CERTAINTIES OF OUR SALVATION "We Know—We Know"

Confusion and doubt in so many areas of life seem to lend,at least with some, even to the relationship in Christ. Withwhat, for me, is, increasing frequency I am hearing membersof the church speak with uncertainty about their faith,whether saved or not, faithful or not, and the like. A greatdeal of writing has been done on the grace of God andsome are still perplexed and with them the bottom line is,"Can we be certain of God's grace"? Careful study of theFirst Epistle of John reveals a positive note which seemsespecially timely.

The basic theme and purpose of the First Epistle of Johnis expressed within, "These things have I written unto youthat believe on the name of the Son of God; that ye mayknow that ye have eternal life, and that ye may believe onthe name of the Son of God" (1 Jn. 5: 13). In face of theheresy afflicting churches of Asia Minor near the close ofthe first century this statement has special impact.

Gnosticism, a combination of religion and philosophy,projected the idea that only spirit is good and that flesh and material things are altogether evil. The Gnostic believed onemust free himself from the material and be occupied solelywith the spirit. His means of solving the problem was in theexaltation of superior knowledge, or human wisdom. "Gnosis" is the Greek term meaning "to know". The Gnostics thought they knew all the mysteries of the universe and having solved

these, freedom was theirs. This concept of superior

knowledge occupied the place of faith and actually out

moded faith. To the superior mind thus enmeshed in this

fallacy the great question was not "What must I do to be

saved? but "What is the origin of evil?" and "How are we to

restore the primitive order?" Having by superior wisdom

resolved this they saw themselves as dwelling on a totally

spiritual plane in this material realm. John summarizes

the basic thrust of the epistle toward correcting the

uncertainty and doubt generated by these errors. The

details under-girding this are challenging.

The repeated use of the expression "we know" in this epistle encourages confidence and certainty. Our conclusion is that there is a certainty attending our relationship to the Lord which does not lend itself to doubt.Faith and the hope it produces is not uncertain and doubtful in any respect. However, these initial observationsare not to be seen as a slighting of conditions or in any wayoverriding those conditions. Quite to the contrary, it is themeeting of the conditions that gives the assurance and confidence.

"And hereby we know that we know him, if we keephis commandments" (1 Jn. 2: 3). This is a clear cut statement of criteria whereby we may know if we are God's children. The word "keep" is present subjunctive, thus conveys the meaning "keep on keeping". The sense of thestatement at this point clearly impresses an attitude of submission that produces the fruit of obedience. To concludea one time obedience would be ridiculous. It is continuitythat is here impressed. Those thus described "know" God.Mere acquaintance with his nature does not satisfy thepoint. Rather an intimacy akin to Father-children involving His spirit and character which sees a taking onand a reflection of them. The "know" of the Gnostic is in contrast with the knowledge of faith, the latter based uponbelieving and obeying the commandments of God.

Which commandments are we to obey? A frivolousquestion when we recognize that the commandments of Godare as one. "For whosoever shall keep the whole law, and yet stumble in one point, he is become guilty of all" (Jas. 2:10). Similar to breaking a pitcher by a small

puncture hole, it no longer serves its purpose. One commandment broken nullifies the purpose of God and identifies the violator as reverencing his own will over andabove the will of God even in making choice of the commandment he breaks. The negative consideration ofverse 4 furnishes a conclusion on the foregoing premise. "Hethat saith, I know him, and keepeth not his commandments, is a liar, and the truth is not in him?" Bysuch the nature and character of the true father, the devil, isdemonstrated. "Ye are of your father the devil, and the lustsof your father it is your willto do" (Jn.8:44).

"Hereby we know that we are in him" (1 Jn.2: 5)further identifies with the keeping of His word. "In him verily hath the love of God been perfected" makes us aware that our standing as complete and mature revolvesaround obedience as such gives expression to our love ofGod. "For this is the love of God, that we keep hiscommandments: and his commandments are not grievous"(1 Jn. 5: 3). Obedience has ever been the acid test of loveand only in those who are passing the test is there the intimacy of relationship which embraces all the blessingsflowing from God. Truly, the kind of fruit produced as resultof our love for God indexes our union with Him. One's life is the reflection of the pattern by which it is shaped and molded. For the second time, we take note of the certaintyand confidence repeatedly expressed by this Apostle as hemakes us aware of the certainty of our salvation.

P

Page 3

e

DOES THE NEW TESTAMENT AUTHORIZECONGREGATIONAL SINGING?

Since the recent unity meetings in Joplin, Missouri and Tulsa, Oklahoma between various Christian Church preachers and some from churches of Christ, a new argument has been advanced by those whofavor theuseofinstrumental music in public worship. Through the yearsthe public debates and controversies in the periodicals overthis issue have produced a variety of arguments to justify the use of instrumental music in worship. It has been contended that since they were used in Old Testament worship, they must surely be acceptable now. Others haveargued that the Greek PSALLO or PSALLEIN includedthe instrument, perhaps or PSALMOS.

All of these arguments had one thing in common: theywere attempts to prove that instrumental music in worshiptoday is AUTHORIZED by the scriptures. Now, comes anew approach. It is now being contended that not evencongregational singing is authorized. This approach wouldconcede that instrumental music is not authorized BUT NEITHER IS CONGREGATIONAL SINGING. Don DeWelt advanced this in a letter sent out to a number of people (I received one). Also, a recent issue of the CHRISTIAN STANDARD contains an article by Ben Killion entitled "A New Look At An Old Controversy. " inwhich he makes essentially the same point as Don DeWelt.

Here is whatBen Killion said:

"What conclusion can be drawn from all this? Is congregational singing commanded? It seems obvious to methat it is not and that one cannot even make a case for it from the New Testament.

"Is congregational singing anti-Scriptural" No! Singing isone way to praise God, to instruct, edify, andencourageone another__ Singing with the instrument is a worthy way to praise God. Singing without the instrument is also a worthy way to praise God, butcongregational singing has neither command nor precedentin the New Testament. "

These are amazing statements. They reflect serious flaws in understanding the nature and expression of divine authority, not to mention a cavalier attitude as toour right to act in absence of divine authority. It is badenough to admit that instrumental music does not havedivine sanction and that it is used in the absence of it. But now to arguethatcongregationalsinging is not

divinely stated (either by command or precedent) and thenin the next breath say we may do it anyhow is to compound the problem. According to this, we now have twothings being done without New Testament authority. If neither playing nor singing has divine command or precedent to support them, then we are double sinners fordoing these things anyhow.

This leaves a considerable amount of egg on the faces ofthose men, who, through the years, have engaged in publicdebate and tried to prove that playing along with singing wasincluded in the verb "to make melody" or in the noun "psalms. " They strove to prove that singing was not onlyauthorized, but that instrumental music along with it wasalso included in the command. That leaves Briney, Boswell,Hunt, Dunning and a number of others high and dry. Downgoes every argument along this line, if DeWelt and Killionare to be believed.

We have been saying for a long time that the basic issuewith the folks in the Christian Churches over music was divine authority, how it is established and our respect for it.This new argument says, in essence, God did not authorizecongregational singing in the first place, so the question ofinstrumental accompaniment is a moot question. But itinsists we can have both the singing and the playing INTHE ABSENCE OF A SINGLE PASSAGE AUTHORIZING IT. How would we know that singing isone way to "instruct, edify, and encourage one another"unless there is scripture which says so?

These gentlemen have taken every passage used to establish congregational singing and argued that they donot mean that at all. They are going to have a harder timedismissing passages such as Eph. 5: 19 and Col. 3: 16 thanthey think. The instruction in these verses is aimed with equal force at every Christian. "Teaching and admonishingone another" comprehends the need to be together whenthis is done. It is in that context that we are to "sing andmake melody in our hearts to the Lord. " That is exactlywhat is done in congregational worship.

These brethren from the liberal camp who have beenreveling in the new found rapport with folks who are justas digressive as they have ever been, need to ponder all ofthis very seriously. Why do people with such loose notionsabout Bible authority want to "dialogue" with some of thebrethren from the liberal churches? Is it not because they cansee that these folks have crossed their Rubicon by engagingin practices that are just as unauthorized as instrumentalmusic, and that misery loves company? What is the basis ofsuch communion except the mistaken notion that "we do many things for which we have no authority. " After all, if wecan do one thing without authority, why not another?

