Volume XXXIII May 1992 Number 5

How Do Men Forsake The Right Way?

Goals and motives play an enormous role in deter-mining what people will do and how strongtheir convictions will be. The most important placesin life require dedication to principle and faithfulness to duty. Those who desert the principles and duties to which they dedicated themselves, especially when they are associatedwith others, do the same damage as if they servedthe enemy of their cause. There are many in thechurch who have deserted the Lord Jesus Christ and his word.

A compromise of one's conviction will allow sins that destroy the cause for which Christ died. Wheredid the idea that mild sins or "human weakness" will be tolerated by God? The idea that mild slander, littlewhite lies, little deceitful conversations among members of the church, taking liberty with the authority ofChrist came from compromise attitudes. It did notcome from sound doctrine. It came by the promotion and approval of preachers, elders, teachers and Christians as they silently consent to the practice of sin bynot speaking against it and not using such disciplineas is necessary to keep it out of the church. Everyteacher or practitioner of "evil communication" out ofthe mouth is a traitor to the Lord. They have forsakenthe principles of truth and have become the enemies ofGod.

We also have the universal problem of indifference among members of the church. Apathyis the product

of Satan and is opposed to the way of Truth. All apathyproduces lukewarmness and finally spiritual death. It isfrom the lack of real conviction. The Laodiceans were nauseating to the Lord because of the "lukewarmness" toward their responsibilities. They weretold to repent. God will not tolerate such attitudes, andthe church cannot afford to be guilty of tolerating andendorsing such today. The church at Ephesus wasindustrious, but they had left their first love. This condition could not continue; they had to repent orhave the candlestick removed. It is as true today as itwas then. Mechanical exactness in rituals is not obedience to the Lord. One must do exactly what the Lordrequires, but it must be done with love and zeal.

Emotional and sentimentalism are supplantingtrue worship in spirit and truth in many congregations ofthe Lord's people today. More time and energy is spent in relating an emotional account of human expe-riencethan in rebuking sin and admonishing to be faithful tothe Lord. If you want to have the anathema of important men upon you, just speak out against the modern philosophy of preaching among the notable in the churchtoday. Go easy, speak softly, do not rebuke or condemn;compliment and flatter the church, do not call names,speak in glowing terms of the accomplish-ments andgreatness of the church; do not expose weakness and lack of faithfulness. This is the modern day philosophy of gospel preaching. One has but to glance at the NewTestament to be convinced that this sort of deceptivehandling of the word of God breeds religious traitorsto the cause of Christ, and never produced faithfulworkers in the service of God.

Turncoats in the church are on the increase because of apathy and worldly ambitions within the church. Wecannot blame the world for the weak spiritual con-ditionof some churches. Such evil was present when in thefullness of time God brought into existence the kingdom spoken of by the prophets. The church IS the"called out" from the world into Christ. We have been delivered from the powers of darkness, and translatedinto the kingdom of Christ (Col. 1: 13). The real reasonwhy so many turn from the truth is that many "in the church" have never been converted to Christ; theyhave never been convicted of sin in their own lives;they have never really accepted the authority of Jesus Christ as taught in the New Testament.

This is no little matter. It has become a real problem. We need to be strong in the Lord and in theword of his power. We must oppose sin in every form and in every place. We must insist uponcomplete obedience to Jesus Christ. To walk in the truth is to abide in Christ and have the hope ofeternal life.

Specials From Religious Supply Center

Haters Of Good

Paul warned of "perilous times" during the "last days"(2 Tim. 3: 1). "The last days" refers to the gospel age and not just the last few days of that age. Throughout thetenure of the last days there would arise times especiallydifficult for the Lord's people, times which would testtheir faith and conviction and sorely try their patience. The very time in which Paul wrote that was "perilous"for believers. Many of the characteristics he listed inverse 2-7 were all too obvious even then. Half of the world was enslaved to the other half with every evilattending such a circumstance. Pagan religion distortedthe true concept of God and promoted the grossestperversions, all in the name of the "gods. " In the midst ofit all, the true Christian was an oddity. Peter said"Wherein they think it strange that ye run not with themto the same excess of riot, speaking evil of you" (1 Pet.

4: 4).

But look at Paul's list of characteristics of those who would make the times difficult for the godly. "For men will be lovers of self, lovers of money, boastful, arrogant,revilers, disobedient to parents, ungrateful, unholy,unloving, irreconcilable, malicious gossips, without self-control, brutal, HATERS OF GOOD, treacherous, reckless, conceited, lovers of pleasure rather than lovers ofGod; holding to a form of godliness, although they havedenied its power; and avoid such men as these. Foramong them are those who enter into households andcaptivate weak women weighed down with sins, led onby various impulses, always learning and never able tocome to the knowledge of the truth" (2 Tim. 3: 2-7-NASV).

The context here indicates apostates who have rejected the faith. They manifest the same spirit andbehavior as those who never knew the truth. But, tellme, as you read through that sad list, did you recognizeanyone you know? Are not these traits present in mega-doses in our own time?

Focus with me on the phrase "haters of good. " TheKing James Version reads "despisers of those that aregood. " The positive form of the word here is used in Titus

1: 8 of elders: "lovers of good. " The negative form appearsin 2 Tim. 3: 3, "not lovers" or properly "haters" of good.

A Hedonistic Society

It is time for Christians in America to awaken to the fact that this is not a decent society anymore. Every sin

in the book has been dubbed "an alternate lifestyle. " The political scene reeks of scandal. Negative campaigning is the order of the day. Confidence in elected officials is at an all-time low. Social engineershave recommended every sort of approach exceptrespect for God and his word to control alcoholismand other forms of drug abuse, unwanted pregnancies,and venereal diseases, by pouring gasoline on the fire. Prohibition was bad, so it was argued that the government should issue a license to merchants to sell the stuff. Bars could offer "happy hours" for people onthe way home from work during rush traffic. We had tohave more sex education (without moralizing) and nowstudents pass around condoms and other forms of birth control devices in classrooms, go on fields trip to drug stores to inspect condoms and report back to class ontheir findings, or schools dispense these devices to highschool students. They are told to practice "responsible sex" and then are given devices to help them be "responsible. "

Under the guise of clarifying values, students of allages have their values scrambled so that they cannot tellthe difference between right and wrong. The Bible cannot even be read in the classroom and school prayers are out. The only legal reference to the Bible is an effort toridicule what it says about creation, morals and humanresponsibility. And should some systems and teachersbe so bold as to defy this mandate, there are highpowered and well financed legal organizations ready toleap into action, drag the offenders to court and wrap the educational system in a cocoon where they are shieldedfrom the nefarious influence of the word of God. Freedom of religion has come to mean freedom from religion. Good is called evil and evil is called good.

Television and movies have become major purveyorsof this hedonistic society. The music industry plays a major role in the corruption of the nation's morals. In the name of "artistic expression" anything goes. Let's grant right up front that there are religious phonies who evenuse television to rake in millions from sympathizers whohave no better judgment than to forward their last dollar to these bandits. But why does every preacher, or religious figure portrayed on the TV screen have to be madeout to be some kind of pervert, or sissified incompetent?Are there no good, decent people to be praised? Well, Ibelieve there are. Our work takes us all over the countrywhere we meet people who are truly the salt of the earth.

But a stroll through any shopping mall, or themepark, or just standing in line at a checkup counter to payfor your gasoline, exposes you to a herd of people indecently dressed, buying beer, or lottery tickets, and assaults your hearing with foul language.

What Are We To Do?

We might as well face the fact that we are in the minority. Your voice at the PTO meeting may be indeeda strange sound to many. Standing your ground at work on some matter of principle may expose you to ridicule,or even hinder a promotion. At school, you may becomewhat every teenager dreads — different! At home, youmay be the last hope of sanity in a domestic world gonecrazy. But you CAN make a difference. You MUST makea difference. If a handful of unknown fishermen, a tax collector, and a militant member of the Jewish underground movement could be transformed into faithfulservants of God whose lives changed the destiny of the world, then surely there is something WE can do in ourown time. Faithfully, persistently and militantly theypreached and practiced what Jesus taught them. Whatever has been decent in men of every nation since thattime is directly traceable to what they did in fulfilling theLord's mandate to "go into all the world" with the gospel. The gospel is still God power to save. As it saves, itchanges not only the lives of those it saves, but the environment around those saved by its power. They area genuine blessing at work, at home, at school, at playand in the government. I'm not talking about imitationChristians, hypocrites who disgrace the name of Christ,but about the genuine article.

