========================================================================
  ABILENE1941 LECTURES
  by Abilene Christian College
========================================================================

The annual Abilene Christian College Lectureship for 1941, featuring a series of
sermons, lectures, and addresses by prominent preachers and teachers in the
Churches of Christ on themes of faith, doctrine, and Christian living.

  Chapters: 14

------------------------------------------------------------------------
  TABLE OF CONTENTS
------------------------------------------------------------------------

    1. Publisher's Notice
    2. Our Heavenly Citizenship
    3. Business Life of a Christian Citizen
    4. Social Life of a Christian Citizen
    5. Worship In the Program of a Christian Citizen
    6. Citizenship in an Established Kingdom
    7. The Citizens of the Kingdom Organized for Work
    8. Every Christian Citizen a Teacher
    9. Opportunities in the South and Southwest
   10. Opportunities Among the Other Races in the South and Southwest
   11. Opportunities in the South
   12. Obligations of the Christian to the State
   13. Loyalty to the King and the Kingdom
   14. The Possibilities of Christianity in Australia

========================================================================
  CHAPTER 1: PUBLISHER'S NOTICE
========================================================================

Publisher's Notice PUBLISHER’S NOTICE

We are much pleased to have had a part in adding another volume to the large
number of volumes that have already been published covering the annual
lectureship in the main auditorium of Abilene Christian College closing week of
February. These lectures are those that were delivered in February 1941.

Every one of the addresses covered in this volume contains substantial matter on
the subject under con-sideration and will contribute no small service to those
who may have the pleasure of reading. The Abilene Christian College lectures
will go down in history as a distinct contribution to the religious literature
in the realm of sound, sane, loyal and faithful adherence to the commands,
precepts and approved precedents of the Holy Scriptures. They are expressions of
confidence, instruction and hope from prominent exponents of the sound slogan:
the Bible, the whole Bible and nothing but the Bible in the realm of religion.
May the followers of the Christ be faithful to the words of a great religious
teacher and gospei preacher, "Where the Bible speaks, we speak; where the Bible
is silent, we will be silent also.”

G. H. P. SHOWALTER.


========================================================================
  CHAPTER 2: OUR HEAVENLY CITIZENSHIP
========================================================================

Our Heavenly Citizenship OUR HEAVENLY CITIZENSHIP By Chas. H. Roberson “Our
citizenship is in heaven” (Php_3:20—ARV), “Our conversation is in heaven” (AV).
Our citizenship or commonwealth of the Revised ver-sion, is indeed, the
conversation of the Authorized ver-sion. It is in the sense of citizenship that
one gets the full import of Paul’s words. He knew what citizenship meant; he was
a citizen of the Roman Empire, and more than one time do we find him escaping
personal suffering and violence by simply declaring that he was a Roman. It is
in allusion to this that the metaphor of heavenly citizenship, so full of
meaning and consola-tion, is used. No attempt is made to define heaven, for at
best, only a partial and an incomplete answer can be given. It is clear that the
church must depend upon the revelation of her divine founder himself. Heaven
lies beyond the range of human intuitions and discoveries. “No man has seen God
at any time”; and no man has seen heaven. There is simply placed before the
Christian that his relationship to the heavenly world is that of citizenship. It
is quite clear that there are in the New Covenant two great lessons which stand
out in relief: The enjoyment of the heavenly life depends on the character and
conduct in this life; and the access to the heavenly life lies in the method and
the revelation of the gospel. It is not in man to merit heaven. A good citizen
and still more a good Christian, is not two beings, but one. And if it were good
and glorious to be a citizen of Rome, how unspeakably precious the prerogative
of a citizenship in heaven! Men are tempted to essay the task of making others
better; but the one infallible service which they can render is to make
themselves better. Political schools, parties, ad-ministrations, cabinets, rise
and fall, and often it is difficult to appraise the good or the evil they have
done; but there is no one, not even the poorest or the humblest, who may not, if
he will, be enriched in the treasure most enduring and ennobling—that of his own
sincere, honest, upright, virtuous Christian life. Each Christian needs to live
more and more not as a worldly man or woman, whose soul is bound by the range of
mere temporal and lerrestial aspirations, but as a citizen of an eternal
commonwealth, a son or a daughter of Almighty God, redeemed and consecrated by
the Passion of the Lord JesusChrist. Thus, and thus alone will each live on
earth the life of heaven; and thus also may each lift the society in which he
moves to himself, by lifting himself to God.

