal. Preparing yourchildren for heaven is far more important than dentalwork, sports, good grades, degrees, musical skills, thelatest fashions and the social graces. These all may have a place, but they are temporal. They are light in comparison with an "eternalweightof glory. "

All Christians face circumstances in life, at one timeor another, which we consider "afflictions. " The car breaks down and we face expensive repairs. The furnaceneeds replacing. Or the roof must be replaced. An appliance quits. In frustration we ask "Why me"? Health problems arise and we are distressed. We see ourloved ones become ill, sometimes gravely so. We evenhave to bury our dead. In agony we plead "What am Igoing to do now? How can I go on? Why did this happento me?" But remember, these are "light afflictions"when viewed from the realm of the eternal.

How shall we handle these "light afflictions"? "Forwhich cause we faint not; but though our outward manperish, yet the inward man is renewed day by day" (2Cor. 4: 16). While the temporal things are decaying, dimming and weakening, the inward man is becomingbrighter and stronger. This "inward man" is "renewedin knowledge" after the image of Christ (Col. 3: 10). "ForI delight in the law of God after the inward man" (Rom.

7: 22). Here is the blessed man of whom the Psalmistsaid"but his delight is in the lawof theLord; and inhislaw doth he meditate day and night" (Psa. 1: 2). As wegrow in grace and knowledge of our Lord and Saviour,Jesus Christ, we are making the inward man strongerday by day, even while the outward man, concernedwith the temporal things which are seen, grows olderand weaker. I don't know about you, dear reader, but Ineeded to be reminded of these things.

THE EUNUCH'S CONFESSION

While we are not saved by confession only, it is still necessary for us to confess Christ before men in order tobe saved (Mt. 10: 32, 33; Rom. 10: 9, 10). And, whynot? If this is what the heart believes, then the mouthshould confess it, “for out of the abundance of the heart the mouth speaketh" (Mt. 12: 34). Philip had preached Christ unto the eunuch (Acts 8: 35), so it isno great mystery that the eunuch's confession was inharmony with what he had been taught.

The conversion of the Ethiopian eunuch is one of the plainest examples of salvation to be found in the Bible.Here is seen the simplicity of the gospel plan of salvation in action, both from the standpoint of the one who teaches the gospel, and the one who obeys it. There is noreason for either party to become confused by readingthis inspired account. There are only two individualsinvolved, so we can keep one eye on the preacher, and the other on the one who is in need of conversion.

Thesimplicity and powerof this account(Acts 8:2640), is only magnified by the feeble efforts of false teachers to circumvent it. One false teacher will try to substitute the word "Spirit" for the word "water, " in order toreplace water baptism with Holy Spirit baptism. Thesewould have both Philip and the eunuch going down into the Spirit. The folly of this effort is seen when we arethen forced to substitute "water" for "Spirit, " and laterhave Philip being caught away by the water of the Lord!Yet another futile effort to confuse this simple ac

count of conversion is the one where the sectarian

preacher tries to prove that the sprinkling of water on a

person constitutes baptism. In spite of the fact that the

record says, "and they went down both into the water,

both Philip and the eunuch, " one preacher theorized

that the eunuch had a bottle of water under the seat of

the chariot, held it up for Philip to see, and said, "See,

here is water... " One problem with this theory is that '

'they came unto a certain water" (v. 36), and the greater

problem would be getting "both Philip and the eunuch"

down into that bottle. However, the greatest problem

with trying to introduce sprinkling into this text, is that

of confronting other passages of scripture which teach

that baptism is aburial (Rom.6:4).

The simplicity of this Bible account of conversion wasimpressed upon me years ago when I received a requestto go and baptize a penitent believer. The unusual thing about this request was that the person to be baptizedwas a deaf mute. A special class for deaf mutes wasbeing conducted one day each week at the church building, and the teacher (who was "bilingual"), called for. me tocome and do the baptizing. Now, I have turned downseveral requests to perform marriage ceremonies, for the Lord did not tell me to go into all the world and perform marriage ceremonies. So, I think I can be selective, or even a "teetotaler" if I wish, but I saw noway out of this request to baptize a penitentbeliever.

On the way to the church building, I thought of Philipand the eunuch. I placed the Bible in front of the deafmute, and pointed to each word of the text, beginningwith Acts 8: 35. When I was half-way through v. 37, theyoung man spontaneously put his finger on my Bible (Icouldn't have coached him, even had I wanted to), andpointed emphatically to each word of the text whichsaid, "I believe that Jesus Christ is the Son of God. " Atthe same time he was doing his best to say the words ashe pointed to them, and I imagined I could understandwhat he was saying, though it may have been that I had been coached because I had heard that confession so many times before from others, and had also made itmyself just beforeI wasbaptized.

Like the eunuch, this young man went on his wayrejoicing, and this preacher went on his way thankingGod for such a plain, simple account of a conversionwhich took place somewhere between Jerusalem andGaza more than nineteen hundred years ago. It hasbeen thirty-two years since that deaf mute "made thegood confession" as we sometimes say, but I have nevergrown tired of reading and preaching about the eunuch's conversion. And, while I have never insisted on acertain "formula" for those who wish to confess their faith in Christ, my wish has been that all would be assincere as Ithink that deafmutewas.

THE MAN OF SIN QUESTION: Who is the man of sin in 2 Thess. 2: 31 Who sits in the temple of God and claims he is God!Was this Nero? Verse 8 shows that the man of sin is destroyed at the brightness of Christ's coming.

ANSWER: 2 Thess. 2: 3-4 states: "Let no man deceive you by any means: for that day shall not come, exceptthere come a falling away first, and that man of sin berevealed, the son of perdition; Who opposeth and exalteth himself above all that is called God, or that is worshipped; so that he as God sitteth in the temple ofGod, showing himself that he is God. "

This is a difficult passage since the "man of sin" is notidentified. Consequently, several interpretations have been offered, some of which are imaginary and even anti-biblical. The "man of sin" (v. 3) and the "son of perdition" (v. 4) and the "lawless one" (v. 8, ASV) areused synonymously in the chapter.

The Thessalonians were assured that Christ's comingwould not occur until there was a falling away of thechurch and the "man of sin" was revealed. This "lawless one" would be in collusion with Satan (v. 9), sitting inthe temple of God, opposing and exalting himself aboveall that is called God or that is worshipped. He was restrained by him that letteth (preventeth) until he whorestraineth be taken out of the way (v. 7). The Lord willfinally destroy this "man of sin" at His coming (v. 8).

The following views have been offered as to who the"man of sin" is. Space will not permit us to write at length about each one.

(1) The papacy. Historically, Protestants have attributed the "man of sin" to the pope (that is, the line ofpopes) of the Roman Catholic Church. Some members ofthe Lord's church have taken the same position. Certainly,to a great extent, the Catholic Church would fit Paul's characterization, but why single out the Catholics andignore the false Protestant bodies of religion?

The Catholic Church with its first pope (606 A. D. )came along much too late to be the personage in thechapter. The "man of sin" is connected with the apostasy of the church. The Catholic Church is not the NewTestament church apostatized, but rather it grew up out of the apostasy. The Gnostics, Ebionites, Montanists, etc., all heretical sects of the first and second centuries, would have been closer to Paul's descriptionthan the popes. Too, I do not know of any pope that hasgotten even close to the temple of God, much less sat init

(2) Nero Redivivus. This theory says that Nero Caesar did not really die in 68 A. D. but merely hidhimself with the idea of later returning to power toset up an anti-Christian kingdom, or he was reallydead and would rise again. "Redivivus" is a Latin wordmeaning, "brought back to life. " This position makes Paul predicting a falsehood because Nero never returned. Hence, the "man of sin" is not Nero. (3) Roman emperors. It is proposed that the "lawlessone" was the line of emperors, such as Caligula, Nero,Vespasian, Titus and Domitian. But the "lawless one" will be here when Jesus returns (v. 8), eliminating totally the possibility of the Roman emperors, whether one or the line of emperors. (4) Beast of the sea of Rev. 13. Though there be similarities between the two, they are not identical.Both stand in close connection with Satan. Both opposeGod and both suffer defeat. However, the sea beast, a symbolic expression for civil rulers, specificallyDomitian in Revelation, rises up out of the sea (the seasymbolizing society). In contrast, the "man of sin" arises within the church (temple of God). Therefore, they are not the same personage. (5) A world dictator. Premillennialists believe that during the Great Tribulation on earth (a seven-year period wherein there will be World War III, famine, pestilence and persecution, all concocted in their wildimaginations), a ruthless, cruel and godless tyrant willtake over the world, that is, the revived Roman empire,consisting of the federation of the ten common: marketEuropean nations. Hal Lindsey said, "I believe that this very man lives right now somewhere in Europe. "

Of course, there is nothing in the Bible that is even aforty-second cousin to such an outlandish theory. Therewill be no seven-year tribulation, no seven-year rapture, no revived Roman empire and not a literal battle ofArmageddon. Yea, there will be no such Fuehrer!