I would also strongly urge my brethren to do everything possible to spread the gospel into the other nationsof earth while we have the means to do it. Not only shouldthis be done because it is right, but one of the side effectsmay be that we will be casting bread upon the waterwhich will return after many days. For you see, we mayjust need gospel preachers from India, Nigeria, the Philippines or eastern Europe to come to this countrysomeday to try and rescue our Grandchildren from thegods of hedonism.

Let's make sure that we are "lovers of good" and that we give no ground to those who are truly "haters of good. "

May the Guilty Party Remarry?Divorce, Remarriageand Fellowship

This is the last of the series of articles that review Jerry Bassett's book. The last two sections of his book deal with the guilty party and the fellowship question asit relates to divorce and remarriage.

The "Guilty" Party

Chapter X of Bassett's book is presented differentlythan any other chapters. In the other chapters he stateshis convictions about other aspects of divorce and remarriage. However, in this chapter, he makes it appear that he is undecided. He presents arguments both "for" and"against" the guilty party remarrying. He tells us that"There are strong, logical arguments on both sides of the question... Neither side, however, seems to me to have aclinching argument on this point. From the standpoint ofthe argumentation based on Jesus' wording, it could be either way" (Bassett, p. 112).

To any perceptive reader it is obvious that he thinksthe guilty party (one put away for fornication) canremarry. He tells us that 1 Cor. 7: 27-28 demonstrates"that a divorced person is not prohibited from remarrying just because he has been put away" (Bassett, p. 114).He further wrote, "Shall we tell the one who has beenput away on the grounds of his own fornication thatwithout any doubt he has as much right to marry asanyone else? If so, on what statement from God shall thisadvice be given?

"Shall we tell this one who has no spouse, having beenput away lawfully, that God absolutely forbids him tohave one? What declaration from God states this?

"There is no question that the mercy of God is ample,on the basis of this man's repentance, to release and forgive him to the extent that he could be allowed toenter another marriage covenant" (Bassett, p. 117).

This above quote is interesting in light of the fact thatJerry had stated a few pages earlier that "when the NewTestament was revealed, it contained no express provisions for the divorced party in a case based on sexualimmorality to remarry" (Bassett, p. 111).

Brother Bassett presents three basic contentions. (1)He argues that there is no prohibition concerning the putaway fornicator remarrying (Bassett, pp. 114, 117). This

is not true because Jesus did prohibit the put away one's remarriage. Jesus said, "... and whosoever shall marry her that is divorced committeth adultery" (Matt.

5: 32b). "... and whoso marrieth her which is put awaydoth commit adultery" (Matt. 19: 9b). "... and whosoever marrieth her that is put away from herhusband commit-teth adultery" (Luke 16: 18b). Notice that there is no exception phrase in the clause we justquoted. The exception in the first clause applies to the one who puts his mate away.

(2) Bassett also argues that the exception phraseapplies to both clauses in Matt. 19: 9. He goes on to point out that this does not prove that the put away fornicatorhas a right to remarry. But, he thinks it proves that theput away fornicator is not forbidden to remarry.

The exception phrase cannot grammatically modifyboth the first and last clauses of Matt. 19: 9. As it modifies the first clause, it is an adverbial phrase(qualifying "shall put away"). This cannot be done grammatically! I wrote to Bruce M. Metzger asking him,"Does the exception clause ('except it be for fornication')modify the phrase 'and whoso marrieth her which is putaway doth commit adultery?" His answer was "no, itqualifies the preceding clause. " Dr. Harry Sturz (another noted Greek scholar) said, "In my opinion, thephrase, 'except it be for fornication, ' applies to the first clause but not to the last. "

Jerry tries to parallel the phrase "unless they repent"(Rev. 2: 22-23) to the exception phrase of Matt. 19: 9.He says it applies to the clause "I will cast... " (previous to the phrase) and to the clause "I will kill... "(following the phrase). However, the construction isnot parallel. The phrase in Rev. 2 could apply to bothas an adverbial phrase. But, if we try it in Matt. 19: 9,it is used as an adverbial phrase in the first clauseand an adjectival phrase in the second. We encourage brother Bassett to find a passage that is really parallel.

(3)Jerry contends that God's mercy is ample to forgive the fornicator who repents so that he is released andallowed to enter another marriage (Bassett, p. 117). I wonder if God's grace is ample to forgive any divorced ordivorcee? If so, (and it is), then any divorced person ordivorcee is forgiven, released and allowed to remarry? Would Bassett argue that anyone in a divorce situationcan remarry?

There is no authority for the put away fornicator to remarry. Brother Bassett himself admits this point (p. 111). To act without authority is a sin (2 Jno. 9). God's silence is not permissive, but prohibitive (Heb. 7: 14). Wemust abide by the authority of Christ in this area as inthe work, worship and organization of the church.

Fellowship

A side issue that has been raised in the divorce and remarriage controversy is the question of fellowship. Brother Bassett devotes two chapters to this problem.

Four points are made in Jerry's book. (1) In congregational matters we must agree (p. 128), yet in individualmatters we may differ. He contends that Romans 14 is a discussion of individual matters.

(2) Bassett clarifies that if one teaches a doctrine that is "indisputably contrary to the doctrine delivered by the apostles of Christ" the congregation should take actionagainst the individual. Furthermore, if an individual involves himself in that which is "clearly immoral" thechurch should take action (pp. 130-131).

(3) Jerry raises the question of whether we can differover matters of doctrinal consequence. His answer tothe question is yes (Bassett, p. 134). (4) He parallels the issue of divorce and remarriageto the war question (pp. 145-148).

Romans 14 deals with matters of indifference. Whether one eats meats or does not eat meats made no difference. Neither one would be guilty of sin. No matterwhich he did, God received him (v. 3). The one who eatsdoes so to the Lord (v. 6). The one who does not eat does so to the Lord (v. 6). The brethren were told not to judge one another in this matter (v. 13).

This is obviously in contrast to matters that involvesin. Unscriptural divorce and remarriage involves onein the sin of adultery. God does not receive him, butrejects him (Heb. 13: 4). God does not expect us to receivehim, but commands that he be disciplined (1 Cor. 5).One who commits adultery cannot do so to the Lord. Weare to judge the one who is guilty of adultery (1 Cor. 5).

In all fairness to brother Bassett, he acknowledgesthat Romans 14 deals with matters that are "doctrinallyinconsequential" (Bassett, p 132). However, as his section on fellowship continues, I am left wondering if hedoesn't put the varying positions on divorce and remarriage under Rom. 14.

He tells us that there are "matters of doctrinal consequences about which Christians can disagree withone another but continue to work together within a local church" (Bassett, p. 134). He says these matters mayeven involve questions of spiritual and even moralimplications. He draws a parallel between the divorce and remarriage issues and the war question.

Whether one believes that the war question is parallel or not may depend on his view on the war question.Since we still fellowship those who teach and practicedifferently on the war question (a moral question),Bassett thinks we can do the same on divorce and remarriage. I wonder why we couldn't do the same on the moral questions of homosexuality and polygamy.

Bassett said that one who teaches a doctrine that was indisputably contrary to the doctrine of Christ ought tobe dealt with. Furthermore, one whose activities wereclearly immoral ought to be disciplined (Bassett, pp.130-131). Adultery is clearly immoral (Gal. 5; 19-21).Those whose teaching encourages divorce and remarriage contrary to Matt. 19: 9 are indisputably contraryto the doctrine of Christ. So, how can we fellowship the one who teaches error on divorce and remarriage or the one who lives in harmony with his teaching?

We must not forget two basic principles; (1) Wecannot fellowship sin or those in sin (Eph. 5: 11; 1 Cor.5). (2) We cannot fellowship those who teach error (2Jno. 9: 11; Rev. 2: 18-21).

Knowing that I would be writing a review of hismaterial, brother Bassett asked that I address thequestion of excluding from fellowship those who agreewith Bassett and others on divorce and remarriage

while including some who teach the "mental divorce" view (Jerry Bassett's letter to me, March 11, 1991).

In any issue there must be some tolerance and the spirit of longsuffering (Eph. 4: 1-3). I am not ready tomark off every brother who disagrees with me on the"mental divorce" issue or even whether the alien is amenable to the law of Christ.

However, when either one of these brethren presstheir positions so that churches are disturbed or peopleare comforted in adultery, they become the teacher of 2Jno. 9-11.