There is no better way to learn how the heavenly life may be lived than by
studying carefully the content of Paul’s letter to “the saints in Christ Jesus
that are at Philippi.” The More Excellent Way “That ye may approve the things
that are excellent” (Php_1:10). In this remarkable prayer the apostle is guided
by a conception of what the Christian religion really is. There is described a
most important aspect, namely, the approvals of a life, its unforced choices,
instinctive preferences, and habitual consents. There are in speech and thought
and manner and action two possible courses which may be justifiable, but one is
the finer course, and belongs to the things that are excellent. Here then is a
prayer for the type of character founded upon the habitual choice of such
things. One may be well assured that if he lives worthily among plain and
ordinary issues; if he trains his mind to think accurately and dispassionately;
if he keeps his eyes open and gains experience of the world, that he will
acquire the power of spontaneous and immediate discernment of the lower and the
higher ways.

Magnifying Christ “According to my earnest expectation and hope, that in nothing
shall I be put to shame, but that with all boldness, as always, so now also
Christ shall be magni-fied in my body, whether by life, or by death”—Php_1:20.

These words give us a portrait of a minister of Jesus Christ. There is presented
for our instruction a portrait of Paul drawn by his own hands. There is set
forth a confidence that knows no wavering, though a prison door should open at
any moment, and the executioner enter to take him to a shameful punishment, a
public execution. As Paul looks at the two things, life and death, each is so
excellent that he says, “I am in a strait betwixt the two. What I shall choose I
know not.” And then he thinks of the Fhilippinns, and remembers how necessary he
is for their guidance and help, and he says, “Having this confidence, I know
that I shall abide, yea, and abide with you all, for your progress and joy in
the faith,” and he is content that it should be so. Here is confidence that
belongs to every Christian man and Christian woman. Can there be any higher
aspiration in life than that set before us here? But one may ask, “How can I
magnify Christ who is so infinitely great?” You cannot make Christ any greater
than he is, but you can magnify him, for each life may become a magnifying lens,
and men may observe Jesus Christ through your conduct even as they looked at
Jesus Christ through the conduct of his servant Paul. You may make him appear
infinitely greater than he does in the eyes of men and women whom you meet in
business and in your social circle. Paul said that his “earnest expectation and
hope is ... Christ shall be magnified in my body,”

Against Controversy “Doing nothing through faction or through vainglory, but in
lowliness of mind each counting other better than himself’ (Php_2:3). In the
letter to the Philippians there are two great notes. The first is the note of
joy. Paul keeps saying, “Rejoice,” and this is the more noble when it is
re-membered that he is a prisoner and as one in chains. And this also reminds
the child of God that no chain can ever fetter the free spirit: Stone walls do
not a prison make, Nor iron bars a cage, for in every case the citizen of the
heavenly kingdom finds more in Christ to make him glad than in the world to make
him sad.

'The second is the note of love. At no other place does the fire of love bum
more brightly. It is an anxious love that is expressed for the Philippian
Christians. Paul commends their faith and purity and charity; and yet they are
not perfect. He has heard of discord and differences; he has noted the growth of
party spirit and personal rivalry. So he argues that “nothing be done in the
spirit of strife or vain glory.” This warning is needed today, for there are not
wanting certain signs of the rekindling of party spirit. Every matter which
affects the worship of Almighty God is tremendously important. The Master
declared that the heart of all good lies in the worship of God in spirit and in
truth. Here is the exhortation that the heavenly citizen he far removed from
party spirit and self-assertion.