In the past we have been in agreement that singing wasauthorized by God. Now we are told that it has "neithercommand nor precedent in the New Testament" and yet itis argued that it is all right to sing. Well, not if there isneither command nor precedent for it. We are right back tothe issue of whether or not the silence of God is permissiveor prohibitive. That is the crux of the matter and always hasbeen. Heb. 7: 14 still

speaks to the point. Our Lord could not be a priest onearth because he was of the tribe of Judah "of which tribe Moses spake nothing concerning priesthood. " Question:Was the silence of the Lord permissive or prohibitive? Thepassage argues that Jesus was prohibited from being a prieston earth because God was silent onpriests from the tribeofJudah. One writer in the CHRISTIAN STANDARD recently made light of our contention that the silence ofthe scripture is prohibitive, but the force of this passagecannot be denied.

I am not much into "dialogue" with folks who have suchlight regard for the scriptures. But I'll tell them what I will do. I will meet any representative man among themon the polemic platform in Cincinnati or anywhere elsethey have a following and in honorable Controversy willaffirm that congregational singing is authorized in the NewTestament. In the past, this has never been challenged. Nowit is. If congregational singing is not authorized in the New Testament then it is sinful to practice it. It would be uniquein all the annals of religious controversy to have one of thesegentlemen attempt to prove publicly that hymn singing in public worship "has neither command nor precedent inthe New Testament. " We are ready to be tested on the issue.What about Don DeWelt and/or Ben Killion?

PROSPECTIVE GAIN COUNTED LOSS FOR CHRIST

The apostle Paul, referring to his heritable advantages, training, and zealous activities in a popular cause, said "But what things were gain to me, those Icounted lossfor Christ"(Phil.3: 7).

Such sacrifice and conviction has been in the past, and still is, demonstrated today. One such case involves a young couple who were "Missionaries" in Scotland.

Last year, Regina Green (daughter of Ken Green) andPhillip McGahey fell in love and were married. This marriage was viewed with apprehension by both familiesand others. Phillip had been brought up under strong "liberal" influences and was educated to evangelize in a foreign field, under the sponsoring church system. His father is an elder in a large liberal church in Tennessee which was the "sponsoring church" for Phillip as he preached in Scotland. Regina, on the other hand, was thedaughter of a popular, effective, sound preacher who hassuccessfully exposed the unscripturalness of liberalism,and, therefore, greatly influenced by "Anti-ism", as liberalsview it.

Despite these differing backgrounds, Phillip and Reginamarried and went to Scotland. Soon, things done by thebrethren there, and endorsed by their sponsoring church,caused doubts in Phillip's mind, resulting in his making athorough study of "the Issues". The result was a changeof convictions, a complete break with his sponsoring church, and a return to the States. After making thisbreak, even if the sponsoring church had been willing tofly them back to the States, Phillip had already informedthem he could no longer accept support from the "sponsoring church" system. Knowing the deepness ofconviction and sacrifice made, the Jordan Park church herein Huntsville is flying Phillip and Regina back to the States,where we believe they can be of great worth to the causeof truth. In a letter to the Jordan Park church, Phillip tellsof his changed convictions and actions.

March 3, 1985

"To the elders and brethren at Jordan Park,

Regina and I want to just express our thanks to you allfor helping us out in this time of need. There are no wordsthat can express our gratitude for what you are doing for us.

P

Page 5

This decision we have made is probably the hardest thingthat we have ever done, but it was the only right thing to do.Jesus said in Luke 14: 25ff that if your family is moreimportant than Jesus then you cannot be His disciple, if youare not willing to bear the burden of the cross then you cannot be his disciple, and finally Jesus said if the pleasures of this world mean more to you than He does that you cannot be His disciple. We wanted to be His disciples so wegave it all up for Him.

I would like to take some space to tell you brethren aboutmy decision and how it came about. About seven months agoRegina and I came to Scotland to do mission work. Beforewe came there were several weeks that I studied the issues that have divided the church not really knowing what theissues were. I read some one-sided material on the subjectand was convinced that what I believed was right. There was even one Sunday when I stood up and preached against what I now believe to be right. I had no doubts aboutit until I sat down over lunch one day to talk about this withRobert Jackson and Ken Green. We did not talk very long. Iwould not listen to them because my mind was already prejudiced against what they had to say, but they did show me how the sponsoring church arrangement was not found inthe Bible.

I went away thinking that I needed to just study my viewa bit more. A few weeks later, in Franklin, Tennessee, I heard a sermon on Bible authority preached by brother WardHogland. That was the first time in my life that I had everheard a sermon preached on Bible authority and it frightened me. It frightened me because brother Ward showed why the churches of Christ are divided. They aredivided because of Bible authority. That sermon really had me thinking. Later I again talked with brother Green andalso Ed Harrell.

By the time we left for Scotland, I had pushed all of myfears and thoughts to the back of my mind hoping theywould go away. I was actually afraid to study both sides ofthese issues. Months went by as Regina and I settled in,herein Scotland, and on severaloccasions wewould talk about it.

It was during the month of December that I once againstarted to think on these issues. The brethren here had a church sponsored Christmas party I openly objected to it atthe business meeting and questions were asked to me thatI did not want to answer. My objection was that we couldnot find where the church ever celebrated Christmas or paid for a party and bought gifts for children. Theyimmediatelyput meonthe spot soI just askedthem where it was in the Bible. They did not answerbutaskedif Iobjectedto expedientsand other things thatwerenot in the Bible.

I was so disturbed that I began to study more and moreto see why I had objected. It was because there was noBible authority. I studied more and found there was also noauthority for sponsoring churches and human institutions. Ifound out the Bible tells me that the church is all sufficient to accomplish the work that God gave it to do on the locallevel.

I was shocked at what I had learned, so I began to talkto Ken Green and ask him if that is what he be

lieved and he said yes. I called him on several occasions.

Then when I was convinced I was right I had to do the hardpart. Tell my parents, sponsoring church, and supportingchurches about what I now believe. It was so hard to do,but I had to ask myself if I wanted to be a disciple of Jesusor not.

If it were not for you brethren I would not be able tocome back to the States. My sponsoring church is stillsending me money even though I have told them not to. Iwill not take it, but send it back to them.

We now realize that the situation we have been in is sinful. Please pray for us and forgive us for living in thisunscriptural situation of a sponsoring church. We want tocome home and do what is right in the eyes of the Lord.

We are selling our house, furniture, and car. Please prayforus thatit will sell quickly. We aregoing to come home thelast week in March even if our house hasn't sold because we do not want to be a burden to the church.

We love you all much.

In the love of the Lord

Phillip and Regina"

Phillip is scheduled to preach at both services at JordanPark, Sunday, March 31. 1 believe brethren who are interested in Scripturalness and soundness will want to encourage this young couple, who have sacrificed so much,in every way they can. Churches in need of a preacher orwho can use the services of Phillip in any way, may get in touch with him through Ken Green (4605 Dyshel Dr. S.W., Huntsville, AL 35805. Phone 834-1943).

CARDINALS GO TO COLLEGE

The new media of this nation and the world devoted much time and space to the recent appointment of 28prelates to the college of cardinals, part of the hierarchy ofthe Roman Catholic Church. These included two Americans, Archbishops John C. O'Connor of New Yorkand Bernard Law of Boston.

Since the Catholic Church claims to be the publisher ofthe Bible, one would think that it must authorize the college of cardinals, but the word is not in the Bible!Neither is the office or the idea. We might stress a point bysuggesting thatone may find authority foracardinal in theverse following the one which authorizes the office of thepope. Don't spend too much time looking for eitherverse.Here ispart of the newspaper account of the ceremony:

"John Paul, wearing a gold-embroidered red cape overwhite vestments, took his seat as the Sistine Chapel choir sang in Latin the 131st Psalm 'your priests put onjustice and your faithful people sing with joy. '

"The cardinals sat in single rows, flanking the popeseated in front of the centerdoor ofSt. Peter'sBasilica.

"After the pope spoke, the new cardinals knelt before himand received a red skullcap and a biretta—the three-cornered pillbox cardinal's hat. The pope then blessed andembraced each one. "

The Associated Press in Vatican City gave a specialreport on the two American Cardinals under the heading,"Two Experience Anxiety, Awe at St. Peter's. " We quote from the article:

"New York Archbishop John J. O'Connor worried Saturday that he would trip on his cassock as he climbed the steps of St. Peter to receive the crimson hat ofcardinal from Pope John Paul II. Boston Archbishop Bernard Law felt awestruck as he waited his turn to kneel before the pontiff. "

May we suggest that the gentlemen had better be worried about the lack of authority from God for the office, and think how awestruck they will be as they standbefore the Lord at the judgment having practiced suchblasphemy.

"After the pageant-filled ceremony, Law said he wasoverwhelmed by two strong feelings as he approachedJohn Paul for the elevation.