Quite frankly, I don't see much difference in the consequences of either position. If either are adhered to,adultery is the result.

Indeed, it is time to rethink marriage, divorce and remarriage.

The speakers were Jerry F. Bassett, preacher at theCoburg Road church, Eugene, Oregon; and Jack Holt (theyounger), preacher at Oaks-West church, Burnet, Texas,but supported by West Avenue church, San Antonio,Texas. They met first at San Antonio, Feb. 10-11, whereBassett affirmed "an alien sinner whose marriage endedby divorce for a cause other than fornication, and who isnow married to another person, may be forgiven byobeying the gospel, and should maintain his second marriage. " Feb. 13-14, Holt affirmed "may be forgiven ... provided he is willing to divorce hissecond wife. " Then, Mar. 9-10, 12-13, they met inEugene, Or., on the same propositions but in reverseorder. W. L. Wharton was the moderator for Bassett in both places; while Elmer Moore moderated for Holt inTexas, and Robert F. Turner moderated for Holt in Oregon.

In both places the speakers conducted themselves inan excellent way, deferring to one another; and thehearers were polite and refrained from demonstrations.Numerous charts were used, expertly handled, and forthe most part the audience could understand the issuesbeing presented. In Texas and in Oregon the attendancewas good, and included many preachers and elders ofboth persuasions. This writer believes the truth was admirably upheld.

An obvious issue in this subject is "repentance" andwhat it requires. Holt contended one must cease thaterror of which he repented; and Bassett agreed, but saidthe error was not sexual in its nature but consisted of two things: divorce and the making of a second covenant(the marriage ceremony). One could "repent" of these twothings, and maintain his marriage with the second wife. Holt contended one committed adultery in the secondmarriage, and true repentance required that this secondrelationship cease.

Their difference demanded a definition of "adultery"in Matt. 19: 9 et al.; and Bassett said the word was usedfiguratively, referring to the "adulteration" of the covenant made in the first marriage ceremony. He contendedthe verb "marry" had no sexual connotation, as is foundin the noun "marriage. " Holt cited context (Matt. 19: 10-12) where "not to marry" was related to the makingof eunuchs by self containment ("for the kingdom ofheaven's sake"). He also cited 1 Cor. 7: 9 "better to marrythan to burn; " and asked if covenant making alonequenches the "burn"? Then, in Matt. 19: 9; Lk. 16: 18:"whoso marrieth her which is put away doth commitadultery. " This "whoso" could be one who had neverbefore made a marriage "covenant. " How could "adulteration of covenant" apply here? Holt showed the adulteration of covenant argument is deeply flawed.

Bassett contended a married couple can not commit adultery with one another; while Holt cited Rom.

7: 2-3 to show the second marriage is adulterous "solong as (the first husband) liveth. " Bassett dismissed Rom. 7: as an "analogy, " and Holt replied in essence."So what? Each facet of the analogy is still true. " Holtalso cited Mk. 6: 17-18 and said the marriage of Herodand Herodias was adulterous; but Bassett said it wasonly incest. Holt replied that incest involved uncovering "the nakedness of thy brother's wife" (Lev.

18: 16); and effectively used a chart which quoted Rom.

7: with names supplied. "For the woman which hath anhusband (Herodias) is bound by the law to her husband (Philip) so long as he liveth ... So then if,while her husband (Philip) liveth, she (Herodias) be married to another man (Herod), she shall be called an adulteress. "

1 Cor. 7: received much attention. Bassett said v. 24 (abide as called) referred to marriage; hence meant the converted alien should not change his marriage state.When Holt asked about polygamy. Bassett used v. 2 tosay "context" forbade that. Holt then said the immediate context (vs. 18-24, circumcision, slavery) dealt withmatters of indifference as respects serving Christ; andfurther context (Vs. 10-11) forbade divorce and remarriage. Bassett applied these verses only to saints whoinitiate divorce, he said "loosed" of v. 27b meant "divorced, " and v. 28 said if such an one marry he hasnot sinned. Holt said the context (vs. 25-26) deals withnever married people. (See "virgins" "so to be, " Cf. Rev.

14: 4, rft. ) He also reminded us, to divorce and remarryare the two elements Bassett says makes the sin ofadultery. All of us should remember. "Don't Mess With Context!"

Differing concepts regarding Christ's teachingduring his personal ministry surfaced repeatedly. Bothmen recognized that Jesus lived under Judaism and was usually speaking to Jews. But His message was not simply a rehash of the Law of Moses. It was a prepara-tion for things to come. Holt saw the final andcomplete revelation of God's will in Jesus Christ (Heb. 1: 1-2); "All

truth: set forth by Him and His witnesses (Jn. 16: 1213; Lk. 24: 45-49), for "all the world. " Bassett seemedto think that Jesus' exposition of Moses' Law meantan approval of "moral" conditions under that law for today. Since the Jews asked Christ about Moses' command which he wrote (Bassett emphasis) relativeto divorce, he seemed to think the standard of Deut. 24: l-f, applied to today. Because God used Esther's place in King Ahasuerus' harem to accomplish some good end,and did not charge her with immorality, Bassett seesGod's approval of such "unchanging" moral conduct today.

Holt pointed out that Jesus said those standards were"suffered, " because of the hardness of hearts, "but fromthe beginning it was not so" (Matt. 19: 8). Compare Acts

14: 16; 17: 30; Rom. 2: 4; He recalled that God usedwicked nations to accomplish His purposes; even "winked at" idolatry, "but now commandeth all men everywhere to repent. " The "moral capacity" that is universal in every accountable being made in God's image, has come to be regarded by some as a "moral code" by which divorce and remarriage is regulated.Holt asked if this "code" was objectively or subjectivelydetermined, and I did not hear a clear consistent answer.

I suppose the reader can tell my conclusion about thisdebate, but regardless of personal views on the subject,all should thank the participants for shaking complacency and making us think of the various conceptsinvolved. Perhaps of first importance is a basic understanding of divine revelation—on this or any subject.And certainly, in the present moral climate, we must beconcerned for preservation of the home—and society.Churches are divided over these matters: by zealots,compromisers, and people who allow emotions and bizarre hypothetical "cases" to take the place of calm saneBible study. We should neither invent "issues" nor ignore them. But there is scarcely an individual thissubject has not or will not touch. If you have not considered its pros and cons, the tapes of this debate will giveyou food for thought, and I recommend them.

Sending Outside Support

I know what it is like to feel the same gratitude felt bythe apostle Paul when he gave thanks for the church at Philippi for sending more than once to meet his needs(Phil. 4: 15-16). At the time of this writing five churchesprovide my salary on a regular basis. I have also had theexperience of working with churches that, like Philippi,had the financial resources to send to evangelists inother places. It is not easy to raise support to go into a difficult area. But neither is it easy to have more requests for help than money to send. The followingsuggestions are offered with the hope that they can helpmake the decisions easier for churches as well as the financial arrangements more secure for the evangelist.

KNOW THE MAN YOU SUPPORT. It is impossibleto emphasize this point enough! You must be confidentthat he will be faithful and active in preaching the truth,not lazy. He needs to have a measure of good judgmentin dealing with people problems. When possible, knowing something of the man's past work is very helpful. Ifhe has a record of splitting churches you need to know!

KNOW SOMETHING OF THE WORK WHERE HE IS GOING. This is especially important if you have twoor more requests, all from worthy men, with resources tohelp only one. Sometimes even good men don't use the best judgment in where they locate. Good stewardshipdemands that the Lord's money be put to the best usepossible. The work in some areas has been like a blackhole which has devoured the efforts of a lot of goodpreachers and thousand of dollars of the Lord's moneywith little or no progress to show for it. Some churchesare satisfied to let other churches support their preacherwith no seeming concern for the need to become self-sustaining. This is not right! It's understood that the work in some areas is hard, growth is going to be slow, and patience to support such work is needed. But it's also true that some churches have never grown for other reasons (like cantankerous, lazy members). It is bad stewardship to send money to support men in such areaswhen the fields are white unto the harvest elsewhere.

ONCE THE DECISION IS MADE, PROVIDE SOMESECURITY FOR THE EVANGELIST BY MAKING A COMMITMENT TO HIS SUPPORT. It's hard for man to do an effective work when he must wonder from month to month whether or not he is going to receive a check from a given source. Therefore it is good to make

a commitment which, barring unfortunate circumstances, provide a measure of security. The following isa portion of a letter I received from a church which nowsupports me. I think it is a good model and the elders ofthis church are to be commended:

"This support will be provided to you for a period of fiveyears in the hope that the work there will become self-supporting in that time. In the event that it should become necessary for us to reduce or terminate thissupport for financial reasons, we will give you one yearadvance notice so that you will have adequate time tofind replacement support. At the end of the five yearperiod, we will evaluate the need to continue the support.