Christian Altruism “Not looking each of you to his own things, but each of you
also to the things of others”—Php_2:4. This is a fine piece of advice, and is
one of the wisest and noblest things each Christian can do. It was what our Lord
was always doing, and what every person does who shows any likeness to Jesus
Christ. “Every man for himself” mars the beauty and the strength of life. Look
at that little “also,” and remember that no one is fit to take care of his
neighbor, until he has learned to take care of himself. It is vitally important
for the goodwill and usefulness of a community that each of us realize that
other people have tastes and convictions as well as ourselves. Nine-tenths of
all quarrels and disputes would be prevented or would be speedily healed, if
each took as much pains to read his brother’s view of the question as he is to
insist upon his own. Surely there would be more considerate attitudes and more
lenient judgments if each man tried to understand the circumstances of others,
their difficulties, their temptations, as he understands his own. This “looking
on the other side” has the power to make you happy, cheerful and to enjoy peace
of mind. It is manifesting heavenly citizenship when you have pieties,
sympathies, and affections which go out on every side; when you have hearts that
compassionate the wretched, hands eager to help the needy, hearts that bleed for
human wrongs, hands that are always ready to soothe human pain. There must be
regard of the things of others because the Master thought of our things. This
trait of character may be manifested in the lives of philanthropists and saints,
in the lives of our own homes, and in the lives of Christian friends, but it
issues in resplendent and eternal character from the cross of Jesus Christ.

Christian humility is not an alternative to greatness of soul. It is a protest
against the limitations by which it is too often hedged. The reign of humility
goes back to the time when the morning stars sang together, and it flows among
men out of recognition of bounteous Providence and the riches of an infinite
liberality. It is this which gives it true dignity and value in the character of
the heavenly citizen. It is for this reason that many definitions, or better
said, descriptions—fall far short of its true proportions. Humility, like every
aspect of the character that is truly and properly Christian, must find its
spring no less than its goal in the character of God. It is from him that the
Christ comes forth, as it is to him that he returns. The Mind of Christ “Have
this mind in you, which was also in Christ Jesus"—Php_2:5.

Paul says here that a Christian ought to have the mind of Jesus Christ; to think
as he did, to have some-thing of his spirit, at all times. Particularly should
he desire to understand that mind when his thinking centers about the cross. One
is not able to believe in the cross, is unable to understand it, unless he has
something of the spirit which led to the cross. The mind of Jesus Christ as here
presented comprehends both his infinite compassion and his infinite humility. No
one has need to be told that there is sin in the world, and that it brings upon
men unhappiness and ruin in every shape. The Lord Jesus came to heal the
diseases of the soul, to bring the great remedy. He met with “the daily
contradiction of sinners,” submitted to stand before the judgment seat of fools
and hypocrites, and to have sentence passed on him by blind and wicked judges.
No one of us is able to measure accurately what such humiliation means. There is
in Jesus the union of strength and tenderness which gives his character a unique
charm and attractiveness. The source of this compound of strength and
attractiveness is found in the unique intensity with which our Savior realized
the presence of God. .Paul, who entered the secret of his life and teaching as
none other has done, puts into maxima the mind of Christ. "Pray without
ceasing.” “In everything give thanks.” “Whether, therefore, ye eat or drink, or
whatever ye do, do all to the glory of God.” If the Master felt the burden of
that comparatively simple state of society, it seems that he would surely say to
the heavenly citizen to try earnestly a simpler life for his soul’s sake. The
Master hated intensely three sins: hypocrisy, selfishness, and worldliness. The
double heart makes a double head, and the hypocrite ends always in deceiv-ing
himself. The lack of sympathy is a cardinal sin in the Christian religion as it
is in no other system to which men subscribe. Worldliness is based upon a
radically wrong standard of values. As men attempt to work apart from God, tasks
are assumed and wages are wrung which have no connection with the work God
intends us to do, or the reward he intends us to receive. Our Example “Have this
mind in you, which was also in Christ Jesus: who, existing in the form of God,
counted not the being on equality with God a thing to be grasped, but emptied
himself, taking the form of a servant, being made in the likeness of men, and
being found in fashion as a man, he humbled himself, becoming obedi-ent even
unto death, yea, the death of the cross"— Php_2:5 ff.