" 'The first was a verypersonal feeling when Isaw my

mother being wheeled in, in a wheelchair. I was so happy.' " 'The second was standing at the foot of the steps,looking up at the Holy Father. ' "

Do you suppose the man has never read the Bible? If so,did he find the statement from Christ, "And call no manyour father upon the earth: for one is Your Father, which isin heaven"? It is found in Matthew 23: 9, and says thesame in the Catholic Bible. Did the Lord mean what He said? Do theybelieveand respect Hiswill? Theydonot!

Law was quoted as saying, "I realized I was being calledby the collaborator of Peter, the first pope. It was an awesome moment. "

Dear reader, there is not one verse in the Bible which says or teaches that Peter was a pope. Such an office,proposing to honor the apostle Peter, is the greatest hoaxeverperpetrated on the world!

Jesus Christ is the one and only head of His church(Eph. 1: 22, 23). He is the foundation upon which thechurch was built (Matt. 16: 18; I Cor. 3: 11).

The apostle Peter understood that Christ, not himself,was that foundation of which theprophet spoke. Hear him,"Wherefore also it is contained in the scripture, Behold Ilay in Zion a chief corner stone, elect, precious: and hethat believeth on him shall not be confounded. Unto youtherefore which believe HE is precious (emphasis mine,EB): but unto them which be disobedient, the stone which the builders disallowed, the same is made the head of the corner" (I Peter 2: 6, 7).

Back to the newspaper article for a moment. It tells about O'Connor standing for 90 minutes in the courtyard of the Pontifical North American College, greeting hundredsof people in a receiving line. He said, "I'm still numb from what happened this morning. It's something I never anticipated in my life. It will take meawhile to sortit out."

We don't mean to be unkind, and we doubt that it was atypographical error, but concerning a knowledge of thescriptures, the word "numb" should have begun with a "d". The man doesn't know what the Bible teaches!

While he is trying to "sort it out, " he would do well tosearch the scriptures for any mention of popes, archbishops and cardinals.

The simple, efficient and sufficient organization of theLord's church is described in Philippians 1: 1— bishops(elders), deacons and saints. And all the saints (Christians)were priests in the royal priesthood (I Peter 2: 5, 9). Why can't it be so today"

P

Page 7

e

"... I have overcome the world" (John 16: 33). "... and this is the victory that overcometh the world, even our faith" (1John 5: 4).

Numerous were the times during the earthly ministry ofJesus when he called attention to outstanding faith in thelives of specific individuals. It is also true that he focusedon cases of little faith, even among his closest disciples.

How important is faith? Well, we cannot please Godwithout it. (Heb. 11: 6). It is predicated upon the word ofGod (Rom. 10: 17). The just shall "walk by faith" (2 Cor. 5:7). This is to say that in order to please God we must trustHim and do His will. This is faith in action. This is Bible faith.

Although Christians know all of this, still we are plagued in Christ's church in that we are lacking in proper faith. We either have a lack of faith, our faith issmall, or our faith is weak. Why is this so? It may be thatthe flesh is weak while the spirit is willing. It may be that we do not understand what it means to really turn ourselves over to God and truly trust Him. It may be weallow fears and anxieties to overrule the scene. It may meanthat we need to study more in the Scriptures. Perhaps itmeans that we have not exercised our faith. It could mean any or all of this. Just what is our own problem on thisscore?

Why are ye fearful? Jesus asked his disciples this question on one occasion and then accused them of having"little faith" (Matt. 8: 26). The word "fearful" as it is usedat this place means "cowardly" or "timid". It is not so much that we often tremble, as did they, but what weallow the fear and trembling to do to us. It is what we doin spite of the fear that makes the difference.

Jesus, in anticipation of his impending suffering on thecross, was in agony of spirit and sweated profusely as hethought about it. However, he resigned himself to whatmust be and prayed more fervently (Luke 22: 44). In spiteof his sorrow, his heaviness of spirit, his agony of soul,Jesus overcame. He left it in the hands of the Father. "Thy will be done", he said.

We need to let our faith be stronger than our fears.Jesus did that. Surely, this should serve as an example tous. It demonstrates the power of faith. Preachers and eldersand all of us are sometimes faced with weighty matters,decisions and problems. The making of these decisionsand the solving of these problems in favor of God's truth could bring down the wrath of evil men

upon us. It could arouse opposition from false brethren. Thevery thought of it all might make us quake all over, that is, ifwe just dwell on it and brood. We might need, as Jesus, to pray all night. The more intense the agony, the more intense and fervent the prayers must be. As Jesus emerged from the garden, his all night prayer vigil hadcalmed his spirit. Christ had put it into the hands of theFather. Now he was ready for whatever would happen.

Likewise, as we agonize with fears, anxieties, problems,nameless dreads, persecuting powers (both in and out of thechurch), sickness, grief, and many other matters that troubleus we need to pray the more fervently and that very often.We, too, can emerge from our closest of prayer with a calmspirit, resigned to whatever is to take place, fortified with that inner strength which can only come from reallytrusting in God and turning our problems over to Him.Jesus did this. It sustained our Saviour during one of themost trying moments ofhistory.

Dear brotherand sisterin Christ, itwillsustain you, too!

FINANCIAL COMPENSATION FOR MEETINGS AND DEBATES

Bro. Foy Wallace, Jr. wrote in his preface to "Present Truth" of the famous Neal-Wallace Discussion in Kentucky and the Norris-Wallace debate in Fort Worth and likedebates in other place. These debates were conducted inthe days of the Great Depression. Bro. Wallace, likemany otherswent broke in those days.In hiswords, "... the good brethren who were vocal in commendation and praisewere not conscious of the stringent circumstances and did not provide the monetary means for the end... "

Regarding these great debates, he said: "... again the financial remuneration in every instance, including theFort Worth debate, was below the costs of preparation; and theexpensesof travel and accommodations, not to mentionsustenance for my family and the means to meet pecuniary obligations. "

He was not complaining. He wrote farther, "In retrospect, at the call of duty I would again travel the samerugged road. History bears witness that signal achievements have been accomplished amidst suffering and sorrow, and even grief... "

It continues to be an issue of ambiguity as to what factors brethren consider when they decide upon financialcompensation for a man who has left his family to live and work in their midst for a week's time. For my part, if I weredoing it for money, they couldn't pay me enough. But it's always been my custom to accept without comment whatever is given. I intend to continue that practice. I havereceived, on occasion, less than $100 after air fare from achurch that had over $60, 000 in the bank and a fine commodious building. I have conducted meetings whereremuneration fell short of the air travel cost or other expenses. In areas where disciples are few and financesare tight, I do not mind that kind of sacrifice. But often, one can't help but notice that he's the only one in the situation who is expected to sacrifice. Several brethren there may be doing quite well.

Then too, there are a few occasions where brethren, are not only "vocal in commendation and praise", but veryliberally "provide the monetary means for the end. .. " Whenthat happens, I usually make exception to my "no comment" vow of silence, and express appreciation for their consciousness "of stringent circumstances, " or at least fortheir understanding of the normal needs of any family ofsix with teenagers, children in college, weddings, and other expenses.

It's been my experience and observation that brethrengive very little thought to the expenses and preparation thatgoes into a debate. Any financial reward is usually lessthan one may expect to receive for a week's gospel meeting;yet there is no comparison in terms of the additional timeand work involved. In most of the debates I've been involved in, either as disputant or moderator, no consideration has been given to this matter. Some churcheshave thankfully been more thoughtful.

I moderated for Gene Frost for four nights as he debatedin a mid-western city. We were away from our homes andour respective local works to teach and defend the gospel among brethren of ample means. The trip necessitatedseveral hundred miles of travel for each of us. Bro. Frost's expenses for materials, visual aids, etc. were far greaterthan most brethren would think. And all that was given ina material way was a sack of fresh corn apiece! I thoughthe should have at least gotten two sacks!

When I debated Jesse Pratt at the Von Braun Civic Center here in Huntsville, AL in 1981, 1 did not expect anyfinancial remuneration. The Jordan Park Church spentquite a sum, in their part of the rental of facilities. Theirfinancial support for the local work had been thoughtfuland adequate. But the presentation of a $1, 000 check inlieu ofmyregular salary thatweek was highlyappreciated. Itreally came in handy in the "sustenance of my family andthe mansto meet pecuniary obligations. "

Paul said it even better than Foy Wallace: "For the scripture saith, Thou shalt not muzzle the ox that treadethout the corn. And, the labourer is worthy of his reward" (1Tim. 5: 18).