"Should you decide to stop preaching, the support willbe terminated immediately. It will not be passed on toyour successor or used to continue the work in thatarea. Should you decide to go elsewhere to preach, the support will be terminated unless you advise us inadvance and obtain our consent to continue the support in the new locale. If it should be reported to us thatthe truth is no longer being taught, we will inquire toascertain the facts before taking any action with regard to the support. "

I recognize that some churches may not be able tomake what amounts to a five or six year commitment tosupport an evangelist. But the length of time is notnearly so important as the commitment. The foregoingletter provides a sense of security in that it lets me knowexactly where I stand with this church that supports me.Some churches have fallen into a "three month" pattern. That is, they will give the evangelist they aresupporting only three months notice of discontinuing hissupport. This may sound generous at first but considerthe following scenario which I think is typical. A churchdecides in its January business meeting to discontinuesupport to a particular preacher giving him three monthsnotice (they'll support him through March). They writethis preacher a letter to inform him of their decision andhe receives it a week later (it's the middle of January).This preacher gets busy trying to raise the support he islosing, writes letters to several churches, and these letters are received by the churches in time for the Februarybusiness meeting. It is not at all unusual, perhaps standard practice in most congregations, to receive a requestone month and postpone any decision about it until thenext so that the treasurer may be able to look closely at the accounts to determine whether or not they have the funds. By now we have gotten to the March businessmeeting and the preacher in need has already receivedhis last check from the church discontinuing his support.If this first set of letters does not produce a positive replyto his needs, he will go lacking adequate support to meetthe needs of his family in the month of April and perhapsbeyond. The point is this: when a preacher is having toseek support from churches that operate out of a business meeting, a three month notice to terminate hissupport is really not adequate. If the church from whomhe is seeking support has elders he may be able to get aquicker reply, but not necessarily. A man who devoteslife to the preaching of the gospel deserves at least asmall measure of security from his brethren which just a little consideration in this matter could amply supply.

KEEP IN REGULAR CONTACT WITH THE MEN YOU SUPPORT. Bring them in for a weekend meeting toallow them the opportunity to give a detailed, face-toface report of the work they're doing. Ask members of thecongregation to write them an encouraging note. I deeplyappreciate the letters I get from members of the churcheswhich support me. They really mean a lot, especiallywhen you are a little discouraged and wondering if anyone cares.

PLEASE, HAVE YOUR TREASURER BE ON TIMEWITH THE CHECKS. A lot of us preachers have falleninto the habit of eating and don't want to break it (although I should for a while). Seriously, a preachersbills are due just like everyone else and he is dependingupon you to have your check to him on time so that hemight meet those bills. Years ago I had a check fall about two weeks overdue. I called and the treasurer had goneon vacation so I called back a couple of days later whenhe returned. He promised to get the check in the mail immediately. Two weeks later, after still not havingreceived the check, I called again and he had decided towait until the next month and just double the amount tomake up for it. I wonder what would happen had he goneup to the pay window where he works and his boss had said, "We're not going to pay you today. We'll wait until next week and double up?" Some people just aren't considerate.

There are many other things that perhaps need tobe said but maybe these provide some incentive tomore thought and consideration on the subject. Thereare new fields of labor that are opening up every daythat will present to all of us new challenges. I'm confident that, with the Lord's help, we will arise tomeet those chal-lenges. We must use our abilities, ourtime, and our resources to do the most good that we can.

Same Song, Same Verse, Over andOver Again

I have before me a copy of One Body, Winter, 1991, inwhich Bob Shaw of Medicine Hat, Alberta, Canada, hasan article "Instrumental Music: A Matter of Faith or Opinion?"

Brother Connie W. Adams called me and requestedthat I review this article for Searching The Scriptures, which I am glad to do.

Bob Shaw tells the reader in the article that "I spentthe first 25 years or so of my life fighting againstinstrumental music in worship.... but during the last 10years or so, I've become more and more convinced it is,indeed, a matter of opinion.... I have the right to changemy views when I become convinced that I have been inerror. " No one would object to an individual changing hisposition from error to truth, but in this case, Shaw haschanged from truth to error. He wants people to knowhe has been convinced the instrument is just a matter ofopinion. He may be convinced, but he has not beenconvinced strongly enough to defend his position inpublic debate.

Some seven or eight times in his article he makesreference to the fact that he does not feel that the Scriptures clearly teach the instrument to be sinful. He says, "the Bible does not clearly teach that instrumentalmusic in worship is sinful. " Says who? Right now thereare people saying that the Bible does not clearly teachthat divorce and remarriage, except for fornication, issinful. Someone could say that the Bible does not clearlyteach that Jesus Christ is the Son of God. That does not mean the Bible does not teach such. It just meanssomeone could say such; however, saying such does notmake it so. Who is going to determine if the Bible clearlyteaches the instrument to be sinful in worship? Is BobShaw? What would the Bible have to say for him to admitthat it clearly teaches it to be sinful?

The Holy Spirit clearly said on the subject of music to be used in worship of God, "sing. " One word says it all.Is that not clear? If Bob Shaw's wife or mother sent him to the store for "milk" would that be clear? Not accordingto his argument on the instrument.

He tells us "God has not clearly spoken... " on thequestion of the instrument. Now, God either did or did not speak on the subject. If God did not speak, then wedo not know His mind. If He did speak, then we eithercan or cannot understand His revelation. If we can not understand His revelation, then it is not a revelation atall. If I can understand His revelation, then I know whatHe has revealed! God has spoken (Acts 3: 21; Heb. 1: 12). The sum total of all God has said is "sing" (Matt. 26: 30; Mark 14: 26; Acts 16: 25; Rom. 15: 9; 1 Cor. 14: 15;Eph. 5: 19; Col. 3: 16; Heb. 2: 12; James 5: 13). Is"sing" clear? What would have to be added to "sing" inorder for God to make it clear? All God said was "sing" and when you start taking away from what God hassaid you have "sin_. "

Reason For Change

After 25 years, Bob Shaw changed his position due to"An honest, open, heart-searching look at our 'position' and a diligent search of the Scriptures. " But he did not give his readers the benefit of his "search of the Scriptures. " What was the result of that? I am interested in what the Scriptures say. Did he find the verse for theinstrument? NO! Twenty five years ago the Scripturessaid "sing" and they still say "sing" and he will never findanything different. Rather, his defense of the instrument is the same song, same verse, that hasbeen sung over and over again.

(1) He tells us the references to singing is to the individual and not the church. I am well acquainted withthat argument, having heard it many times over the years. On benevolence our liberal brethren have saidpassages addressed to the individual were actuallyapplicable to the church. Now, this liberal just reversesthe argument. Let us look at it.

Just for arguments sake, let us grant him his argument. What does that prove? It proves in the worship ofGod the individual is limited to singing. Bob Shaw stilldoesn't have the instrument in the verse. One of the things singing does is "teaching and admonishing oneanother. " How could one teach another without beingassembled with that one or ones? Shaw saying the assembled church is not involved does not make his statement so.

(2)Shaw tells his reader that if millions will go "to hell for using instrumental music in worship, it will be on the basis of violating a law that cannot even be found in thebooks!" His saying the law does not exist does not makeit so. The law says "sing. " His problem is he just will not recognize the law. A drunk that does not recognize the white line in the middle of the road does not do away withthe line. A liberal preacher intoxicated on his ownhuman wisdom refusing to recognize the law of God doesnot mean God's law does not exist.

3) Shaw says "if this were a matter of vital importance to God" he "would have made it crystal clear. " How muchclearer would God have to make it for Shaw to understand it? If he cannot, or more appropriately will not,understand one word - "sing" - how much more troublewould he have with a whole sentence?

(4) He says we do not read in our assemblies thosePsalms that mention instruments. That is not so! If I were Shaw I would be accurate. His lie with honest people will only show him up for what he is -a twister of

Scripture (2 Peter 3: 16-17).