(6) Principle of lawlessness. The advocates of this position maintain that sin is personified as a man whomanifests a spirit contrary to everything taught inGod's holy Word. This, in my judgment is the truth ofthe passage. Thayer, under harmartia, states that sin as a principle and power is "rhetorically represented as animpersonal personage" in Rom. 5: 21; 6: 12, 14; 7: 17, 20

(p. 31). Sin is depicted in these passages as a king and master.

McClintock and Strong, commenting on the "man ofsin, " said, "an impersonation of the sinful principle spoken of by the apostle Paul in an emphatic manner" (Vol. 5, p. 689). Pulpit Commentary states, "in whom sin is,as it were personified, as righteousness is in Christ" (2Thess., p. 24).

In the book, Questions Awarded, authored by D. Lipscomb and E. G. Sewell, it says, "The man of sin is understood to be a principle of error or lawlessness that arose in the church. . . . This lawless principle is a principle among those claiming to be the Lord's peoplebut are not willing to be controlled in all things by theword of God" (p. 603).

Hence, it seems more plausible that the "man of sin" is lawlessness, a disrespect for truth, figuratively de

picted as a man who usurps the rule of the churchthrough apostasy of God's people.

The "man of sin" is present in every age whenevermen in the church oppose Christ, alter the truth, speakpresumptuously, go beyond what is written, introduceinnovations into the church or ignore God's Word. Theyare sitting in the temple of God, showing themselves tobe God and exalting themselves above all that is calledGod. The only thing that prevents men from perversionof the truth is a love and respect for it. This, in myestimation, is the restrainer in verse 7.

Only God has the prerogative to make laws (Jas. 4: 12)for His people. Any man, or group of men, who makeslaws to govern people religiously, or revises God's laws,enthrones himself as God and becomes a usurper of theauthority that belongs only to Jehovah. Such a man becomes lawless, wicked and the son of perdition. WhenJesus comes, all lawlessness will cease and those whowork iniquity will be separated from the presence of the Lord (Lk. 13: 27).

FORGIVENESS ONLY INCATHOLIC CHURCH

On his radio network newscast December 11, 1984,Paul Harvey announced that the pope had ruled thatCatholics could not receive forgiveness of sins by goingdirectly to God. I was watching for the information inthe press, and on the following day the Arkansas Gazette printed the announcement as follows:

"VATICAN CITY (UPI)—Pope John Paul II blamed the evils of the modern world Tuesday on 'the loss of the sense of sin' and called on Roman Catholics to return to the confessional.

"The pope warned Catholics and non-Catholics alikeagainst 'the illusion of sinlessness' in a 140-page, 25,000-word 'Apostolic Exhortation Reconciliatio et Paenitentia' (Reconciliation and Penance).

"At the heart of every situation of sin are always to befound sinful people, he said.

"The pope blamed 'secularism' as a primary cause for the 'eclipse of conscience' in the modern world, and he defined secularism as 'a movement of ideas and behavior which advocates a humanism totally without God,completely centered upon the cultof action and production and caught up in the heady enthusiasm of consumerism and pleasure-seeking, unconcerned with the danger of 'losing one's soul. '

"The papal document grew out of the work of the1983 World Synod of Bishops on 'Reconciliation and Penance in the Mission of the Church, ' called by thepope to examine why a growing number of Catholics areabandoning the sacrament of confession.

"There is no real alternative to individual confession,the pope told the world's almost 800 million Roman Catholics, and it is the 'only normal and ordinary way'of celebrating the sacrament of penance.

"Group confession and general absolution, increasingly popular both in the United States and the ThirdWorld, may be used only 'in cases of grave necessity, ' he said.

" 'And there remains unchanged the obligation tomake an individual confession of serious sins before again having recourse to another general absolution, ' the pope said.

"But the pontiff made clear he was speaking not onlyto Catholics.

" 'Indeed, even beyond the boundaries of the churchand the community of believers, the message and ministry of penance are addressed to all men and women because all need conversion and reconciliation, he said. "

The pope is concerned because 'a growing number ofCatholics" no longer make personal confession beforethe officials of the Catholic Church.

The language of the pope in stating the official Catholic position on confession is clear. "There is no real alternative to individual confession" and "there remains unchanged the obligation to make an individualconfession of serious sins... " Of course he has reference to confession of sins before a Catholic priest in order tobe forgiven.

Let us consider the official Catholic teaching on forgiveness through prayer:

"Christ himself forgave sins. He forgave Mary Magdalen because she loved much; and He said that God alone could forgive sins. For three years He forgave sinsand then He left this earth. But He enshrined His work in a society which would continue for every generationso that all generations of mankind would get the samechance of knowing. His message and His precepts. Thissociety was made up, first of all, by His Apostles anddisciples. It had a mission—to go and teach all nations;it had a head who was to be Christ's Vicar—'Thou are Peter and upon this rock I will build my church; ' and it had certain powers. One of these powers was that ofBaptism which was to be a passport into His society orChurch. Another power was to forgive sin...

"Catholics, therefore, believe that forgiveness of sinis the special prerogative of Christ. He has given ordelegated this power to His Church; this, and this alone,makes it possible for one man to kneel before another,one ordained and authorized by the Church to exercisethe power of forgiveness given it by Christ.

"The man whom the Church authorizes to forgive sinis always a priest. He studies for the job almost twice aslong as the time needed to qualify in the legal profession, longer than the time necessary to qualify as a medical doctor...

"And how sure can we be that our sins are forgivenmerely by sorrow in the secret of our heart? The wayGod willed is certain—in Confession. In the Sacrament of Penance Christ speaks through the priest, and therepentant sinner stands on Calvary. No matter how lateour repentance, and even if the bell is about to toll, weknow that on this day we shall be with Him in Paradise. " (YES, a Priest Can Forgive Your Sins by the Knights of Columbus, pages 3-5. )

The only power or authority to forgive sins given byChrist to His apostles and the church was through thepreaching of the gospel which men and women believed and obeyed for the remission of sins (Matt. 28: 18-20).There is nothing in the New Testament to indicate thateven the apostles, much less any other men, had peoplebowing before them to confess their sins and obtainforgiveness. And where does the Bible teach that certain men have to study so long to qualify for others toconfess to and pray through in order to be forgiven ofsins? Yes, there are occasions when we are taught toconfess to one another and pray for one another, but notin the way which the Catholic Church teaches and practices.

In the article from which we quoted above, reference is madeto Jesus' statement to the apostles: "As My Father has sentMe, I also send you. And. when He had said this, He breathed on them, and said to them, Receive the Holy Spirit. If you forgive the sins of any, they are forgiven them; and if you retainthe sins ofany, they are retained. " (John 20: 21-23. )

How did the Spirit-filled apostles forgive sins, and what did the procedure entail? We find the answer to this when the Lord's plan was put into operation, as recorded in Acts chaptertwo. Peter, standing with the eleven, preached the gospel concerning the Christ. When some believed the message andasked what to do, they were told to "Repent, and let every one ofyou be baptized in the name of Jesus Christ for the remission ofsins" (Acts 2: 38). Only in this way did the apostles bind the willof Christ and forgive the sins of those who obeyed it.