Let us look at some definitions: Assume: "To seize;usurp. To take on or to take upon oneself. To be pretentiousor presumptuous. "

Presume: "To take upon oneself without permission orauthority. To take liberties. Making suppositions. "Assign: "To set or fix for a specific purpose; to designate.To appoint. To give out as a task. "

If God has not assigned the church to help certain onesand exclude others, who is to determine who the churchwill help and who may be excluded from church help?

If God has made assignment in the matter of whom thechurch is to help, may the church disregard the assignmentand help others?

If the church helps people whom God has not assignedthem to help, isn't that church acting presumptuously?Hasn't God fixed or designated or appointed the churchto assist certain people?

Isn't the church that goes beyond God's assignment and"assumes" or "presumes" to do other work being pretentious?

God has fixed or specified or designated or appointed orgiven as a task to the church the obligation to help saints,or brethren, or widows indeed. (Acts 2: 44-45; 4: 34-35; 6:1-6; 11: 27-39; Rom. 15: 25-31; 1 Cor. 16: 1-2; 2 Cor. 8: 4; 2 Cor. 9: 1-13; 1 Tim.5: 16).

Who else has God fixed or specified or designated orappointed the church to help? The answer is NOBODY:

When the church helps others it ASSUMES a work thatGod did not intend for it to have. It has taken upon itselfwithout permission or authority a work and it is thereforepresumptuous. God will deal with churches who thus takeliberties with his word.

Churches have no more right than individuals to act presumptuously or take liberties with God's word. To goonward and abidenot in the word of the Lord is to havenot God (2 John 9). To add unto the word of God is to have theplagues in the word added to such a church or individual. Itis high time churches looked around and started backingup and backing off and living by the Word of God!

READ YOUR BIBLE TODAY

Page 9 a g e

EVANGELIZING THROUGH REVIVALS

Revival meetings, as a means of evangelizing, were undoubtedly the most successful method the pioneerRestorers used in making converts. It was in the revivalismthat swept frontier America in the early nine-teenth century that the Restoration movement associated with Barton W. Stone arose. It is not surprising, therefore, thatrevivals played a dominate role in the preaching of theseKentucky reformers from the beginning. The word "revival"in the religious sense generally refers to a stirring up of religious faith among those who have been indifferent. Revivalism is characterized by fervid preaching in publicmeetings.

But "revival" is also an Americanism that means "a series of (evangelistic) meetings, characterized by confession of sins, professions of renewed faith, etc. " (New World Dictionary) While churches of Christ today generallydo not use the term, preferring "gospel meeting" or someother designation, a revival in pioneer America was similarto a gospel meeting, especially as conducted earlier in thepresent century. However, the revivals of Stone and hisassociates, at least in the beginning, were hardly distinguishable in form from those of their religious neighbors.

Reference was made in a previous article to AlexanderCampbell's lack of enthusiasm prior to his debate with JohnWalker in 1820. Before this, in his own words, he had beencontent to have "a single congregation" striving to practiceNew Testament Christianity. " I had not the remotest idea",he later wrote, "of being able to do more than this". (The Christian Baptist, July 5, 1830. ) If the debate with Walterand other influences had not entered Campbell's life, hisefforts may never have developed to any great extent.

Revivals were such a part of evangelism in the Stone branch of the movement that after Stone began The Christian Messenger, he featured news of revivals and for several years used "Revivals" as the title of a news column.Before 1826, revivals among these reformers were highlyemotional. Remnants of revivalism remained in some of their reports for several years. In 1829, D. Long, writingfrom Milligan's Cove, Pennsylvania, spoke of "a number ofweeping mourners on my circuit inquiring what they mustdo to be saved".

But by 1826, Stone acceptedbaptism as fortheremission ofsins, and about that time Walter Scott began his great efforts on the Western Reserve of Ohio. These

forces merged together to mold the Restorers revivals intoprotracted meetings that were more nearly like those ofthe present century.

Most of the revivals of pre-Civil War days were spontaneous affairs, held by traveling evangelists, without priorannouncement or preparation. They usually continued as long as interest and circumstances permitted. B. F. Hall, anevangelist who left tracks over much of the Southlandbefore thewar, practiced dentistry to support himself ashetraveled widely to preach the ancient gospel. He established the first congregation associated with the Campbell movement in North Carolina and the first suchchurch in Arkansas. He was very likely the first preacher toteach baptism for the remission of sins in Alabama and iscredited with beginning the practice of inviting sinners toobey thegospel at the close ofasermon (at Florence in about1826).

A congregation of one hundred and twenty members wasestablished at Russellville, Alabama, by Tolbert Fanning in 1842 in a revival that started "accidentally" and that continued for several weeks. The number of converts exceeded the population of the town. Fanning and his wife were on a journey for their health when they passedthrough the town and events occurred which led to therevival and the origin of the church there. While this is ofinterest because of the man involved, it is not a uniquesituation. Most congregations in thosedayscame into being through efforts that appear circumstantial. The writer's interest in the Fanning meeting is special because his paternal great-great grandfather was converted in that meeting.

It was not unusual for preachers who had been in the fieldfor many years to number their converts by thousands. Onerevival might see the conversion of fifty, a hundred, ormorein a short time. Whole denominational churches were sometimes won over to the New Testament order in such effort. The success of the early Restoration revivals was remarkable in that day, but they seem marvelous almostbeyond belief compared to gospel meetings today.

But while revivals resulted in much good, they also had some harmful effects. The churches established by the traveling evangelists often were left to shift for themselves with little or no adequate leadership and muchof the gain was lost. Fanning seemed truly surprised whenhe returned to Russellville some years after he planted thechurch there to find that its membership had dwindled greatly. But viewing the matter from the perspective ofhistory, he should not have been surprised. However, manyof the early converts remained faithful, often through their own efforts with little or no encouragement from able teachers.

Revivals have long been an effective tool of evangelism,and while weprefer to call meetings byterms that seem moreaccurate, such meetings remain an important means of evangelism. In this day when many question the need ofgospel meetings, and some seem to conduct them more from a sense of duty than from any expectation of converting the wayward, it might be good for us to reconsider the history of revivals. It

would be utter folly to discard the "gospel meeting" as anoutmoded concept. However, this is only one means of preaching the gospel and meetings alone are not sufficient. But the success "revivals" have had during the last two centuries has been due to one thing above allothers: the Word of God without addition, subtraction, orcreedal interpretation has been preached.

"IF THE UNBELIEVING DEPART"

Many good and conscientious brethren believe that thedesertion of a believer by an unbelieving mate gives thebelieving mate the right to remarry without committing sin. It is sometimes called the Pauline privilege. " Let's look at the passage that supposedly authorizes such action."But if the unbelieving depart, let him depart. A brother orsister is not under bondage in such cases: but God hathcalled us to peace" (1 Cor. 7: 15).

Context and Remarriage

First of all you will notice that there is nothing said in thetext or the context about remarriage. The thought that isbeing expressed in the context involves the departure of amate generally, and the text itself seems to answer the question (though the question is not stated) "Well, then, what about a believer who is married to an unbeliever? Should they continue living together? If so, what if theunbeliever decides to leave the believer"?

Is Paul Quoting Jesus on Matthew 19: 9?

It has been suggested that in 1 Cor. 7: 10-11 Paul issimply quoting the Lord (from Matthew 19: 9), and since Paulsaid he, not the Lord, is giving instructions regarding thebeliever and the unbeliever, then what Jesus taught inMatthew 19 only involved believers and not unbelievers.In other words, Jesus' teaching in Matthew 19 is not applicable to aliens.

Again I say, there is nothing in the text or context of I Cor.

7: 10-15 that would suggest such a thing. The fact of thematter is, Paul is not discussing remarriage atall. If one is toknow anything about God's law on the subject of remarriage, he will have to go to another passage.

What Does1 Cor.7: 15 Teach?

First of all, there are two different Greek words that are translated "bondage" and "bound" used in the New

Testament. (The word "bound" is from the Greek word deo). The word "bondage" is taken from the Greek word dedoulotai, and is 3rd person singular, perfect, passive, indicative of douloo, which is from the Greek word doulos. Doulos, or a form of the word, if found 133 times in the NewTestament (Smith's Greek-English Concordance, Page 93).The word means, according to Bagster's Analytical Greek Lexicon, Page 107, "To reduce to servitude, enslave, to oppress by retaining to servitude, Acts 7: 6; II Pet. 2: 19; met. to render servitude, 1 Cor. 9: 19; pass, to be underrestraint, 1 Cor. 7: 15, to be under bondage, held byconstraint of lawor necessity, in somematter"(Thayer, Page158). Originally the lowest term in the scale of servitude,came also to mean one who gives himself up to the will ofanother" (W. E. Vine's Expository Dictionary of NewTestament Words, Volume 1, Page 139). In no referencedoes douloo ever refer to the Marriage Bond (unless it can beproved that it is so used in 1 Cor. 7: 15, which cannot bedone).