(5) He tells us that those who use instruments have"hermeneutics" that "differ from ours. " That is what makes Catholics. People have a different hermeneutic.They think the Pope is the final authority instead of the Bible. The Christian Church people use the hermeneuticof "I want the instrument in worship and am going tohave it regardless of what you say1' rather than what the New Testament teaches. (6) He tells us a brother said "the Bible clearly teachesthat instrumental music in worship is sinful" and that"really struck home. " He says, 'Can I just say honestlyand sincerely, the Bible does not clearly teach thatinstrumental music in worship is sinful!" (sic). He maynot say it, but I will until he gives us the New Testament passage that teaches it. (7) He affirms "God is going to hand me a harp... inheaven. " Does he intend to affirm man's physical bodywill be in heaven? Will the hand that God puts the harpin be one of flesh and blood? Paul said, "Flesh and bloodcannot inherit the kingdom of God" (1 Cor. 15: 20). Healso has "God handing me a harp just after he has sentmillions to" hell for using instruments of music in wor- ship. He can't have it both ways; some in hell for usingit in worship and some in heaven. Let him tell us which one he wants, but he can't have it both ways. (8) Finally, Shaw tells us that the argument thatcondemns the instrument, condemns other things. Sowhat? If a thing can not be shown to be scriptural, thenwe ought not to be practicing it. But just because he saysother things are condemned does not make it so. Wemust come to the Bible to prove everything. We cannotsay something is just as scriptural as something else. A thing is either authorized or not.

How strongly does Bob Shaw feel about the instrument not being a matter of faith? I will deny the followingproposition if he has the courage to affirm it: "TheScriptures teach the use of instruments of music in theworship of God is a matter of opinion and should not bemade a test of fellowship. "

Now, let us see if he is willing to work toward havingsuch a discussion?

A Reader Defends the "One Nation Under God" Campaign

Two articles relating to the "One Nation Under God"Campaign appeared in this column in the January andFebruary issues. One dealt with the sinfulness of local elders overseeing a churchhood project and the otherwas an open letter to Furman Kearley, who praised the"success" of the campaign in the Gospel Advocate. A reader from Kosciusko, Mississippi has sent a brief response.

I read your article in S. T. S. (O. N. U. G. ) Ofcourse I disagree with you. We have to keep in mindGod did not bind one way only, on us. We don't havescripture for a church building either, but because wedon't have one, it's not wrong. I realize there are twoextremes in the church, legalism and liberalism. Bothare wrong! We must not loose what God has bound, nor bind what God has loosed. —Jim Mordecai, Kosciusko, Mississippi. Dear Jim,

If God did not bind or limit the authority of elders ofthe local congregation they oversee, then we should beable to read where he allowed them to oversee the evangelistic work of other congregations as they are doing in the "One Nation Under God" Campaign. I can put my finger on the verses that limit their authority.They are 1 Peter 5: 2, Acts 20: 28, and Acts 14: 23.Elders were to be appointed in every church. This isunnecessary if we can have a centralized eldership thatoversees the work of other churches. (The right of elders to oversee any part of the work of other congregations is the right to oversee all of it). But God limited their oversight to the flock "among you, ""over which the Holy Spirit hath made you overseers" (1Pet. 5: 2; Acts 20: 27). Sponsoring church elders, inoverseeing "brotherhood" projects, go beyond the bounds God set by overseeing more than their localwork. The elders at Sycamore have admitted that "O. N.

U. G. " is a "brotherhood" project.

Brother Jim, what verse can you put your fingeron that allows one church to oversee any part of the evangelistic work of several thousand congregations? Or even two congregations? It isn't in the Bible. I am glad it isn't for it would contradict the above verses.

If you mean by "God did not bind one way only" that the Bible doesn't say "thou shalt not have a Sponsoring

Church over brotherhood projects, " neither does itsay "thou shalt not sprinkle for baptism, " "thou shaltnot count beads (rosary), " "thou shalt not use hamburger and coke on the Lord's table, " "thou shaltnot use instru-mental music in worship, " etc. Surelyyou see the point. We only have authority to do what isauthorized. It is unnecessary to have a "thou shalt not"for every prohibition. It is the obligation of the promoterof a practice to show there is scriptural authority for it(on its behalf). Since no one can show scripture on behalfof hamburgers and coke on the Lord's table then it is forbidden. Since no one can show scripture on behalf of"Sponsoring Church" elders overseeing the work of flocks that are not "among you, " then it is forbidden.

Brother Jim, if God did not bind "one way, " did Hebind anything regarding the oversight of elders? If so,what? If you agree he did bind something, you will comeup with the same thing I did, that congregations areindependent and oversight of elders is to be over no morethan the local church "among you. " But if you say thereis no limitation, then "anything goes. " (conventions,conferences, associations, synods, dioceses, etc. ). Eitherthere is a pattern, or there is not. If there is, you mustconclude it is found in 1 Pet. 5: 2; Acts 20: 28; 14: 23. Ifyou have scriptural authority for such "churchhood" projects as this Campaign, surely you would have given it. That is what I asked for in the articles you respondedto. But there is not one verse of scripture in your letter. Why, Jim?

You said, "We don't have scripture for a church building either, but because we don't have one, it's not wrong. " Colossians 3: 17 says everything we do is to be done "in the name" (by the authority) of the Lord Jesus. The wordiniquity means "without law" (Mt. 7: 21-23). We are tohave authority (book, chapter, and verse) on behalf of allour religious practices. If we are doing anything we don't have authority for, we should quit that practice immediately. If you do not have authority for a church buildingyou should cease using one immediately, for you are sinning. I have heard this statement about church buildings a number of times and it reveals the great dearth ofteaching among institutional churches on our need forauthority and how it is established. How would youregard this parallel to your statement? "We don't have scripture for hamburgers and coke on the Lord's table, but because we don't have one, it's not wrong. " With yourstatement on church buildings you could not consistently oppose the person who wants to add to the Lord'sSupper. We do not have specific authority for a churchbuilding, but we do have general authority. Hebrews

10: 25 commands regular assembling. That necessarilyimplies that a place of some kind is required. The kindof place is not specified, therefore a building would meetthe requirement. 1 Cor. 11: 20 also requires a "place. "

You said there are two extremes. By "legalism" youimply that I have bound something God did not bind. ButI can put my finger on the verses that limit the oversightof elders, thus I have not bound what God has not bound.You cannot put your finger on any verse that allowselders to occupy a dual role of (1) overseeing their localwork (1 Pet. 5: 2), (2) overseeing a multi-church project (scripture?). Number one is in the Bible. Number two(which you defend), is not. You have loosed where God did not loose and are guilty of what you called "liberalism. " The Bible doesn't say sing only, but it only sayssing. It doesn't say bread and fruit of the vine only, but it only says bread and fruit of the vine. It doesn't say elders' oversight is limited to "the flock... among you" only, but it only says "the flock... among you. "

I have publications from institutional brethren whereelders of one church are overseeing churches in otherstates and countries. This is sinful. They do so in rebellion and disregard for the scriptures. I have noticed thatinstitutional brethren will try things outside the U. S.that they seem afraid to try here because some are notready for that much liberalism — such as, " Church ofChrist" hospitals, "Church of Christ" headquarters, etc.The Garden Oaks Church of Christ (a "Sponsoring Church") in Houston, Texas oversees its "Minister of Missions" in Honduras who is the President, Board ofDirectors of the corporation called "Churches of Christ ofthe Republic of Honduras. Do you defend this, Jim? Ifnot, what scripture does it violate? How about 1 Pet. 5: 2;Acts 20: 28; 14: 23? If such is right in Honduras, why notin the U. S. A. ? Give them time. When brethren start saying "we don't have to have scripture for everything we do" (as you implied), there is no end to how far theycan and will go.

We need men today with backbone to speak forth boldly (Eph. 6: 20) and who will fight to keep the churchpure from the wisdom of men. Men who have the courageto expose the error that needs exposing and refuting sobadly. Error is having a field day because it is easier togo along with the majority. Jim, I beg you to leave theliberalism you are promoting. If I can help you, pleasecall on me. Brotherly, Dick Blackford

Is The Eldership Any More Than A"Deliberative Assembly"?

Deliberative assemblies are those whose primarypurpose is to meet and talk and make decisions, mostlyabout actions to be taken by other people. It is hardlypossible for any group, large or small, to act collectivelywithout some such deliberations—despite their obviousdrawbacks, we have to have deliberative assemblies.Congress immediately comes to mind, but daily lifebrings us into contact with many others: the local schoolboard, the board of directors at the bank, etc. True, the members of deliberative assemblies sometimes do more than deliberate, and granted, the decisions sometimesbear on the decision-makers themselves. But still, the main purpose for which a deliberative assembly exists isto have meetings and make decisions. To a farmer or afactory worker, no doubt, "deliberating" sounds like something people would do who were unacquainted withreal work. Nevertheless, we do sometimes have to havepeople whose work consists of little more than talkingand deciding things.