The basic fallacy in Catholic teaching on prayer and forgiveness is their denial of the priesthood of all believers. Theapostle Peter wrote, "You also, as living stones, arebeing builtupa spiritual house, a holy priesthood, to offer up spiritual sacrificesacceptableto God throughJesusChrist" (I Peter 2: 5). In verse9 of the same chapter, he referred to Christians as "a royal priesthood. " In the same epistle he admonished, "therefore beserious and watchful in your prayers. " Among those to whomthis teaching was given were "newborn babes, " and we cannot believe that they had studied prayer and forgiveness long enough to be lawyers or doctors.

Every Christian is a priest. Forgiveness, as taught in the NewTestament, involves not just a priest but rather two priests!Prayer to God must be "through Jesus Christ" who is our HighPriest (Heb. 4: 14-16; 7: 25-27). Each and every Christian whoprays through Christ is a priest, and because of this is qualified to approach God through the great High Priest.

Remember, there is "one mediator between God and men, theMan Christ Jesus" (I Tim. 2: 5). Because of this, true Christiansrefuse to pray to Mary, "saints" or so-called priests on earthtoday. They can and must pray directly to God through theirHigh Priest, Jesus the Christ.

Despite the opinion of today's woman, who believes thatbeing a wife is so simple she must have something real todo with her life, it is not that easy. Christians, too, havefallen into the notion that there is nothing to being a wife.Rather than studying what God has said with open andunbiased mind, we have accepted the stereotype handeddown by society, family, even older Christians. Whereas the"older training the younger" is scriptural procedure, if theirtraining comes only from their subjective experience, and not from the word of God, each generation gradually driftsfrom the original. Today, countless of us read Ephesians 5 and 1 Peter 3 in every ladies' Bible class, and still do notrecognize our own failures as wives. We have brainwashedourselves into believing that because we can quote these pet scriptures, are willing to say, "My husband is the head of thehouse, " and at least follow the norm in the church, we are good wives. No wonder we find it so easy! Paul warned theCorinthians about using something other than the scriptures to measure their righteousness (2 Cor 10: 12),One can always find someone worse than she, if she lookslow enough. And James and John both taught that sayingand doing were two entirely different things (Jas 2: 18, 20;1 John 2: 4; 3: 18). The friends and neighbors who reallysee us every day (as opposed to we who blind ourselves toour behavior) may have an entirely different opinion aboutwho runs our homes!

Yes, the New Testament is our guide for living, andEphesians 5, Colossians 3, and 1 Peter 3 are rich passagesfor the woman (and man) to turn to. But, if one does not know how to apply them, their benefit is lost. Romans 15: 4gives the Christian the authority to search out the Old Testament for other clues as to what God meant a wife to be. She will find there many simple descriptions that willgive her both a broader perspective and a deeper insight intothe job she has before her. It is a few of these passageswhich we wish to study.

A Good Thing

Proverbs 18: 22 states that a wife is a "good thing. "Does one become a good thing by simply saying, " I do?" Inother words is every wife a "good thing?" There might bea point to this we overlook. Because we know the answer is"No, " we add a few words to the scriptures: "Whoso findeth a wifemight have/shouldhave foundagood thing. "But that is not what it says! A wife is something he has tolook for, whereas women who want to marry are a dime adozen. We are also told that

a worthy woman (wife) is hard to find (Prov 31: 10). Perhapsthe point is that not every married woman deserves to becalled a wife!

A double standard existed in the Victorian age which was,of course, wrong, but is usefulin illustrating the point. Whilewomen were expected to live morally exemplary lives, mencould have both a wife and a mistress without censure. Yet,even when the wives knew of the other women, as theyusually did, they considered themselves in the exalted position. It was an honor to be a man's wife, and one recognized the responsibilities it laid upon her in behaviorand management of the home. The woman was insulted if she was asked to become his mistress. Such a proposition included the tacit statement that he considered her unworthy to be "wife. " Those who did accept the proposition were those who despised responsibility and desired self-indulgence.

The whole system, of course, was sinful, but let us carryout the illustration. If one is not worthy to be called "wife," what is the alternative? With ERA in full swing, the responsibilities to husband and home are swept aside. Itnow becomes more important to assert and indulge SELF. A woman may keep her own name, or add his as an appendageto it. She may have a career, which he must realize takesprecedence over the home they planned to make together,and which may even take precedence over his career. Shemay farm out her (and his) children to someone else to raise,very often, strangers. She expects, and demands, that heconstantly (not just in times of sickness or domestic upheaval) share her home-making duties on nothing less than a50-50 basis, because she is too tired from doing extra thing which God has not required of her. She may be bringinghome some of the bacon, but many of the responsibilities of awife are left undone. Regardless of a signed sheet of paper, sheis at best his "kept woman. "

It is one thing to say, "I am this man's wife. " It is quiteanother to be his wife. We should count it an honor to be our man's wife, and act accordingly in fulfilling our responsibilities, but if being a true "wife" requires much fromthe woman, it follows that much must be required of the man in how he treats her. He must not treat her as a "kept woman," but truly as a "wife. " Peter instructed the men, "... givinghonor unto the woman... " (1 Pet 3: 7). It is much easier tobe a real wife when one is treated as a real wife. Husbands, when you enter a room, be proud to haveheronyour arm and she will be proud to be there.

FALSE VIEWS OUTSIDE THE CHURCH

There have been many theories advocated through thecenturies to try and handle the problem of sin in the life of abeliever. As we studied in our first article, God and sin do not mix. But since we as God's people commit sin fromtime to time how can we have the assurance of salvation? Some of the views offered in answer to this question arecontrary to the Scriptures.

As we study this matter it might be good to remind us thatany view offered which takes away the "fear... of. .. come(ing) short of" the eternal rest must be a false view (Heb. 4: 1). Or any idea which takes away the need to "takeheed lest"we fall must also be a falseidea (1 Cor. 10: 12).

This study is devoted to some of the false views which havebeen taught by different men outside of the church of theLord.

The Catholic View

As the Catholic theologians wrestled with the problem ofsin in the life of those they believe to be God's people, theredeveloped a classifying of sins. The Catholic Encyclopediastates:

"All sins are not equal before God,nordare anyoneassert that the daily faults of human frailty will bepunished with the same severity that is meted out toserious violation of God's law. On the other hand whosoever comes into God's presence must be perfectly pure, for in the strictest sense His 'eyes are too pure to behold evil' (Heb. 1: 13). " (Vol. XII, p. 575).

Since one may have these "daily faults" or venial sins in hislife at the time of death, what is the answer for the removal of these sins so that one may "be perfectly pure" to comeinto the presence of God? The Catholic answer is purgatory.Edward J. Hanna's article on that subject in The Catholic Encyclopedia says:

"Purgatory (Lat. purgare, to make clean, to purify) in accordance with Catholic teaching is a place or condition of temporal punishment for those who, departing this life in God's grace, are not entirely free from venial faults, or have not fully paid the satisfaction due to their transgressions.... For unrepented venial faults, for the payment of temporalpunishmentdue to sin attime ofdeath, the Church hasalways taught the doctrine of purgatory. " (Vol. XII, p.575).

There are a number of things wrong with the idea ofpurgatory. One thing that is wrong with this view is itadvocates a second chance after death. If enough prayersare said for the departed he will then go from the area ofpunishment into God's presence. The Bible teaches that after death comes "the judgment" (Heb. 9: 27). The doctrine associated with purgatory allows for one who hasdied to go from a state of punishment into a state of bliss.Abraham said this transfer from one area to another was impossible because of "a great gulf fixed" (Lk. 16: 26). TheCatholic idea would also destroy the urgency for obediencenow. Yet Jesus said, "I must work the works of Him whosent Me while it is day; the night is coming when no one canwork" (Jno. 9: 4).