The literal rendering of the Greek words ou dedoulotai is "has not been enslaved" (Nestle's Greek-English Interlinear,page 673). This expression does not carry with it the idea ofsomething that is to take place in the future, ("if the unbelieving depart"), for as we have already noted it is inthe perfect, passive, tense. "The Greek perfect tense denotes the present state resultant upon a past action. There is no English tense corresponding to the Greek perfect" (Machen's Greek Grammar, page 187, Article 451,452). For an example, Mr. Machen used the followingillustration. "It is written— which mean, it stands written. "That is, it has been written in the past and remains writtenat this present time. Thus the force of the statement in 1Cor. 7: 15 is that she is not under bondage NOW becauseshe HAS NEVER BEEN under whatever bondage Paul hasunder consideration.

The kind of bondage that a person cannot become involved in, as it relates to another person, is found in 1 Cor.

7: 23. "Ye are bought with a price; be ye not the servants ofmen. " We are not to forfeit our obligation to Christ for any service to any man, thus becoming enslaved to him. In doing that, one would, of necessity, have to forsake Christwhich is what the person would have to do in order toremain with his name, as per 1 Cor. 7: 15. The unbelievingmate is leaving because of Christianity, and his spouse's allegiance is to Christ. Thus she is not her husband's servant (slave) to the neglect of Christ because she never has been.

So we can see beyond any shadow of doubt from thisaspect also, that Paul is not speaking of the marriage bond;because she has been (and still is) bound to her husband in the sight of God as far as the marriage bond is concerned. Thus, she is neither "held by constraint of law or necessity" (Thayer, Page 158);herallegiance is to Christ.

Besides this, if one may remarry simply because his spouse, who is an unbeliever, deserts him, then the consequence of this doctrine would be, that it would bebetter to marry an unbeliever instead of a believer, (whichis nonsense) because there is no passage that

a

g e

says one is not "under bondage if a believer deserts him. Get it now, if he married an unbeliever, and the unbelieverdeserted he COULD remarry. If he married a believer, andthe believer deserted he COULD NOT remarry. That isridiculously absurd! The Bible does not teach it!

THE SMYRNAS AND PHILADELPHIAS

Much has been said recently in papers and bulletinsabout the relationship between preachers and congregations.Something needed to be said. I haven't read all the articles,but what I have read is good, so what I have to say isn't an"answer" to someone's literary offering. I hope that the air has been cleared, and conditions will improve for the furtherance of the gospel.

It seems appropriate to say something on behalf of thosegood congregations who for years have been quietlytreating a preacher like he should be treated, and thosewho have improved in this department. I have said myshare about those brethren who seem to think they havereceived a divine mandate to make the preacher's work as difficult as possible, so allow me to commend those of"Smyrna" and "Philadelphia" who may be suffering verbalor typographical fall-outfromsister congregations.

In the first place, an innate sense of fairness demands that we not lump all preachers or congregations into one group, and in the second place, I'm naturally inclined to defend the underdog. I don't need to pay some psychiatristan healthy fee to tell me that this latter inclination revertsback to my childhood when I seemed to be the recipient ofmy share ofverbalabuse due to mypoverty level among mypeers. If there had been any psychiatrists in those days, Icould have told them right then that I would make atonement for my mistreatment every time I got the chance.

There is another reason I feel compelled to say something on behalf of those good congregations and eldershipsamong us. As a rule, they have no one to speak or write on their behalf, whereas every preacher has a typewriter (ortwo), and generally has access to the pages of some journal or bulletin. Even if these good congregations had aspokesman for their cause, they would understandably bereluctant to speak out. After all, good preachers are alreadyhard to come by, so why run the risk of offending another one or two? They may feel like an old brother in a congregation where I used to

worship—hesaid in theBible class that hedidn't believe in ghosts,but on the other hand hedidn't believe in aggravatingthem either!

Some preachers receive year-'round support from the home congregation and still conduct ten, twelve, or fifteenmeetings for good-paying congregations during a year's time. If that was the agreement, fine. It is difficult to make inflexible rules, for sometimes teaching opportunitiesarise which need to be taken advantage of by both thepreacherand the congregation. Otherwise,a preacher needsto remember his primary obligation to do the work of anevangelist with the congregation which supports him.

Some congregations have paid the preacher's movingexpenses, supplied him with every need, and met his everyrequest (or demand), only to have the preacher leave them"holding the bag" because his "wandering of the desire" exceed his "sight of the eyes" (Eccl. 6: 9). May God giveus patience and charity "as workers together with him" (2 Cor. 6: 1).

Then, there is the congregation which, through no fault of its own (or at the most, faulty judgment), finds itselfstuck with the support of a preacher and his family after the preacher has rendered himself ineffective in the pulpit, eitherdue to doctrinal or moral impurity.

A congregation can be deceived, just the same as preachers, True, there are congregations which don't deserve a preacher, but then there are preachers who should never have begun to preach, or having begun,should have quit before becoming a reproach to the causeof truth. Or, at least, should quit after the first offense, unless they intend to repent and bring forth attendant fruits.

My first located work was with a congregation whose former preacher was arrested by the police for drunkendriving, and the elders had tobailhim out of jail. Maybe that's why I got the job—they were desperate! The congregationwas sympathetic enough toward the offending preacher's wife and children to allow them to continue living in thepreacher's house for awhile (along with the sorry preacher).There are other congregations which practically have to payblackmail moneyin order to get rid ofsomebad eggswhichjust won't seem to hatch into productive laborers in the Lord's vineyard.

There are congregations which have fellowship with us inthe gospel, bear with us in our infirmities and adversities,give us a going away party and bid us God speed when weleave. May their tribe increase, and may God bless them "inthat day. "

FIRMNESS WITH KINDNESS

Somewhere along the way between birth and adolescencea father and mother need to convey to the child that just asit must respect its parents so they as parents must respect God's orders to "nurture" their children "in the chasteningand admonition of the Lord". Successful disciplinariansreflect their love for God by teaching the child that theirrequirements of him grow out of God's requirements ofthem. The child, ofcourse,must be disciplined before it canunderstand anything about the meaning of parentalaccountability to God. The fact remains, however, that assoon as the child begins to understand that it is somehowaccountable to its parents for its positive and negativeresponses to theirwill, so the child mustunderstand that itsparents are answerable to God. Somehow a child learns the meaning of "Yes" and "No, no" before it understands why some actions bring it physical pain accompanied by parental vocalizing of "No, no" and "Don't" as well as tender caressing and pleasant vocal sounds which reflectparental approval years before it learns the meaning of theword approve.

Correcting Words and Deeds

By the time a child learns its own name it is possible thatit has understanding of words descriptive of acceptable orunacceptable behavior. An incident regarding my own older daughter Connie will illustrate this point.

My wife and I determined not to put out of our little girl's reach things which she could mar or break when she wasmature enough to touch them on shelves or low tables in oursmall apartment. We watched her very carefully and as shewould reach for an "untouchable" object we would spank her hand and at the same time say, "No, no. Connie don't!"

Evidently our system worked quiteeffectively, judgingbywhat Georgia Dean heard her say to a man who appeared atthe door when Connie was mature enough to know and callherself "Tonnie" when asked her name. The weather was warm, the solid door was open but the screen door locked.Connie's mother was busy in a back room when the man knocked at the door. While awaiting a response he saw Connie through the screen playing with her toys. My wifeheard the man ask, "What is your name little girl?".Immediately the child responded, "Tonnie Don't!".

I often tell this incident to underscore the point that achild can be conditioned to match proper and improper action with approving and disapproving words from itsparents. In time the child can learn that its parents havetheir God-given "No, no's" as well as their God-given "Yeses" and that they are answerable to God for the discipline of their children who are God's "gifts" to them.

Responsibility is a Two-Way Street

If a child can be taught to love and care for the dollsgiven to it by its parents it can be taught that it is God's "gift" to its own parents who love and care for it. If not, whynot? This realization becomes increasingly meaningful tothe child as it matures and as parents explain to the childtheir responsibility to God for its moral and spiritual training.

In this connection we should distinguish between parental firmness and parental hardness because there is a difference. To say that parents are "hard" on their childrenis to convey the idea of impenetrability or severity, evenharshness, or offensiveness to a sense of justice. When parents treat children as dumb animals which respond only to painful stimuli there is something sorely lackingin parental understanding of child motivation. This is notto say that children should not be punished for wrongdoing but it is to distinguish between hatred ofwrongdoing and the wrongdoer even as God distinguishesbetween sin and the sinner by hating sin while loving thesinner.