But, in spiritual matters, what about the eldership?Do the elders of a local congregation of saints, actingscripturally as the bishops or overseers of that church,constitute a body which is primarily deliberative? Thatis, is it the main part of their job to have meetings andmake decisions about the work of the congregation,decisions which are to be carried out mostly by othermembers of the church? I think not. And the question isone of more than slight importance.

One does not have to be a grandparent to remember a time when, in very many congregations, any meeting ofthe elders at all was a rare occurrence, and elders whohad regularly scheduled meetings were almost unheardof. That situation has changed for the better, obviously.It is not uncommon for elders now to have a room in the church building more or less set aside as their meetingroom. Few except those who deny scriptural teachingabout the oversight function of elders would fail to see thegood that has come from the practice of elders meeting onsome kind of regular basis. But has the pendulum notswung so far in some cases that another problem has arisen? If we have come to think that attending meetingsis virtually all there is to being an elder, are we in significantly better shape than when elders did not evensee the need to meet? Unless I have seriously misreadwhat the New Testament teaches about it, the eldershipis not merely a deliberative assembly — and if we havelet it become that, we have narrowed the eldership tosomething that can do us little of the good the Lord intended.

If elders were never described as anything but "bishops" or "overseers, " we might conclude their work waslargely administrative. But in both Ac. 20: 28 and 1 Pet.

5: 2 those entrusted with the oversight are charged to'Teed" or "shepherd" the church which is under theirsuperintendency. And Peter is clear that elders do theirwork under the watchful eye of "the Chief Shepherd"

(5: 4). Can there be any doubt that elders are to model their feeding and shepherding work after that of theLord himself? It was He who said, "I am the good shepherd. The good shepherd gives His life for the sheep... I know My sheep, and am known by My own" (Jn.

10: 11, 14). Can we imagine the Lord trying to shepherd His flock merely by having meetings with Hisapostles? No, it is much easier to picture Him, as theGospels frequently do, in direct contact with the people — personally teaching, encouraging, exhorting,and uplifting those who needed Him.

Having meetings, per se, is not what the elders' work consists of—it is preparatory to that work. And if eldershave a room in which they hold their meetings, thatroom is not where the elders do their work — it is where the planning for that work goes on. In Heb. 13: 17, thewriter said that saints are to obey those who rule overthem,, "for they watch out for your souls. " Paul exhorted the Ephesian elders, "Therefore take heed toyourselves and to all the flock, among which the HolySpirit has made you overseers, to shepherd thechurch of God which He purchased with His own blood" (Ac. 20: 28). These and other passages indicatethat the crux of the work of elders is seeing to thespiritual welfare of those entrusted to their shepherd-ship. This involves not only seeing that the flock of Godis nourished and protected so that problems do not cropup, but also being vigilant for signs that any problemhas cropped up. When any member appears to be inspiritual danger, then elders are to do what they areuniquely qualified and responsible to do to strengthenthe weak and restore the erring.

Faithful saints are not kept faithful, weak saints are not stabilized, and erring saints are not rescued withoutthe actual word of God being fed to them. And we haveerred, I believe, in supposing that it is enough for eldersto do this by "hiring it done, " i. e. by retaining agospel preacher to work with the congregation. There is more to watching for souls and tending the flock thansupport-ing an evangelist. That elders are to keep theflock healthy, strong, and safe by feeding it personallywould seem to be obvious from the fact that they are required to be able to do so. What else could be the point of the qualification that an elder should hold fast"the faithful word as he has been taught, that he may be able, by sound doctrine, both to exhort and convictthose who contradict" (Tit. 1: 9)? Or the stipulation thatan elder be "apt to teach" (1 Tim. 3: 2)? The elder himself is to be

skillful in applying the word of God directly to the various needs that his brethren will have.

The word of God is the nourishment that is needed both to prevent spiritual problems and to deal with themwhen they do arise. There is simply no substitute for it. The problems that fall within the scope of the elder's work just cannot be dealt with adequately if substantive Bible teaching is not a major part of the strategy. Andyet, how often do elders personally initiate on-going"home studies" with members whose spiritual lives are in jeopardy? For that matter, how many elders even taketheir Bibles with them when they make a one-time visit to a struggling saint? Elders are required to be spiritually mature and adept at applying the Scriptures to real-life needs—and I maintain that a man never comes closer to doing the real work of an elderthan when he sits down personally with an individualmember of his flock, opens the Bible, and leads hisfellow-saint in an edifying study of whatever passagescontain the nourishment that is needed in that particular case.

It is sad commentary on how little vision we have ofwhat truly is involved in being an elder that we have sofew men supported financially to devote themselves full-time to shepherding the saints. When we think of the work of elders we think simply of occasional elders' meetings to discuss the church's work, and we wonderwhat a man would do with "all that time" if being anelder were his only occupation. But the eldership is far more than a group that meets and talks and makesdecisions. When elders meet, they may well plan their work of tending the flock, pray about it, etc. They couldnot oversee the church very well without some kind ofdeliberative meetings. But the eldership is not merelya "deliberative assembly"—and I have an idea that Godis pleased when He sees elders at somebody's kitchen table with an open Bible!

I

Rumor Upon Rumor

Ezekiel said: "... rumor will be upon rumor" (7: 28).He was not prophesying of our day as a glance at thecontext will demonstrate. But the statement is nevertheless true in our time. So often we see preachers and others jumping on the bandwagon and repeating rumors with-out checking facts. Since I've been guilty of such myself, I do not write these thingsout of a haughty spirit.

One rumor that just refuses to die is that the president of Proctor & Gamble Co. appeared on the Phil Donahue show proclaiming that he was a satanist andthat the company's moon and stars trademark is a satanic/occult symbol. The company has spent a fortunein the past dozen years trying to quell this rumor andexplain that no spokesman has appeared on any talkshow with such a message and that P&G has nothing todo with satanism.

The trademark has been used since 1850. It started as simple markings on crates of Star Candles, an earlyP&G product, and evolved to a formal design showing aman-in-the-moon, a popular figure of the 1800's; and thirteen stars representing the original colonies.

The company has established a toll-free number (800) 331-3774 and a special staff to deal with the thousandsof calls and letters they receive each month in relation tothis rumor. Recently they have filed lawsuits againstindividuals for circulating this report.

Another rumor is that Madelyn Murray O'Hare, theinfamous atheist, has been granted a federal hearing on"FCC Petition #2493 which would ultimately pave theway to stop the reading of the gospel on the airways ofAmerica. " Allegedly she has 27, 000 signatures to support her and we need one million to oppose her.

This number has not changed since I first say thisreport some twenty years ago. Just recently, two different individuals with deep concern and urgency, havebrought to me the petition to counteract Mrs. O'Hare's alleged movement. The Federal Communications Commission (FCC) has received millions of letters about thispetition and their standard reply is that such a petitiondoes not and has never existed.

Several years ago I reproduced in a church bulletin anarticle that told of Charles Darwin's death bed confession of Christian faith and repudiation of his anti-biblical positions. I received a letter from an irate atheist

who happened to be on the mailing list. He informedme that the so-called "Lady Hope story" had been in circu-lation for decades and researchers had uniformly de-nounced it as an unfounded rumor. Hewanted to know what kind of ignoramus would publish such garbage. Well, I wasn't sure just whatkind I was, but after going to some trouble trying tofind verification for the story I admitted my blunder andapologized for circulating the rumor.

Recently I have seen "the missing day" story again.This time it appeared in the paper sent out by the faith(fake) healer, Robert Tilton. According to this widelycirculated rumor, supposedly confirmed by "a group ofexperts at NASA, " some astronomers at the observatoryin Green Belt, Maryland were "rewinding history" byusing "the advanced technology of computer animation. "They were attempting to plot the positions of the starsand planets in the past centuries.

Everything moved as expected "past the days ofGeorge Washington, Henry VIII and Alexander theGreat. However, as the computerized model approachedthe era of Moses, all functions suddenly came to a halt. "The mechanism announced that something was wrong.There was a discrepancy. "A day was missing in time andspace. "

Fortunately one of the scientists recalled a story hehad heard as a child in Sunday School. Some ridiculoustale of how Joshua had asked the Lord to make the sun stand still "about a whole day" (Jos. 10; 12-14). Well, thecomputer showed the elapsed time of Joshua's day to be23 hours and 20 minutes. But the computer showed that40 minutes were still missing.