The Calvinist View

Those who have accepted the theology of John Calvin saythat the believer is secure because he cannot possibly fallfrom the grace of God. In other words, once one is saved,none of the sins which he commits will cause him to be lost. As stated in the creeds:

"Those whom God hath accepted in the Beloved,

effectually called and sanctified by his Spirit, and

given the precious faith of his elect unto, can neither

totally nor finally fall from the state of grace (John x.

28, 29; Phil, i. 6: 2 Tim. ii. 19; 1 John ii. 19); but shall

certainly persevere therein to the end and be eternally

saved. " (The Philadelphia Confession of Faith, pp. 36

37).

The Calvinist then believes that while the believer sins,these sins do notseparate him from God like the sins of analien sinner does. The reason they say this view is so isbecause they believe that the righteousness of Christ isimputed to the account of the believer. God then does notsupposedly see the sins committed by the believer; He seesonly the perfect, sinless life of His Son. The Constitution ofthe United Presbyterian Church in the United States of America reads:

"That, for the sake of Christ's reconciling work, God

will no more remember my sins or the sinfulness with

which I have to struggle all my life long; but that he

graciously imparts to me the righteousness of Christ

so that I may never come into condemnation. ''

This view is also contrary to the Bible's teaching. It really has God overlooking sin, instead of forgiving sin. Butas we studied in our first lesson such is not the attitude of God toward sin. The imputation of Christ's righteousnessbases our justification on what is commonly called "the doing and dying" of Jesus. While Jesus certainly had to livea sinless life to be the proper sacrifice for sin, the Bible teaches that the basisfor ourjustificationisthebloodofJesus(Rom. 5: 9; 1 Jno. 1: 7). This view also seems to downgradethe evil character ofsin andthe importance ofobedience ofGod that was discussed in the first lesson (2 Pet. 2: 22; Lk.

13: 3; Mt. 7: 21; Heb. 5: 9).

The Arminian View

Those Protestants who could not accept Calvinism sought yet another explanation for the question of secu

rity. Their teaching is sometimes called "the second working of grace. " "the baptism of the Holy Spirit, " or"entire sanctification. " A book published by the Pentecostal Holiness Church entitled Focus on Doctrine seeks to show the difference between this view and Calvinism.

"Calvinists assert that the state of conflict must necessarily be lifelong, and that only physical deathcan resolve it. It is the teaching of the PentecostalHoliness Church, as of all Wesleyans, that God had a better plan... The carnal state is a condition of divided loyalties. It is the attempt to live for God andself at the same time….Sanctification ends this state of duality, cleansing out the carnal element, and consecrating the cleansed personality to the holy will ofGod. " (pp. 24, 25, 28).

Thus, these individuals believe that God will finally bringabout a change in the believer so that he will not commit asin, and that he will perfectly keep God's commandments.

The Discipline of the Wesleyan Church reads:

"Inward sanctification begins the moment one is justified.From that momentuntil abeliever is entirelysanctified, he grows daily in grace and gradually diesto sin. Entire sanctification is effected by the Baptismof the Holy Spirit which cleanses the heart of the child of God from all inbred sin through faith in JesusChrist. It is subsequent to regeneration and is wroughtinstantaneously when the believer presents himself a living sacrifice, holyandacceptable to God,and isthusenabled through His grace to love God with all the heart and to walk in all His holy commandments blameless." (1972, p. 30).

Common experience ought to be enough to show the fallacy of this theory. The Bible shows that this situationwas not true in the lives of the early Christians (Gal. 2: 1114; 1 Cor. 9: 27). Indeed, John wrote, "If we say that we haveno sin, we deceive ourselves, and the truth is not in us;; (1Jno. 1: 8). This teaching has sanctification as a "second work"which follows justification. In 1 Cor. 6: 11 Paul places sanctification, washing, and justification as happeningtogether. Most of the advocates of this teaching have twobaptisms—water baptism and Holy Spirit baptism. The Bible says there is now "one baptism"(Eph.4: 5).

Conclusion

As these viewsare all in conflict withBiblicalteaching wemust reject them as "the commandments of men" (Mk. 7:7-9). Let us not be deceived by the philosophies and opinionsof men, but rather let us be content to receive only the simple, pure, and saving Word of God.

Please Renew Promptly

"NOT BREAD"

"Ho, every one that thirsteth, come ye to the waters, and

he that hath no money; come ye, buy, and eat; yea come,

buy wine and milk without money and without price.

Wherefore do ye spend money for that which is not bread?

and your labour for that which satisfieth not? hearken

diligently unto me, and eat ye that which is good, and let

your soul delight itself in fatness (Isa. 55: 1-2).

These verses teach there is a place to go and things to dowhereby one may eat and drink freely and find completesatisfaction. The place to go is God and the thing to do is"harken diligently unto me". This is the eating and drinking in the passage that enables the "soul to delightitself in fatness".

The passage also suggests that there are places one cango and things one may do, that promise satisfaction and fatness, but cannot deliver. "Wherefore do ye spend moneyfor that which isnotbread?and your labourforthatwhich satisfieth not?"

Jesus had in mind such delusions when he asked if a son asked his father forbread would he givehima stone (Matt.7:9).

Pulpit Commentary (Vol. 24, p. 341) illustrates this byquoting the following from preacher H. McMillan. "A strange plant, called the nardoo, grows in the deserts ofLento, Australia. Its seeds formed for months togetheralmost the sole food of the party of explorers who, a few years ago, crossed the Continent. When analyzed, the nardoo bread was ascertained to be destitute of certain nutritious elements indispensable to the support of a European though an Australian savage might, for a while,find it beneficial as an alternative, and thus it happenedthat these poor, unfortunate Englishmen perished of starvation, even while feeding fully day by day upon food that served to satisfytheirhunger. "

I believe the case of these explorers illustrates veryvividly the danger referred to in our text and the case ofmany today from a spiritual standpoint in their quest forlife and happiness.

Solomon experimented with wisdom, fame, pleasure, andriches "Till I might see what was that good for the sons ofmen, which they should do under the heavens all the days oftheir life" (Eccles. 2: 3), and declared "All was vanity andvexation of spirit, and there was no profit under the sun"(vs. 11). In other words, these

1

things were "nardoo bread", not bread of life. He identifiestrue bread as "Fear God and keep his commandments: forthis is thewhole(duty-happiness) ofman" (Eccles. 12:13).Let us study some inviting things which are not bread.

Humanism Is Not Bread

Humanism, as set forth in Humanist Manifesto No. 1 and

2, is a philosophy that ignores the God of creation, professes

evolution, and recognizes no fixed moral standard. Man

himself is the center of everything. Pleasing, satisfying,

and advancing men physically and socially is said to be the

chief goal in life. The sanctity of marriage, home life, moral

principles, and even physical life itself are insignificant in

comparison to fulfilling one's own desires or ambitions.

Religion, marriage, home life, and curbs on sex and

social behavior are all looked upon as enemies to suc

cessful living. There have been societies in past history that

followed this philosophy. All came to destruction rather

than to "life". Read Romans 1: 18-32 and the History of

The Fall of The Roman Empire.

Materialism Is Not Bread

There are many who look upon money as bread that

sustains and gives real meaning to life. They even designate it

"bread", speaking of where the "bread" is and those who

have "bread". Applying this figurative term to money

shows one's belief that money is life sustaining.

Of course, money does play a part in man's physical and social welfare. God, therefore, decreed that man, "in the sweat of thy face shalt eat bread, till thou return unto the ground" (Gen. 3: 19), and directed man to engage in honestlabour that he might have to support his family, give toothers, and lay up treasures in heaven (Eph. 4: 28; 1 Tim. 5: 8; Matt. 6: 19-21). When these motives are behind one's pursuit of money he is indeed laboring for that which istrue bread, not the money itself, but achieving these objectives.