It is not always easy for parents to govern their emotionswith reason but it is always right. Self-control by theparents will produce desired results in a child's respect forthe parent. The parent who learns the difference betweenfirmness and hardness is apt to know the difference between harshness and kindness. The "Golden Rule" of Matt. 7: 12 can help both parents and children in dealing with each other in every phase of life.

It is very obvious that there are some problems and questions that relate to unity. Some brethren would picture it this way: either follow love and have unity orfollow law and be a legalist. However, love and law (truth)do not oppose each other. The truth is spoken in love (Eph.

4: 15). While the Bible does teach us to love our brethrenand religious friends (Heb. 13: 1; Matt. 22: 39), we are also instructed to contend for the faith (Jude 3). An obligation to do one of these does not entail an obligation tocompromise the other.

The cry today is "We are Christians only, butnot theonlyChristians. " But, my plea is that "We are Christians only and the only Christians. " Now, let's clarify what I meanwhen I say that. I am not saying that we know everything.Neither am I saying that we are the only sincere people. I am not saying that we do not love those in denominationalism. Nor am I saying that all those in thechurch of Christ are perfect or will be saved. However, I ammaking a few basic affirmations. I am saying that one mustobey the gospel in order to be saved(l Pet. 1: 22). I amaffirming that there is one body (Eph. 4: 4; Col. 1: 18) and that thesaved are in that body (Eph. 5: 23). I am also sayingthat faithfulness is essential (1 John 1: 7).

We are told today that if we love our neighbors we will refrain from rebuke and condemnation. Rather, we will givethem a pat on the back and wish them well. We are living in a time when we have become too tolerant with sin and false teaching. We are not the aggressive and fighting people weused to be. Error and ungodliness used to be opposed withall our might. But brethren, I'm afraid that we have mellowed and softened and become thin-skinned. Sometime ago I talked with a couple who had left theinstitutional element who said they were impressed with usbecause "you people fight for what you believe. " May Isay that if what I see among some brethren is that fightingand aggressive spirit, then deliver me from the day that weare not.

Jesus told men the truth because he loved them. Sometimes that truth involved strong rebuke (Matt. 23; 7: 13-23). I point out error and sin in the lives of individualsbecause I careabouttheir souls.Paul asked,"Am I thereforebecome your enemy, because I tell you the truth" (Gal. 4: 16)?

There are four basiclaws that relateto unity thatwewantto consider. Those who have problems with unity, fellowshipand who is a Christian need to be reminded of these basic laws. To give credit where it is due, the gist

of this material is taken from an excellent book entitled CHRISTIANS ONLY—AND THE ONLY CHRIS TIANS by Thomas B. Warren.

Law of Authority

There are two sources of authority. One is right and the

other is wrong. One is from heaven; the other is of men.

Jesus gave only two alternatives when he asked

concerning the authority of John's baptism (Matt. 21: 23

27).Itwas either of heaven orof men.

We must have divine authority for all that we do in

religion. We are to walk by faith and not by sight (2 Cor. 5:

7). Paulsaid,"And whatsoeverye do in word or deed, do all

in the name of the Lord Jesus, giving thanks to God and

the Fatherby him" (Col. 3: 17).We must continue to abide

in the doctrine of Christ (2 Jno. 9).

It is important to understand that when God authorizesa thing there isn't a need for God to make a list of all the things that are not authorized. He expects us to have enough common sense to understand. And yet, there aremany who want to justify a practice on the basis that Goddidn't say not to. Let us illustrate how authority works.The Commonwealth of Kentucky authorizes me to put a tag number on my car (ex. BR-549). There isn't any need (in factit would be silly) for them to give me a list of tag numbersand say "don't put these on your car because they are notauthorized. " In every public building there is a rest-roomdoor that says "Men" and one that ways "Women". We understand that to authorize "men only" and "women only" to enter these doors. There isn't a need to put below"Men" another sign saying "No Women are authorized toenter. " The same principle is true when you order a pair ofshoes. When you fill out an order blank you check thecolor "brown". That authorizes the company to send you abrown pair and a brown pair only. Obviously there isn't a need to write a note and say "I do not want a black, tan,white, gray or red pair of shoes. " If by chance the companydid sendyou six pairs of differentcoloredshoes, youwould immediately contact them and point out that you neverasked for anything but a brown pair.

Surely you see the point. We must do the things God hasauthorized and leave the unauthorized things alone. Nadaband Abihu learn the hard way (Lev. 10: 1-2). It is evil to dothings that God has not authorized (Jer. 7: 30-31).

Denominationalism is sinful because it is not authorized. The Bible speaks of one body (Eph. 4: 4), but others cannot be justified. God has promised to uprootevery plantthat he has not planted (Matt. 15: 13).

Law Of Inclusion

God does not approve of all that man calls unity, neither does he condemn all division. Sometimes God demands division (2Jno. 9-11; Tit. 3:10-11; 1 Cor.5:1-13;

11: 19). This means that all are not included in the circleof fellowship. The question then is what is the point atwhich men attain fellowship with God and his people? Isit when one believes even though he hasn't repented orconfessed? Not in light of Acts 17: 30-31 and Rom. 10: 9-10.It is when one has not only believed, repented and confessed, but has also been baptized

(Mark 16: 16; Gal. 3: 26-27). That baptism must be scriptural. It musthave the scriptural mode (immersion— Rom.

6: 3-4), element (water—Acts 8: 26-40), and purpose (for the remission ofsins—Acts 2:38).

The law of inclusion indicates that some are included and some are not. Those who are accountable and have not obeyed the gospel are alien sinners and thus not included(Eph. 2: 1-3). Those who merely think or are convinced thatthey are God's children are not included. One is onlyincluded when he obeys the gospel (Matt. 7: 21; 25: 11;Luke 6: 46).

Law Of Faithfulness

Fellowship with God and the people of God is contingentupon faithfulness. We cannot receive the spiritual blessingsprovided in Christ unless we are faithful. If we truly loveGod, we will keep his commandments (1 John 5: 3).. Paulwrote, "for whatever a man soweth, that shall he also reap...let us not grow weary in well doing: for in due season weshall reap if we faint not" (Gal. 6: 7-9). The Hebrew writersaid that we are God's house "if wehold fastthe confidence and the rejoicing of the hope firm unto the end" (Heb. 3:6). John wrote saying that we must be "faithful untodeath" to receive the crown of life (Rev. 2:10).

God's curses are also contingent. Paul said, "if we live afterthe flesh, ye shall die" (Rom. 8: 13). A branch that doesn't abide in Christ is "withered... and cast... into the fire... and... burned" (John 15: 6). If we sin willfully, "there remaineth no more sacrifice for sins" (Heb. 10: 26).

Law Of Exclusion

Obviously some must be excluded from fellowship.There is some unity that is condemned (Rev. 2: 15-20).There is some division that isupheld (Luke12:50-51; Eph.

5: 11; Rom. 16: 17-18).

Fellowship must be excluded to any who do not believe.The same is true concerning any who have not obeyed theLord in baptism.

If a child of God becomes unfaithful he is to be excluded from fellowship (1 Cor. 5: 1-13; 2 Thess. 3: 6-15). If one goesbeyond the doctrine of Christ he has not God and wearenottohave fellowshipwith him (2John 9-11). Consider the otherpassages dealing with the law of exclusions (Matt. 18: 1517; Rom. 16: 17-18; Tit. 3: 10-11; Eph. 5: 11-12).

When we get a grasp on these four basic truths, unity andfellowship shouldn't be a great problem forus.

"Having your conduct honorable among the Gentiles, thatwhen they speak against you as evildoers, they may, byyour good works which they observe, glorify God in theday of visitation" (1 Peter 2: 12).

In this study, we are interested in determining, if we can,just what is meant by "the day of visitation"? The wordvisitation is translated from the Greek word episkope. It isalso found in Luke 19: 44:

"For the days will come upon you when your enemies willbuild an embankment around you, surround you and closeyou in on every side, and level you, and your childrenwithin you, to the ground; and they will not leave in youone stone upon another, because youdid not know the time of your visitation" (Luke 19: 43-44). So Jesus spoke aboutthe city of Jerusalem, as He wept over it.

The "Day of visitation" can be used in reference to inspection and judgment; and the rendering of punishment. It is also used in reference to a "Day of mercy", i. e., any time that the heathen, the sinner, thus the servant ofSatan, may come to believe the gospel of Christ, turn fromhis sins, and through faithful obedience, receive the tendermercies of God. Hence, a day of visiting God's mercy uponthose who believe and obey Christ.