Again the Sunday School-trained scientist came tothe rescue and informed his colleagues of the biblical account of the sun moving backwards in the time ofHezekiah and Isaiah (II Kings 20: 9-11). "By all astronomical standards. " we are told, "ten degrees is 40 minutes. " So Joshua's 23 hours and 20 minutes plus Hezekiah's ten degrees added up to the exact 24 hoursthe computer was missing. They had discovered the missing day.

I have seen this rumor in several publications. I haveheard preachers tell it as an established fact. I supposethat it has been well over twenty years since I first heardthis story. I'll admit that the fellow who wrote the article for Tilton's paper was the first one that I know of who claims to have been there when it happened! But therumor has been around for years.

I do not know much about computers, but I know you can't get out the them what has not been programmedinto them. The very best that such a model could accomplish would be to reveal where the stars and planetsshould have been based upon the data we have available.Without objective evidence of where they in fact were,there is just no way that such a discrepancy could benoted by the computer.

Such ridiculous tales destroy our credibility beforethe world. Before we repeat rumors, or sign petitions, or write letters to government officials or companies, let'scheck out the facts and make sure that we know what we are talking about.

Do you read yourBible

1-800 626-5348

THE NEWS LETTER REPORTS

"... They rehearsed all that God had done with them... " — Acts 14: 27

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

ROBERT A. BOLTON, 504 Goodwin Dr., Richardson, TX 75081—I take this means to thank all, many of whom we did notknow, who offered assistance, help and encouragement to me and my wife after we were mugged and robbed in Florida at our motel at theclose of the Florida College lectures. The love expressed to us in somany ways, including financial assistance, was much a manifestation of practical New Testament Christianity in action that the managerof the motel, where the incident occurred, was deeply impressed with what being a Christian is all about. So many phones calls and inquiries concerning our welfare have come from all over the countrythat we continue to be overwhelmed.

As to our situation, at knife point we had taken from us some$1, 770 in cash and possessions, all of which will be replaced byinsurance, except for sentimental value. My wife, Billie, is sufferingfrom a broken left foot which she received in her struggle with one ofthe robbers, and will probably be in much pain for several weeks tocome. We thank God that we were not seriously injured or killed and we are doing well. To our knowledge, as of this date, the two menaccosted us have never been arrested. Again, thanks to all for yourprayers and expressions of concern.

EVANGELISTIC EFFORT IN MINNEAPOLIS RICK LANNING—July 19-31 are the set dates for our planned efforts to "seek and save the lost" of Minneapolis. There is but onesound church in this city of 1, 500, 000. We hope to find many contacts through an intensive door-knocking effort over this two week period. The second week will include a nightly gospel meeting with Sewell Hall. In past efforts of this kind in other cities nearbybrethren from many parts of the country have sacrificially come to help us. We are again asking anyone interested in helping us savesouls, whether for only a few days or two weeks, to please contacteither Wilson Copeland (612-424-4097) or Rick Lanning (612-4252385). We will gladly offer lodging for all, along with a good feeling ofhaving worked together for the Lord.

SERIES ON CALVINISM DENVER NIEMEIER, Jamestown, Indiana—A five-lesson study onthe Calvinistic TULIP will be presented June 15-19 at Jamestown,Indiana. Jamestown is one mile south of Interstate 74 some 20 miles west of Indianapolis. The building is at the corner of Mill and Darlington Sts. (next to the water tower). On Monday Mike Willis will speak on Total Depravity; Tuesday Bob Dickey will speak on Unconditional Election; Wednesday Boyd Sellers speaks on Limited Atonement;Thursday, Morris Hafley will speak on Irresistible Grace and onFriday J. R. Bronger will speak on Perseverance of the Saints.

PATRICK L. KELLY, P. O. Box 822, Portland, Maine 04104 — We recently baptized one here. Several studies are underway. Onesteady visitor is Japanese. One unfaithful member is showing renewed interest.

NEW CONGREGATION A new congregation is now meeting in Prescott, Arizona in the OddFellows Lodge building at Sunset and Whipple Streets. When in thisarea call 778-7695 (Leroy Tope) for more information.

JOE D. WINLAND, Route 1, Box 148, Ridgeway, VA 24128 — March 29th completed 6 months with the Ridgeway church where wehave been working to improve our singing. During this time we havehad two 30 minute classes each week with all who would attend. Fifteen men are now able to direct singing using correct patterns forall time signatures. I have also been in similar efforts recently in WestCarrolton, Ohio, St. Paul, MN, and Newton, NC. I will not undertake an effort of this kind for less than 4 months and prefer 6 months. Ifyou believe a similar effort would be helpful in your situation, let mehear from you. Phone (703) 956-5357.

CLIFFORD SHEFFIELD, P. O. Box 295, Terrell, TX 75160 — Eight families were baptized here in 1991 with others in gospelmeetings where I preached. My son, Raymond, a senior at Washington University in St. Louis, MO, had surgery several months ago to remove some tumors from his chest. There is also an abnormal growthat the base of his brain on the pituitary gland. Though my wife's insurance will pay 80% of the hospital bills, the remaining 20% hasalready built up a large bill. For references and further informationfeel free to contact Robert Gabhart in Ft. Worth, TX at (817) 232-2518 or Robert A. Bolton in Richardson, TX at (214) 234-0296.

FROM AROUND THE WORLD ARGENTINA—Carlos Capelli reports from Buenos Aires that onewas baptized in a meeting in Mercedes — San Luis. The preacherthere is Jorge David Rodriquez, a teenager. At Jose C. Paz congregation several have visited from the radio program which the stationmanager had commended as having a large audience. One was baptized at Jose C. Paz. On April 4 he leaves for preaching in Columbia and Ecuador.

RUSSIA — THOMAS G. O'NEAL is trying to get THE NEWTESTAMENT CHURCH by Roy E. Cogdill translated and printed inRussian. Two individuals, one an American and the other a Russian,are now working on the translation. This book is already in a dozenlanguages and the American Braille Society has put it into braille. Ithas been through over twenty editions in the last fifty years and is stillin great demand for Bible classes. Many preachers have found it to bean excellent book of sermons. Tom has recently been in contact withPhil Morgan of Paris, Kentucky and Greg Gwin of Knoxville, Tennessee both of whom spent three weeks in Russia last summer, and alsowith Lena Zakheim whom they baptized while there. Greg Gwin hasplans to return for work in Russia.

The cost of translating and printing 5, 000 copies of THE NEWTESTAMENT CHURCH will run about $1. 60 per copy. These bookswill be given to Russian people just as we would give a tract, Tom says.Those who might be interested in this project should contact Thomas

G. O'Neal, P. O. Box 723, Bessemer, AL 35021. Phone (205) 425-4320.

IRELAND — Tracts and correspondence courses are urgently requested by a small, struggling congregation in Ireland for a forthcoming gospel effort. If any have such materials you could send, pleasecontact: JOHN McCOURT, Church of Christ, 74 Earlswood Road,Belfast, Northern Ireland BT4 3DZ, or phone 0232 651337. Anadditional letter from brother Me Court reports a midnight baptism in "an icy cold ocean. " I quote the following appeal from him:

"We are a small congregation struggling to teach ourselves moreclearly the Lord's way. We urgently require a preacher to help us.Anyone willing to come would need to find his own financial support and be very patient with us as we struggle with the legacy ofliberalism which we inherited. We have our own meeting place which we are in the process of comprehensively renovating. " (Editor's note: Here is an open door. Who can go and help? Who will help those who will go?)

PHILIPPINES — ROBERT GAMIAO reports 14 baptisms atSanto church, Rizal. A new work has been established at Rome Enrile,Bagayan with attendance of 18.

JOY NOTARTE reports on the recent visit of Wallace Little and JimPuterbaugh. They conducted classes at Davao City, Samal Island, Bansalam, Dungan Pekong, Maymana and Bajada. The preaching atBansalan was attended by brethren from 15 congregations. Julie and Joy Notarte (these are MEN, brethren) translated for them in thatarea. Three were baptized in Davao after the preaching there. Theyalso accompanied them to the Visayas. In Ormoc City they saw the terrible damages from the recent flood and also met affected brethren.In January a new work began in Senuda, Bukidnon, 3-4 hours travelfrom Davao City, and about one hour walk from the highway.