When people act from a materialistic standpoint,

thinking that money and the things it will provide is the

fountain of life and happiness, they are in for disap

pointment and sorrow. The wise man said, "When goods

increase, they are increased that eat them: and what good

is there to the owners thereof, saving the beholding of them

with their eyes? The sleep of a labouring man is sweet,

whether he eat little or much; but the abundance of the rich

will not suffer him to sleep. There is asore evil which Ihave

seen under the sun, namely, riches kept for the owners

thereofto theirhurt.... " (Eccles.5: 11-17).

The Holy Spirit directed Paul to write Timothy, "But theythat will be rich fall into temptation and a snare, and intomany foolish and hurtful lusts, which drown men in destruction and perdition. For the loveof money is therootofall evil; which while some coveted after, they have erredfrom the faith, and pierced themselves through with many sorrows.... Charge them that are rich in this world, thatthey be not high-minded, nor 1 trust in uncertain riches, but in the living God, who

giveth us richly all things to enjoy; That they do good, thatthey be rich in good works, ready to distribute, willing tocommunicate; Laying up in store for themselves a goodfoundation against the time to come, that they may lay holdon eternal life" (1 Tim. 6: 9-10, 17-19). The media has madeit possible for us to see from the lives of many who,evidently, gloried in their money, the loneliness, heartache,drug and alcohol addiction, broken homes, early deaths,mental illness, etc. Think of Howard Hughes, Elvis Presley, the Vanderbilts, Kennedys, numerous movie stars,and many you may know"closer to home"! Truly, thosewho turn their backs to Jesus and his Word—the true bread of life—to travel the materialistic road "labour for that which is not bread" and of whom it may later be said "He hath laboured for the wind" (Eccles. 6: 16).

Sensuality (Pleasure) Is Not Bread

We live in an age when many have embraced the Humanist philosophy of "If it feels good do it", and Situation Ethics (if it satisfies you-gives you pleasure, thenit is right for you). Thus, the bottle, drugs, sexualized music,free love, dance halls, night clubs, etc. is the bread that givesand sustains life and happiness. It is the same with some,who may have some conscience against immoral things, but give themselves wholly to pleasing themselves in somesport or innocentmaterial endeavor.

One of the things Solomon experimented with was pleasure. "And whatsoever mine eyes desired I kept not fromthem, I withheld not my heart from any joy... and behold all was vanity and vexation of spirit, and there was no profitunder the sun.... I said of laughter, it is mad; and of mirth,what doeth it?" (Eccles. 2: 1-11).

The prodigal left his father's house "well off", undoubtedly with a heart filled with desire and hope for satisfaction and happiness in "riotous living", but whatlooked like bread to him turned out to be far from it. "And when he had spent all (His brother charged him with devouring his living with harlots) there arose a mightyfamine in that land and he began to be in want.. . and hewould fainhavefilled his belly with the husks thatthe swinedid eat; and no man gave unto him... I perish with hunger"(Luke 15: 11-17).

Paul wrote, "But she that liveth in pleasure is dead whileshe liveth" (1 Tim. 5: 6). Moses realized that the pleasuresof sin are only for a season, so with respect unto therecompense of reward, he choose the lot of the people of God (Heb. 11: 24-26).

Even with all these Scriptural warnings and the examples observed from others about us, it is true, as predicted, many are "lovers of pleasures more than lovers ofGod" (2 Tim. 3: 4). Truly, "all that glitters is not gold, " orlife-giving bread. Making pleasure your chief aim in life,allowing it to make you neglect spiritual endeavor, eventhough you maintain "a form of godliness," willbe revealed,in time, especially the judgment, to be that which was not bread-only bread of destruction.

(In a lesson to follow, I will discuss "False Religion Is Not Bread")

I have observed that many brethren do not know how longIsrael was in Egypt. In the interest of a better understanding of what the Bible teaches on this matter, thismonograph is offered.

Misunderstanding of this seems to be based on the ASRV of Exodus 12: 40, which says, "Now the time that thechildren of Israel dwelt in Egypt was four hundred and thirty years. " This contradicts Galatians 3: 17 which saysthat the Law was given 430 years after the Promise to Abraham. Hence, our problem is basically to harmonize Exodus 12: 40 and Galatians 3: 17. Please note the following:

Abraham was 75 when the Promise was made (Genesis 12: 4); he was 100 when Isaac was born (Genesis 21: 5); Isaac was 60 when Jacob was born (Genesis 25: 26); and Jacob was 130 at his going down into Egypt (Genesis 47: 9). Josephwas 30 when he stood before Pharaoh (Genesis 41: 46); 7years of plenty and 2 of famine made him 39 when Jacob came down (Genesis 41: 47; 45: 6). Joseph dies at 110(Genesis 50: 26); hence, taking 39 from 110 we have 71years from going down to the death of Joseph. Moses was 80 at the Exodus (Exodus 7: 7); therefore, 71 plus 80 equals

151. Subtract this from 215 and we have 64 years for theperiod from the death of Joseph to the birth of Moses. Whenwe add 71, 64 and 80, we get 215 years, the other half ofPaul's 430 years from the Promise to the Law. Arithmetically: 100—75 = 25+60+130=215. Then: 110—30=80—7—2=71+80=151+64=215+215=430. Graphically, thus:

The chart verifies Paul's statement, but what of Exodus 12:40? Let us see some other translations:

The KJV says, "Now the sojourning of the children of Israel,who dwelt in Egypt, was four hundred and thirty years. " (emphasis mine, JEN) The New King James says, "Now thesojourn of the children of Israel who lived in Egypt! 1 wasfour hundred and thirty years. " The footnote says, 11 "Samaritan Pentateuch and Septuagint read Egypt and Canaan. " I do not have a copy of the Samaritan Pentateuch, but I do have the Septuagint and it says, "And the sojourning of the children of Israel, while they sojournedin the land of Egypt and the land of Canaan, was fourhundred and thirty years. " It is easy to see that the 430years included the time spent in Canaan and in Egypt.Furthermore, Flavius Josephus says, "They left Egypt inthe month Xanthicus, on the fifteenth day of the lunar month:four hundred and thirty years after our forefather Abrahamcame into Canaan, but two hundred and fifteen years onlyafter Jacob removed into Egypt. " (Antiquities of the Jews,II, 15: 2)

Adam Clarke, in his Commentary on Exodus 12: 40 quotes the Samaritan Pentateuch: "Umoshab beneyYshrael veabotham asher yashebu baarets Cenaan, ubaaretsmitsraim sheloshim shanah vearba meoth ahanah" translated "Now the sojourning of the children of Israel, and of theirfathers, which they sojourned in the land of Canaan and inthe land of Egypt, was 430 years. " Then he cites Paul's statement and adds, "That these three witnesses have thetruth, the chronology itself proves: for from Abraham's entry into Canaan to the birth of Isaac was 25 years, Gen. 12:4, 17: 1-21, Isaac was 60 years old at the birth of Jacob, Gen.

25: 26; and Jacob was 130 at his going down into Egypt, Gen.

47: 9; which three sums make 215 years. And then Jacob andhis children having continued in Egypt 215 years more, thewholesumof 430 years is regularlycompleted. "

The apostle Paul said, "Finally, brethren, whatsoever things are true, whatsoever things are honest, whatsoeverthings are just, whatsoever things are pure, whatsoeverthings are lovely, whatsoever things are of good report; ifthere be any virtue, and if there be any praise, think on thesethings" (Phil. 4: 8). Oh, how we need to think on things thatare good. Rather than spending our time dwelling on thingsthat are negative and bad, we should strive to center ourthoughts on things that are good and positive.