This Greek word, episkope, means to inspect, look upon, oversee, judge, or evaluate. In the Septuagint, it isfound in Exodus 3: 16:

"Go then and gather the elders of the children ofIsrael, and thou shalt say to them, 'The Lord God of our fathers has appeared to me, the God of Abraham,and God of Isaac, and God of Jacob, saying, I havesurely looked upon you, and upon all the thingswhich have happened to you in Egypt'. And he said, ' I will bring you up out of the affliction of the Egyptians.... to alandflowing withmilk and honey. "

Note how this "day of visitation" was to be one of mercy!

The New King James Version uses the expression: "Ihave surely visited you and seen what is done to you in Egypt" (Exod. 3: 16).

Anotherexample of "visitation" is foundin Isaiah 10:3: "And what will they do in the day of visitation?For affliction shall come to you from afar: and towhom will ye flee for help?" The New King James Version renders this: "What will you do in the day of punishment1!... " Therefore, in this

example, it is a visiting of punishment upon the people. Foryet another example of "visitation" or "over-sight", we go to Job 10: 12:

"And thou didst bestow upon me life and mercy, and thy oversight has preserved my spirit. " The New King JamesVersion gives the above as: "You have granted me life andfavor, And your care has preserved my spirit. "

As a final example of the Septuagint's use of "visitation", we refer to Jeremiah 10: 15:

"They are vain works, wrought in mockery; in the timeof their visitation they shall perish. " The New King JamesVersion renders it: "They are futile, a work of errors: In thetime of their punishment they shall perish. "

1 Peter 2: 12—Is This 'Visitation' Mercy? Punishment? Judgment?

There is no question but what God's over-sight, observance, or inspection is involved in any use of the word'visitation', episkope. God is aware of our thoughts, ourdeeds, our speech. Angels rejoice in heaven over the one sinner who repents and obeys, more than over ninety and ninerighteous persons who are not then in need of repentance.

Although most translators apply 1 Peter 2: 12 in thecategory of punishment and judgment, NOT ALL DO SO! Igive brief excerpts of the following:

".... in the day of His overseeing care. "—Wuest's New Testament.

"__ in aday of inspection. "—Young's Literal Translation.

".... they will praise God for you, when his time comes to have mercy on them. "—R. A. Knox Translation. In a footnote, he refers to Luke 1: 68, which reads' "Blessed be the Lord, the God of Israel; He has visited

________________________________________________Page 15

His people, and wrought their redemption. "".... when He grants them the grace of conversion. "—Kleist-Lilly Version.

".... they may through observing you by reason of yourgood works glorify God in the day of visitation. "— Confraternity Version. A footnote reads: "The day of visitation" this may refer to the last judgment, or, moreprobably, to the time when the call of grace shall be givento the pagan. Hence the exhortation to good example. 'Let your light so shine beforemen... ' (Matt. 5: 16).

Conclusion

Although the majority of translators write in terms ofpunishment or judgment, I choose to consider the word asdealing with God's watch-care over his creatures, not willing that any should perish, but that all might come torepentance and ultimately obedience to salvation.

Send all News Items to: Connie W. Adams, P.O. Box 69, Brooks, KY 40109

HAUNTING REALITIES FROM THE

DOMINICAN REPUBLIC ROYCE CHANDLER, 3891 Bunnell Rd., Lebanon, OH 45036—This Spanish work is really marvelous, all things considered. New doors are opening constantly, and everywhere the people are the same: poor,humble,loving, hospitableandhungry to learn the Word.During our visit tothe Dominican Republic (May 1-10), Ross Conley and I worked among someof the Lord's good people. We preached among five congregations in and around Santo Domingo, the capital, and metwith other brethrenwho camefrom outlying parts of the island to be with us. We met several young men who give as much time as possible to preaching and teaching: intelligent,capable, dedicated young men—most of whom have to get by on very littlein order to have time to study and teach.

Two major concerns face those brethren. One, the harsh reality of whattrue centralization efforts are all about; i. e. one church (and its preacher)trying hardto control all the local churches inthe country, as that one church is itself controlled by an institutional church in Tennessee. Two, the question of the spiritual condition of over 90% of the country's married population, who never obtained a legal marriage certificate.As a great majority of the Christians are in this situation the question iswhether they are living in adultery if they did not obtain the legal certificate. Obviously, the one issue is an imported one; the other, purelyculturally inspired.

We met Santiago del Villar and Pacio Blanco, the primary leaders andteachers among the brethren. Both are well versed in the Word and are fearless and tireless in trying to help others learn. Both are self-supporting, Santiago by a pension and Pacio by his little pharmacybusiness. Other young men are following suit, and we were quite taken withthe depth of conviction and understanding of these men. One thing is truly worthy of note: in all the conversations we had, from breakfast to bedtime, agood 95% of all that was said was spiritual talk. That was true whether Ross and I were around or whether we were in a room studying for thenight's lessons and listening to the

brethren inthe next room as they continued their discussions.Little or no frivolity

or triviality surfaced in their conversation. Their preoccupation is with

"redeeming the time", and Ross and I felt like we had almost entered a time

machine and gone back when saints searched the Scriptures daily in order to

learn and grow. It was an experience I had not had in such concentrated form

before—and one that I have never had in my own country, among my own

brethren here.

Perhaps it is the hard reality of poverty and a government in severe economic

trouble that leads these brethren to such sustained spiritual concentration. Many

of them are jobless and live in shells or in a small lean-to made of tree leaves.

The hospitals are closed. They have a saying, "If you get sick, just take your

bed to the cemetery. " Every day is one of poverty, of concern for children and

for sick and needy brethren, of a threat of national economic disaster. There is no

thought of going to McDonalds or "out on the town"; no vacation, no new

clothes... new car... new home. But there is constant prayer and a smiling

confidence that God will provide and sustain, and a daily concentration upon

the Word of the Lord.

Ross and I went to study with them, but—without a doubt—we were the

ones helped. If those brethrenare in "need"of visits from us,maywe ever be so

needy!It occurred to me that perhaps manyof our own USA brethren might start

revivingifsomeof those Latinworld brethren would make trips toteach us how

to love, and trust and give of ourselvesto the Lord and to each other. Lord willing,

Wayne Chappell and Iwill visit brethren in ColumbiaandVenezuela, July 6-23.

Please pray for us and for thebrethren we hope to encourage.

CARLOS CAPELLI, Casilla #83, 1665 Jose C. Paz, Buenos Aires,Argentina—Recently, two were baptized and three restored in the Jose C. Pazcongregation. Also, I spoke in a gospel meeting at Boulogne and one wasbaptized there. On May 31 a big tempest came to Buenos Aires. One of the zonesmost affected was Boulogne andthe homesofmany brethren were badly damaged.Water came up4 feet inmany homes with lossof beds,mattresses, clothes and other things. Now there is contamination in the water and there is much illnessamong the children. Some extra help for beddings and clothes or boxes of used clothingwould be helpful and can be received here without problem.

KEITH STORMENT, 808 Bond Ave., Barnesville, OH 43713—On June 30, 1985 I will conclude just over two years of workwith the West Main church inBarnesville. The Lord has blessed our efforts here. Seven have been baptized,fourteen restored, and one couple has placed membership. Also, a serious internal problem has been resolved. I would recommend this work to anymature, faithful gospel preacher.On July 1 wewill beginworkwith the churchinGibson City,Illinois where thereare two good men working as elders and where there is an active program of work, including a radio program. We invite all who might be in that area to stop and worship with us. The building is locatedonhighway 47 south in Gibson City next to Pizza Hut. Our newaddress willbe125 W. Walnut, Gibson City, IL 60936.

WILSON ADAMS, 891 Autumn Valley Lane, Gambrills, MD 21054—Weare now into ourfourthyear withthe Wildercroft churchin suburbanWashington,

D. C. (Riverdale, MD). The work continues to be encouraging and we especiallyenjoy ourpleasant relationshipwiththe goodbrethrenhere. Wildercroft is ablyoverseen by Vernon Klemm, Jim Vaughan, and Rufus Barfield—godly menwho love the Lord and who are definite in their stand for the truth. We recently lost one of our elders, Sid Miller, who in June retired and moved back to the Tallahassee,Floridaarea.TheMillerswill bea great help wherever they go. Wepresently assist in support of four other preachers including James Baker who isdoing excellent work in Philadelphia. He is still in need of more support and isworthy of it. He is a hard worker inamuch neededarea. Please consider him.