RODY L. PORTALES reports five baptisms in February. He saysthat the forthcoming presidential election on May 11 is producing dangerous situations in some areas with eight aspirants fighting with"words and destroying one another and using goons and guns to getthe throne of the Presidency. " Rebel groups are going about urgingpeople to boycott the elections.

ROMANIA — DAVIL TEEL is now in Bucharest. In the month of February 34 classes were conducted with 21 students. An open Biblestudy was held in a hall in the center of town with five previouscontacts and four new ones. One has been baptized and two othersappear to be about ready. Wendall Watts will be coming home in April.He hopes to be able to return later. Teel says "There is elbow room aplenty, so come and join us! We need your heart and your hands. "

HUNGARY—RICHARD COPELAND reports from Budapest thatthe work is taking longer to take root then hoped. Many efforts areunder way to reach people with the gospel. "Jeff and I are in theprocess of getting a correspondence course translated into Hungarian. "

SOUTH AFRICA — PAUL WILLIAMS reports "Between Feb. 17 and Mar. 17, 17 persons were baptized as a result of the efforts ofmembers of the Eshowe church. Many of these were students of thecorrespondence course who answered "Yes' to the final question in lesson 6 — 'Do you want us to assist you in being scripturallybaptized?' David and Funda have been making preaching trips to findthese students. "

PREACHERS NEEDED ANTHONY, FLORIDA — This is a rural area ten miles north of Ocala. Fulltime preacher desired. Have new building with 30 members. Can supply about $1500 a month plus a lot for mobile home orhouse to be built on our property. Prefer a mature man with children at home or retired. Contact Morgan Johnson (904) 368-5792 or Chuck Gates (904) 622-5812.

BRADENTON, FLORIDA — The Bradenton church, P. O. Box10932, Zip 34282, needs a gospel preacher. Average attendance isabout 40. At present we can supply $800-$ 1000 a month in support and will gladly assist in efforts to obtain additional support with a goalof being self-supporting as soon as possible. The Bradenton church(formerly West Bradenton) is the oldest congregation in ManateeCounty and has a rich history. About 18 months ago we sold ourbuilding which had become too old and costly to maintain. We arepresently meeting in a Day's Inn but we are looking for a suitablestructure or land to purchase. Since September, 1991, Dale Wilson has been driving 90 miles from Ft. Myers on Sundays and Wed. nightsto preach and teach. Those interested may contact Ramon Bradley (813) 755-8676; Dan Taylor (813) 7892-4345; Jim Trammell (813) 3550474; or Dale Wilson (813) 275-6245.

PEORIA, ILLINOIS — The Paris Avenue church needs a fulltime preacher. Sunday A. M. attendance averages about 90. We are self-supporting and help support two men overseas and two in other areasof the U. S. If interested, please contact Jim Green (309) 822-0291; Harold Otwell (#09) 383-4470; or Austin Farr (309) 691-9685.

PREACHERS AVAILABLE EDWARD W. PAGAN, Rt. 2 Sulphur Well Rd., Nicholasville, KY40356 — I am looking to relocate. I am 32 years old and have about10 years of preaching experience. If you are interested in knowing more about me, you can write to the above address or call (606) 8851423. Reference will be provided.

KEN FRIEL (Phone 901-738-2258) — Robert H. Bunting of Bartlett, TN sends the following:

"Let me introduce Ken Friel. Ken has had quite a journey to thetruth. He has preached for the conservative Christian Church, but leftthem when he saw their error. Ken next found himself associated with the institutional Churches of Christ and attended the MemphisSchool of Preaching. Ken saw the errors of liberalism, renounced theerrors and left the School of Preaching. He has a strong desire to beright with God, and I appreciate his courage.

"If you are looking for a preacher, Ken might be your man. He is35 years old, and married. He and Sally are interested in working witha good church. He knows what it is to sacrifice for truth, and fordifficult area will not frighten him. To the best of my knowledge, heis godly in life and sincere in his convictions. If you feel Ken may beable to help you, have him come and talk to you. " (You may reach himat the above phone number. )

JULY SPECIAL ISSUE A number of readers have already expressed their delight over theforth-coming July special edition on "Women Professing Godliness"(A Study of the Role of Women). We have already received a numberof advance orders. This is a live subject (red hot might be more apt)among the institutional folks. Journals published by some of thembristle with controversy on the subject. We also need to be aware of thesources of tension among ourselves over this issue and focus ourminds on what the word of God teaches. 100 copies will cost $65/ 50copies will sell for $40. Order from STS, P. O. Box 69, Brooks, KY 40109.

MEETING SCHEDULE CHANGES The editor will not speak on the Miller Avenue lectures in San Jose, California as reported in the February issue. My Californiaschedule for June has been revised as follows: June 19-21 Modesto,CA; June 22-24, Folsom, CA; June 28-July 1, Lakeport, CA. Also welisted a meeting for Nov. 15-20 for White River near Greenwood, Indiana. That congregation has now disbanded. Instead we will bewith the church in Canal Winchester, Ohio (near Columbus) thatsame date.

DAVID JOY

We were just in a meeting at Middlebourne, West Virginia whereour good friends Paul and Gennie Casebolt work for the Lord. Whilethere we were glad to see our good brother, David Joy (son-in-law ofthe Casebolts) who lives in Paden City, WV. Seven years ago, David had a heart transplant. Since then he has continued to teach school,preach at first Fly and now Mellot Ridge in Ohio and conduct several

Page 17

gospel meetings. His health at present is precarious and he is on awaiting list for a second transplant. He attended two nights of themeeting and visited with us afterwards for awhile both times. Hismind is continually on the things of the kingdom. His spirit is radiant. He is not a complainer. David and Patti's older son, Jeremy, is 17 now and preaches somewhere nearly every Sunday and has been doing sofor two years. While we were there we learned that the younger sonobeyed the gospel at Paden City on Sunday, March 29. This is aremarkable family in many ways. While his teaching work hasprovided him with good insurance, the medical bills have been astronomical and much has had to be paid which insurance has notcovered. David did not mention any of this to me but I learned thatthey could use some help to catch up on some medical expenses. Also,a note of encouragement would mean much to a noble family. The David Joys, 313 S. 4th Ave., Paden City, WV 26159.

ENCOURAGING YOUNG PEOPLE This editor might never have thought of preaching had it not been forthat time we kept the preacher at our house during a 10 day meeting. Bonds Stocks came down from Washington, D. C. to conduct a meeting with the church in Hopewell, Virginia where we attended.In a business meeting after services a week before the meeting, therewas a general reluctance to volunteer to keep the preacher. I thinkthere was some intimidation over the fact that before he beganpreaching, brother Stocks had worked on the staff of a senator fromMississippi, and, after all, who were we to house one who had mingled with senators! My father volunteered, much to the chagrin of my mother. We did not, at that time, have indoor plumbing, not evenrunning water in the house. But, stay with us, he did. What a richexperience for all of us. He was a good sport about our conveniences,or lack of them, had more funny things to tell then I had ever heard and was a thorough delight.

One day he invited me to ride over to town with him to checksomething about his car. On the way, he said to me "What are yougoing to do when you grow up?" I replied that my brother and Iplanned to go to Nashville, Tennessee and play on the Grand OleOpry. He said, "Well, that sounds like fun, but you know we sure do need a lot more preachers of the gospel. " I reacted with "Oh, I couldnever do that. " He said "I'll just bet you could. " And he soundedlike he really believed it. It fell silent.

Before we got home he said "You know, I have been doing a lot ofstudy on the errors of the Catholic Church. If you would like to, I'll let you copy those notes while I am here. " I was overcome. When we gotback to the house, I rushed in and rounded up several sheets of paper and spent a good bit of time at the kitchen table laboriously copying notes from the work of Brother Stocks. I still have them.

That was the seed which sprouted and was watered by myGrandmother and later my parents which started me on the road topreaching the gospel. Gospel preachers, take notice of the children.Take a few minutes to chat with them. Ask about their future plans.Encourage them in the direction of kingdom service. I doubt thatBonds Stocks had any idea how big a fire he built in a 12-year-old boy'sheart that sultry summer afternoon in Virginia. But then, maybe hedid!

IN THE NEWS THIS MONTH

BAPTISMS 316

RESTORATIONS 79

(Taken from bulletins and papers

received by the editor)