We hear a lot of pessimistic talk today which reveals many negative attitudes. It is not uncommon to hear someone say, "We just can't get people to come like theyused to come to meetings. " "Nobody is interested in thegospel like they ought to be. " When we try to plan gospelmeetings, debates, personal work programs and the like,someone will be sure to inform the rest that our efforts justdon't do much good anymore. When I first started preaching, I would preach every third Sunday for a small congregation out in the country. They had not had ameeting in several years, so I tried to persuade them to haveone. At first the reaction was, "People in this communitywill not come to the meeting like they did years ago. Weused to have meetings and the house would be full. But thelast meeting we had didn't bring many out, so we haven't had one in a while. " We hear others telling us that thefuture of the church isn't so bright. We are told that thechurch is drying up on the vine. Some have estimated thatwithin ten years there will not be very many churchesaround. And by another ten or twenty there may be none!We hear a great deal about how the brotherhood is so divided.

Brethren sometimes have the same kind of attitudes toward the world in general. How many times have I heard someone of the older generation say that things are not likethey used to be. It is not unusual for me to hear that the evilin the world is worse now than it ever has been. When our economy is in bad shape, there will be some sure to say thatit is the worst time this country has ever seen. We talk asthough there have never been hard times before.

Obviously then you can see thatwe have a problemwithpessimistic thinking. Pessimism affects our whole life. Ifwe have such an attitude toward one thing, we will havethe same toward other things. I once heard a man on television askingwhy was it thatwhen we openedaloaf ofbread we see the end piece instead of the beginning piece.Pessimism is contagious. Itspreadsa

lot faster than optimism.

Pessimistic thinkers are not peculiar to our time. Whenthe children of Israel were about to take the land of Canaan,therewere somewho said, "We be not able to go up against the people; for they are stronger than we.... The land,through which we have gone to search it, is a land thateateth up the inhabitants thereof; and all the people thatwe saw in it are men of a great stature…we saw thegiants... and we are in our own sight as grasshoppers, asso we were in their sight" (Num. 13: 31-33). Yet there wereothers with a little optimism like Caleb who said, "Let us goup at once, and possess it; for we are well able to overcomeit" (Num. 13: 31).Joshuaalso exhibited thatsameattitude insaying, "If the Lord delight in us, then he will bring us intothis land, and give it us; a land which floweth with milk andhoney" (Num. 14: 8).

Our lives will be much like our thinking. The Proverbwriter said, "For as a man thinketh in his heart, so is he" (Prov. 23: 7). If we are negative and pessimistic thinkers,things around us will be bad, dark and gloomy for that is allthat we will see. We sometimes are like the man who goton the bus with some Limburger cheese under his coat.When the heat on the bus caused the cheese to begin tosmell he jumped up and said, "The whole world stinks!"And yet if we develop a positive and optimistic attitudethings about us might not appear so bad. We then willhave a brighter outlook. We will see the good as well, if notmore so, than the bad.

However, there will be times that we need to face the facts.There are warnings to which we must take heed. There willbe problems that must be dealt with. There is sin and wickedness the world over. We must admit our shortcomingsand limitations. Yet, in spite of all this we must remainoptimistic. Let usconsider some encouraging things.

1. The gospel will work. The gospel still has the samepower that it always had. It remains the "power of God untosalvation" (Rom. 1: 16). God made a promise long ago thathis word would not return unto him void, but it would accomplish what he pleased and prosper in the thingwhereunto he sent it (Isa. 55: 11). When God's word istaught we will see some results! That doesn't mean that every person will obey that hears. That has never happened. But the point is that men and women will beconverted by the preaching of the gospel today just as theywere converted in the first century. Example after example can be seen in the book of Acts where God's powerful wordpricked the hearts of the hearers. And when the message isstill the same today, there will be the same kind of results.Paul encouraged the Corinthians by saying that our labouris not in vain in the Lord (1 Cor. 15: 58). Anytime I preachthe gospel I am not wasting my time. My attitude will notbe that it won't do any good. I'll just preach the messageand leave the results between the hearer and God.
2. There has always been and will be a remnant of thepeople of God. We read sad predictions from the pen of ablemen that the church is on the decline. Little or no new works are being established and older works are foldingup. We are to understand from them that there

is a possibility that the membership of the church in the nextgeneration may be zero and the church disappear. We (at least some of us) have become too concerned with statistics andnumbers. And thus, some have taken some statistics and calculated that if we continue at the same rate then the church will disappear. But a very important point has beenoverlooked and that is that it just doesn't work that way. I once took a rate of a child's weight increase from birth toone month and calculated that if he continued such an increase at the same rate that he would weigh over four-hundred pounds by the time he was ten. However I had over-looked one simple point, that being that it just doesn't work that way. Let us carefully consider some promises ofGod. (a) The kingdom cannot be destroyed (Dan. 2: 44; Heb.

12: 28). Though local congregations may fold, the Lord's kingdomwill always be. (b) There will always be a remnantofGod's people. This promise is seen in that there has alwaysbeen a remnant. Though prophets like Isaiah, Jeremiah andEzekiel were pointing out the serious consequences of thewickedness of Israel and showing their fate, they left somehope that there would be a remnant left (Isa. 1: 2-9; 10: 20-ff;Jer. 3: 14; 23: 1-3; Ezek. 11: 13; 14: 22; 34: 11-ff; 37: 11-12).In 536 B. C. the remnant did return and began to restore theservice of God (Haggai 1: 12, 14; 2: 2; Ezra 9: 8). When wecome to the New Testament we again find Israel beingrejected of God (Rom. 9-11). Yet there was a remnant to besaved. Paul said, "Esaias also crieth concerning Israel,Though the number of the children of Israel be as thesandofthe sea, a remnant shallbe saved........Exceptthe Lord of Sabaoth had left us a seed, we had been asSodom and been made like unto Gomorrah" (Rom. 9: 2729). The question is raised in chapter eleven as to whetherIsrael has been whollycast off. The answerinverses 1-10 isthat there is a remnant. Just as when Elias thought he wasthe only one left and God said there were yet seven thousand, "Even so then at this present time also there is a remnant according to the election of grace" (Rom. 11: 2-5).All of this stands as a promise that there will always be a remnant of the peopleof God.

3. Cycles of history. The psalmist wrote, "weeping mayendure for a night, but joy cometh in the morning" (Psa. 30: 5). This is a basic principle that after the night, the morningcomes. After the darkness the daylight will break. After thestorm the sun will shine. Yes, there may be some rough times in the world and in the church, but we can afford to bejust a little optimistic knowing the cycle of events. We may suffer through some bad economic times. There may be a recession or even a depression, but expansion will follow.There may be times when people are out of work, but thatwill be followed sooner or later by a pick up in work. Therehave been times when styles and fashions were about as badas they could be when women wore the mini-skirts and men wore long, stringy hair. And yet those times were followedwith longerdresses and shorterhair. We often say thathistoryrepeats itself. We see that principle in the repeated apostacythat has taken place in the body of Christ. When the firstapostacy came it was followed by a period of restoration and growth. So it has been trueof every apostacy. Yes, the night and the darkness of apostacywill come again, but soon the daybreak ofrecoveryand growth will appear.

4. Man is basically the same. We sometimes think about the crime and wickedness throughout the world andwonder what this world is coming to. I have heard peoplesay that the world is more wicked today than it ever hasbeen. If you will but stop and consider, man has not changed. Man really isn't any worse today than he has everbeen. There is nothing new under the sun (Ecc. 1: 9). Takealittle time and read the list of sins found in Rom.1:18-31,1 Cor. 6: 9-11 or Gal. 5: 19-21 and see if man is anydifferent. Drunkenness is a major problem of our day. Yet that has been a problem starting even with Noah. Homosexuality is an openly practiced sin of this generation. However we find that Sodom and Gomorrahwere destroyed for that very sin. The news is filled with accounts of the problem we have with murder. And yet thathas been aproblem eversince theday ofCain.

In the day of Noah there were only eight righteouspeople (1 Pet. 3: 20-21). Most of us can count more than thatwithin our own families without even counting others within the local congregation of which we are members.You see, the world has been in worse shape. When we thinkabout the opposition and the threats that the apostlesfaced, (Acts 4, 5) we ought to thank God that we live inbetter times.