Over the past two years we have put heavy emphasis on teacher training and preparation and it is beginning to pay off. Our classrooms are bright and cheerywith attractive carpet, two bulletin boards per room and teachers who are usingtheirimagination in creating visuals to makeBible storieslive in theminds of thestudents. Nothing could be more important. Our recent Vacation Bible Schoolwas the most successful ever averaging 105 for the five sessions. We lookforward to having Sewell Hall with us in the fall and Colly Caldwell next spring inmeetings.

The church recently sold the preacher's residence thus allowing us to purchase our own home. Our new address is given above and is located nearAnnapolis. If you are coming to the nation's capital please make plans to worship with us. We are conveniently located just minutes from Capitol Hill and theNational Mall area via the Baltimore-Washington Parkway. The New Carrolltonsubway stationis justtwomiles away and the University of Marylandat CollegeParkisonlythree miles from the building.Weare alsoclose to Andrews Air ForceBase as well as Boiling Air Force Base and Fort George Meade. From the CapitalBeltway (1-95/495) take exit 22 (B. W. Parkway) south to Riverdale Road. Goleft 1/2 mile to Auburn Ave. We are on the corner. Call 301-621-8473 or 249-1706 for more information or directions.

KEN DART, 11775 S. W.5th St.,Beaverton, OR97005—Ihave beenworking with the church in Beaverton since February 1st. There is much to do. We are trying to get a new building and are presently in process of getting city approvaland hope to begin construction about August 1, 1985. Since our new facility willhave new pews, we want to dispose of the old ones which are still functional.There are24 which are 8ft.long and 11 whichare 9 ft. long.Theyare of plywood construction. We would like to see them used by some of the brethren if theyneed them. Contact us atthis address.

TERRELL BUNTING TO NORWAY TERRELL BUNTING, Rt. 4, Box 4129, Manchester, TN 37355— Karen and I would like it known that our tentative plans are to go and help in the work inNorway. We hope to depart January 1,1986 dependingonfinal approvalofourvisa and gaining of sufficient funds. Tom and Shirley Bunting are in their second round of work in Norway. The work is making progress with much to be encouraged about recently. We are in need of monthly support and travel funds aswell as moving expenses. A new generation is on the scene since the work firstbegan in 1957.Please help us if you can.

ROCHESTER, MINNESOTALESLIE DIESTELKAMP, 1730 W. Galena Blvd., #102 W. Aurora, IL 60506— Rochester, Minnesota is the home of the Mayo Clinic and is visited annually bymany brethren. Faithful brethren meet there on Sunday only at 10 A. M. in theMidway Motor Lodge, Room 160, located near the intersection of Highways14 and 52. Phone Alden Sagdalen, 507-545-2554.

FRY ROAD LECTURES HAROLD FITE, 2510 FryRoad, Houston,Texas—On August11-14, 1985,the Fry Road church will host a lectureship with Bob Owen of Temple Terrace,Florida and James Ward of San Antonio,Texas speaking. The morningtheme willbe "God's Precious Promises" andthe eveningtheme willbe "Respect"(for Self,God, Life, Marriage, Parents, the Elderly, and the Truth). If you need a place tostay, phone 713/578-1897.

ALLAN TURNER FAMILY TO SOUTH AFRICA

ALLAN TURNER, 3028 Eleanor Ave., Louisville, KY 40205—After much prayer and family discussion, we have decided to accept the challengepresented by Paul Williams to move to Johannesburg, South Africa to workwiththe church there and in surroundingareas.Ihavebeen interested in gospel preaching inforeign fields for sometime now.I must becandid though; I tried to getothersto go but that did not work out. So, we are going, with God's help and the support of our brethren. We plan to stay at least five years. My wife, Anita, and children (Matt, 15 and Holly, 13) are all anxious and willing to go and help me.Moving expenses are high so we will be selling practically everything and willpurchase what we need there. The Briston congregation will furnish a house.Except for the house, I am responsible for raising all my support ($2, 500 a month). If you wish to know more about meandmywork, feel freeto contact theelders of the Nebraska Avenue church in Tampa, Florida or the elders of the Wendell Avenue church in Louisville, where we have labored the last few years.You may also contact John Humphries, Connie W. Adams, Gene Frost, DeeBowman, Bob Buchanon, Robert Turner,Paul Earnhart, HarryPickup,Sr., CharlesGoodall, Bob Owen or Melvin Curry. All of these men know me and my work.We hope to leave for South Africa in January, 1986 and would be glad to hearfrom any who might wish to help us.(Editor's note: Allan Turner is a most able preacher. He is diligent in his workand study habits. His work at WendellAvenue inLouisville has been outstanding. It has been my privilege to observe his work at close range. He is a mature man blessed with great ability, a godly wife and faithfulchildren who are a credit to their parents. His information letter is accompanied by a letter of recommendation from the elders at Wendell Avenue. Hereare excerpts from what the five eldersthere said:

" He has an unusual fervor to preach the gospel. While working with us hehas preached on television, on radio, on a telephone (Dial-A-Bible-Moment) program, in the prison system here in Kentucky, in England, inIndia (two trips), as well as gospel meetings in this area and other parts ofthe country. Allan stands ready to preach and teach the gospel as many times a day as there may be opportunity,

"He is bold to declare the whole counsel of God—seemingly unafraid toaddress any subject.

"His subjects are chosen not just to have something to say, but rathercarefully selected to apply Bible truth in order that the church may growand mature spiritually.

"He has the ability to glean from the Scriptures their true meaning, and then to teach those truths in a way than can be easily understood andappreciated by the average listener. "

In addition to these excerpts from the elders, I lift the following from aletter written by Allan's wife, Anita:

"On Tuesday,April 2, 1attended thefuneralof sister Bobbie Adams hereinLouisville,Kentucky.... Brother WeldonWarnock spent several minutes reading from an article from SEARCHING THE SCRIPTURES that sister Adams had written several years ago... She wrote about her life asthe wife of a gospel preacher and the joys and rewards she had experienced.In one particular segment she wrote about living overseas in Norway, wherebrother Adams had decided to go preach the gospel. She acknowledged someof the difficulties of that period, but her attitude about the 'why' of going to Norway impressedme verymuch___As I heard brother Warnock read the wordssister Adams had chosen years before, I realized how much we both thought alike.I have no doubts or fears about accompanying Allan to the Republic ofSouth Africa. He is my husband, my protector and provider, and I knowthat inall things he does only that which he thinks is best for me. I am lookingforward to my new life in South Africa as an exciting challenge, and as anopportunity to serve my Lord and my Saviour, Jesus Christ. "

Brethren, this man should have the help he needs. He will be a blessingto the work in South Africa. CWA)

PREACHER NEEDED

JULIAN SNELL, 632 Montclair Rd., Frankfort, KY 40601—It has been reported in some circles that I would be moving to LARGO, FLORIDAto do the work of anevangelist there. Aftermakingadecisiontomove toLargo it became necessary to reverse that decision due to personalconsiderations. Lest my action reflect upon the good church in Largo, let itbe known by all that such decision was in no way due to any failure or shortcoming on the part of the church which in every way was gracious and considerate in the extending of their invitation as well as in the acceptanceof my reversal of decision. From my observation, this is a commendable church and offers a good work to a faithful man.

TIGRETT, TENNESSEE—The Tigrett congregation, located in west Tennessee near Dyersburg, needs a preacher who can partially supporthimself. We have about 40. We have a house to supply and can provide $150a week. A retired or semi-retired person might consider us. Contact Bill Irvin, Rt. 2, Box 176, Friendship, TN 38034, You may call me collect at night(901-677-2589).

NEWPORT NEWS, VIRGINIA—The church here is seeking a full-time preacher. Average attendance is 20-25 and partial support is available.If interested, please contact us at: Newport News Church of Christ, 315Harpersville Rd., Newport News, VA 23601.

PISCATAWAY, NEW JERSEY—The church here has been in need of a full-time preacher for nearly two years. New Jersey is the most densely populated state in the nation and there are few congregations to work amongall these people. During these two years local brethren have done well inpresenting edifying lessons to us. But we all see the need for one to devotefull-time to the work of preaching and teaching. Those interested many contact: JERRY FALK, 421 Graham St., Highland Park, NJ 08094 (phone 201-572-2094); or RICHARD PFLAUM, 3 Yorktown Rd. (Millstone), Somerville,NJ 08876 (phone: 201-359-1928).

IN THE NEWS THIS MONTH

BAPTISMS 432

RESTORATIONS 187

(Takenfrom bulletins and papers received bythe editor)