When we think about the problems among brethren and how sometimes brethren can't seem to get along, we oughtto reflect back on the problems brethren had in the firstcentury. They were divided over following men (1 Cor. 1:10-13), disagreed over circumcision (Acts 15), and had problems over fornication and marriage (1 Cor. 5).In all ofthese respects, man is basically the same.

5. "Doom" sometimes works for good. Sometimes the results of failure will result in good. That is not to say thatdoom or failure is good or that God approves of it. Nor should we hope for it. We see this principle in the fact thatthe Babylonian captivity taught the people of God a lesson.When the Jews of Rom. 9-11 were rejected it ultimatelyaccomplished bringing many of the Gentiles to salvation and the return of some of the Jews. The Gentiles would not become a part of Israel as long as the hypocritical Jewsremained (Rom. 2: 24). Now that God has rejected them,the Gentiles accept their place in Israel (Rom. 11: 30). Thisthus provoked some ofthe Jews to jealousy and caused themto return (Rom. 11: 31).

When apostacy and division comes, it will be terrible and sinful, a thing we should fight against and never hope thatit happens. But if it does, it will cause us to become a littlemore concerned and spend more time in studying. There ismore interest then in debates and more questions askedthan any other time. When congregations begin to dwindleor even fold up, it is a sad thing indeed. And yet that wouldprobably cause us to work harder in teaching those about us. Other congregations would wake up to their responsibility.

P

Page 15

1

6. Hope of eternal salvation. If none of the other pointswere true, this alone is enough to keep us excited because ourfuture is so bright. Paul wrote saying, "For here have we nocontinuing city, but we seek one to come" (Heb. 13: 14).We have the promise of a life to come (1 Tim. 4: 8). When werealize that this life is not all there is, but there is a better one to come, we cannot help but be just a little more optimistic

How about us all trying to be a little more optimistic every day?

Upon what do you base your authority, for what you believe, teach or practice in religion? The chief priests and elders of the Jews asked this of Jesus as He was teaching:"By what authority are You doing these things? And who gave You this authority?"(Matt.21:23. )

This matter as to what a person embraces as a "Rule of Faith" makes all the difference in the world, whether they areheaded for Heaven or Hell!

Archbishop Tillotson of the Church of England, wrote over150 years ago, concerning the "Rule of Faith":

"A rule, when we speak of a rule of faith, is a metaphorical word, which in its first and proper sense,being applied to material and sensible things, is the measure according to which we judge of the straightness and crookedness of things; and from hence it is transformed by analogy to things moral orintellectual. A moral rule is the measure according towhich we judge whether a thing be good or evil; and thiskind of rule is that which is commonly called a law.... "

"A rule of faith is the measure, according to whichwe judge what matters we are to assent to, as revealedby God, and what not. And more particularly, the rule ofChristian faith is the measure, according to which we areto judge what we ought to assent to, as the doctrine revealed by Christ to the world. " (Tillotson's Rule of Faith, Part I, Sec. I. )

Roman Catholicism's Problem

The Roman Catholic has a dual rule, consisting of bothScripture and Tradition. And when tradition differs from Scripture, the Catholic almost always follows tradition, rather than Holy Scripture. This matter of "Tradition" will usuallyconsist ofPapal decrees, some ofwhichare said to beinfallible, while others are not infallible, Encyclical Letters, some of which may or may not be infallible, Rulings of General Councils, and finally Canon Law. So, the Roman Catholic is truly hard-

pressed to define just what constitutes his "Rule of Faith".

The Christian's Rule ofFaith

The Christian looks to the Bible alone, as the written Word of God. But at this point, the Catholic will assert: "Yes, younon-Catholics take the Bible alone plus each person's private interpretation. " But allow me to respond and reply: "The true Christian accepts the Bible alone, and if any"interpretation" is required, then we accept the sum total thatthe Bible records concerning any one subject. "

Please allow me to produce an illustration: The Roman Catholic may practice sprinkling a few drops of water upon a convert and call this action "baptism". But the true Christian, will state, that the act of baptism consists of totalimmersion of the convert's body in water. And the Catholic will respond: "Oh, That's just your interpretation!" This I firmly deny! Now, let the Scriptures "interpret themselves":

(1) "John was baptizing in Aenon near Salim, because there was much water there" (John 3: 23). (2) "And both Philip and the eunuch went down into the water, and he baptized him (Acts 8: 38). (3) "Burie d with Him in baptism... " (Col. 2: 12). (4) "Therefore we were buried with Him by baptism into death... " (Romans6: 4).

Now, what does the New Testament itself explain regardingbaptism? (1) MUCH water is required. (2) The convert WENTDOWN INTO THE WATER, thus requiring a body of water, not a pitcher of water! And (3) the action of baptism is a BURIAL. Now, if the Catholic practice were correct, a fewdrops of water on a convert does NOT require MUCH WATER.The Catholic convert does not go down into the pitcher! And,the flipping of a few drops of water upon the convert does notconstitute a BURIAL! Now, do you understand HOW the New Testament "interprets" itself?

The Christian exercises private judgment in running the Scripture references. This "private judgment" is exercised upon the Rule of Faith, but the "private judgment" is NOT therule. It is no more the rule itself, than the microscope, throughwhich we may observe one-celled plants and animals. We do not confound the one-celled plants and animals with the microscope. It is merely an instrument by which we observethe subject. The Scriptures constitute the Rule of Faith, notthe eyes and ears which may study it.

The Written Word Is a Sufficient Rule of Faith

"And truly Jesus did many other signs in the presence ofHis disciples, which are not written in this book; but these arewritten that you may believe that Jesus is the Christ, the Son ofGod, and that believing you may have life in His name. " (John

20: 30-21). Since the written Word of God, the New Testamentis adequate or sufficient to produce faith that in turn leads obediently to eternal life in Christ's name, we have no needfor other "Rules of Faith" or traditions, Catechisms, Books of Discipline, Confessions of Faith, etc.

"All Scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for

instruction in righteousness, that the man of God may becomplete, thoroughly equipped for every good work" (2 Tim.

3: 16-17).

Conclusion

What do YOU accept as a Rule of Faith in religious matters? Depending upon "your" accepted "Rule of Faith", you are either headed for Heaven or Hell

Sendall News Items to:Connie W. Adams,P. O. Box69,Brooks,KY40109

LECTURESHIP YOAKUM, TEXAS—The church in Yoakum announces a lecture pro-gramfor February 22-24. The church meets at 606 Sheehan in Yoakum. The theme involves "Advantages in Christ. "OnFriday night, Jack Holt and J.

T. Smith will speak. On Saturday morning R. J. Stevens will speak and thenlead an hour of singing. At 5 P. M. Jerry Fite will speak, followed at 6 P. M.by Harold Fite. Speakers Sunday A. M. will be Larry Bilbo and TerrySummerlin. At 5 P. M. Darrell Starling will speak, followed at 6 P. M. byRon Halbrook.

FERNANDO VENEGAS, Casilla No. 122 C. C, 5500 Mendoza, Argentina—Afterfour months of study withme, a goodlady was baptizedinto Christ. In late November and early December we has a gospel meetingwith preaching by Gonzalo Yobanolo from Puente Alto, Chile. We hadvisitors every service and the members supported it well. Two were baptizedin this effort, one the mother of two of our members and the other our daughter.

NEW CONG REGATIO N CHOICE L. BRYANT, 1508 Geraldine Lane, Arlington, Texas 76010—On January 5, 1985 at Thousand Oaks Park in Mansfield, Texas, afaithful church began meeting. This is a fast growing area which affords a great opportunity. If you know of any member of the church in that areainterested in working and worshipping with a church free of the unscriptural institutional projects, please contact us. I am in need of somesupport in this work. Any who know me and would be interested, pleasecontact me soon. Myphone number is (817)640-8354.

AN UNUSUAL COMPLIMENT WILLIAM V. BEASLEY, 602 W. Westmore Rd., Tucson, Arizona 85705—Many and varied complimentary things are said about the efforts of preachers to teach God's word. Some are deserved and some are not. This short notice is about one which was and is deserved. When John Humphries, Tom Moody and I went to India this past fall, we took, as ourcustom is, a good number of cassette tapes of sermons and Bible studies to beleft with the various Indian preachers. Among the tapes given to one of thevery capable preachers, V. John Prabhu Das, was a series by brother HomerHailey. These brought a smile to the face of brother John, since he wasacquainted with brother Hailey's teaching from tapes left on earlier trips,and said that listening to the other series' 'was like opening a banana and eating it... very sweet. " His teaching is easily understood and certainlyprofitable. We pray that brother Hailey will continue to enjoy good health,and continue to be able to teach via the pulpit and printed page.

DEAN BULLOCK, 500 Cunningham, Lufkin, Texas 75901—After almostthirty-eight years of preaching, I am "giving up local work" and movingto Lufkin, Texas. My health is excellent. I plan to preach meetings and "fillin" anywhere needed when not busy in meetings. Over the past 35 years Ihave conducted from 6 to 10 meetings per year. Now, without local commitments, I can go when and where called. Osby Weaver will followme here at Mound and Starr in Nacogdoches. Please note my change ofaddress.Phone number (409) 632-1133.

An Open Door in Philadelphia TERRY Partain, 138 Varner S. W., Winter Haven, Florida 33880— We found an open door in Philadelphia, PA. James Baker, a young gospelpreacher with roots in that city had moved there in the summer of 1984,coming from Miami, Florida. He set up residence in old Germantown andrented a room at the local YMCA for Sundays. He found two sisters inChrist and soon met a man and his wife with a genuine interest in pureNew Testament doctrine. Since the church in Bartow, Florida had helpedbrother Baker move, itofferedto send RonDrumtospend a week knocking on doors in the area. Ron enlisted the help of Webb Harris, Frank Andreand myself. We arrived at midnight Tuesday morning. We wondered aboutthe dangers of the big city.Had this journey beena mistake?Would anybodyopenadoor to us?Should we enterif hedid? We firstmet neighbors, thenstarted conversations on the streets of the busy business districts. As webegan knocking doors wefound many whoreceivedus warmly.

As Ron Drum and Webb Harris were talking to a family living near thePost Office, a sister walking nearby overheard them mentioning the church of Christ meeting at the "Y". She waited and then approachedthem to discover that they were teaching what she held to be the truth. She and several others were driving some distance to a small church meeting ina converted residence. They were meeting that night and she invited us to go. We found 30 to 40 gathered to hear a speaker from Boston who lectured on the humanity of Jesus. At the end of his remarks he made noappeal to the lost. As he sat down the song leader suggested that if anyonewanted to come forward he could do so while they sang. In his closing remarks the song leader asked a brother to lead in prayer and to be sure tooffer thanks for the coffee and doughnut holes. You see, during the lastpoints of the lecture some of the ladies left the meeting and busiedthemselves in the kitchen preparing the coffee and treats. The smell of percolating coffee punctuated the closing remarks of the preacher. James will stay in contact with these as long as possible and try to teach. The highlight of our week was the Sunday morning meeting with the smallcongregation brother Baker had worked hard to gather.

Since our return we have been told that a woman we met who had left the Adventist Church has obeyed the gospel. Others we met that week haveopened their doors to brother Baker. He works 40 hours a week at an Oldsmobile dealer and has to conduct his home studies at

Page 17

nights and on Saturdays. He needs and deserves full-time support for hiswork. Why not write him: James Baker, P. O. Box 44012, Philadelphia, PA19144.

PREACHER NEEDED NEWPORT NEWS, VIRGINIA—The church at Newport News is seeking a full-time preacher. Average attendance is about 30-35. We can supply partial support of $800 per month. If interested please send resumewith references anda sermon cassette(if available) to: Churchof Christ,315 Harpersville Road, Newport News, VA 23601.

PREACHER AVAILABLE

J. M. KENNEDY, 401 Business 31 S., Peru, Indiana 46970—I am interesting in relocating with a faithful congregation. I am 56 years old,married, and have four children, one of which is still at home. I have been preaching for 38 years, 32 of which have been in located work. If interestedwrite to me at the above address, orphone(317) 473-6850.

EDITORIAL LEFT-OVERSBROTHER TANT

The final issue of VANGUARD was the December, 1984 edition. It is now merged with THE EXPOSITORY REVIEW published by Bob Craig andedited by Robert McDonald of Odessa, Texas. Brother Tant retires from editorial work after serving as editor of TRUTH IN LIFE, the GOSPELGUARDIAN and VANGUARD. His work with the GOSPEL GUARDIAN during the crucial years of the fifties and sixties was monumental. In spiteof the stress and tensions of those years, he "kept his cool" and maintainedthe kindliest ofspirits towards those whoopposedhim.He was theobjectof much abuse during those years. His two debates in the mid-fifties with

E. R. Harper on the sponsoring church, were landmark events. I was one ofabout 1, 000 preachers who heard the discussion in Abilene, Texas. His book on the life of his father (J. D. TANT, TEXAS PREACHER) is in its thirdprinting and still selling well. It is a classic.

It was brother Tant who first encouraged me to write. He printed everyarticle I ever submittedto the GUARDIAN. His ownwriting was superiorin style andusually,incontent. His education isbroad and furnishes himasa writer with a rich warehouse full of interesting facts and humorous illustrations. There was often an elegance about his writing. Even when Idid not agree with what he was saying, I always found myself reading hiseditorials and never failed to read his "Overflow" column which was always entertaining.

This editor disagreed with brother Tant on his proposal about a "box inthe vestibule" as a means of solving differences over church support of private institutions. We also disagreed about his association with the Crossroads church in Gainesville, Florida and his assessment of some of theirwork. We have taken note of these differences in this paper. But I am sure thatneither what I have written along these lines, nor that written more recentlyby former editor, H. E. Phillips, has caused brother Tant to become out ofsorts with either of us. Some brethren think that because you disagree withsomeone, that makes you personal enemies. Such is not the case. We wish forhim and sister Tant health and happiness in their remaining years.

INVESTIG ATE!

We are happy to carry without charge notices of churches needing preachers or of preachers who wish to change locations. It is impossible forus to know about the merits or demerits of all who send such notices. We carry these as newsworthy items. Such items should not be construed as endorsement of everything in every congregation in search of a preacherand who announces such need in this news column. Nor are we in positionto know about every preacher who wants to move. Churches and preachersought to make careful investigations of each other. Such would avoid manysorrows for both. We are not in the preacher placing business. We simplycarry these news items as an accommodation to brethren.

* * * * * ** ** *

SORRY ABOUT THAT!

I only learned recently that the last couple of issues of the paper werebeing mailed out from the printing plant with the address label on the frontpage obscuring either part of the article, or the title of the article or the picture of the writer. We have taken steps to correct this and hope there will beno further problem over it. Thanks to those who pointed this out. Please adviseus of any abnormality in receipt of your paper. Some of it we cannot controlbut some of it we can. Thanks for your patience. And thanks also for the considerable number who recently have sent new subscriptions along withtheir own renewals.

EDITOR'S MEETING SCHEDULE FOR 1985

March—Manslick Road, Louisville, KY Jonesboro, GeorgiaMiddlebourne, West Virginia

April—West Lafayette, IndianaWellandport, Ontario, Canada May—West End, Bowling Green, KYLakeview, Hendersonville, Tennessee

June—Houston, MississippiMt. Pleasant, Texas Kahoka, Missouri

July—Pound, Virginia

2nd and Walnut, Paragould, Arkansas August—Merrillville, IndianaSeptember—Barnesville, Ohio

University Heights, Murfreesboro, TennesseeOctober—Muncie, Indiana 12th Street, Bowling Green, KY November—East Alton, Illinois Peru, Indiana

IN THE NEWS THIS MONTH BAPTISMS 238 RESTORATIONS 56 (Takenfrom bulletins, and papers receivedby the editor)