These sublime and important words set forth to men with singular distinction the
foundation truth of the Christian religion, God’s becoming man. It has been
called the ladder of our Lord’s humiliation. It leads us to understand that the
Master surrendered his rights and his liberty, and to realize that in his
sacrifice he chose the hardest way. How often do Christians choose the easiest
way in a duty that must be done! The citizen enjoying heavenly privileges must
emulate the character of the Master, and that entails the free surrender of his
will to God, Worship is the highest act of service, and to be genuine it must be
the expression and the crown of a life of obedience. Sendee must also rest on
filial fellowship with God, for without this, it may be no more than the
assertion of self-will, and therefore, lack freedom, and will not be profitable
to carry with it the power of an endless life.

“A Heart at Leisure From Itself” “He longed after you all, and was sore
troubled, be-cause ye had heard that he was sick”—Php_2:6.

Here is given a singularly beautiful type of Christian character. Epaphroditus
was the bearer of gifts to Paul from the Philippians, and he is presented as
sorrowful because his friends had heard that he was ill. In trouble, it is
perhaps true that it is best for ourselves not to speak much about it. Only
inexperienced sufferers are voluble. Those familiar with the secrets of anguish
are silent. Even while one suffers, doubt may arise whether there is any just
cause for pain, and the memory of a slight or disappointment fades away if it is
not cherished. Epaphroditus knew that the Philippians were hardly hearing up
under the weight of their own sorrows, and with the generosity of a great
nature, he believed that they loved him well —that his illness would sadden them
deeply—and it lay with a double weight on his heart because it had burdened
theirs. The true requital of pain faithfully borne is the assurance that God
will bring one through all that awaits him, triumphantly. Not only must the
Christian not burden others needlessly; he must be kind. One wrote, “Above all
other things be kind. Kindness is the one thing through which we can most
resemble God and the most disarm men. Kindness in mutual relations is the
principal charm of life.” Heavenly citizenship enjoins upon one to increase the
innocent happiness of others, to gladden the weary, to lift the worn spirit from
the dust.

Spiritual Concentration “This one thing I do”—Php_3:13. No one becomes very
great, very useful or very happy who has not the power of spiritual,
concentra-tion. May it be urged that the quality of true heavenly citizenship
lies in setting one’s aims to definite attainment, and then using his whole
being to achieving the goal. Decision is energy; energy is power; power is
confidence; and confidence is success. The work of grace in a man’s heart should
be the happiest of all things. It is the sole thing that gives to man any real
satisfaction in the world. To be Christian demands all the powers one
possesses—his intellect, his memory, his judgment, his affection, his courage.
It is a work not to be done in any given period of time, but a work life-long.
It is done by going about it as the highest work that is ever given man to do.
“This one thing I do.”

Perfect But Not Perfected “Brethren, I count not myself yet to have laid hold:
but one thing I do, forgetting the things which are behind, and stretching
forward to the things which are before, I press on toward the goal unto the
prize of the high calling of God in Christ Jesus"—Php_3:13 f.

Christian perfection reaches forth into a higher goal in the future. As many as
be perfect have a vision of a goal beyond the shifting scenes of time. According
to this, Christian perfection is that stage of life that realizes most intensely
its imperfection, and at the same time involves a certainty of mind with respect
to future glory. No man has yet done well in the present who has no vision of
the future. Christian perfection recognizes its ground, its goal and its
inspiration in Jesus Christ. “I press toward the mark unto the prize of the high
calling of God in Christ Jesus.” There is not one thing beyond that. The high
calling is designated in the book of Hebrews, “the heavenly calling.”

Ought not those who believe there is such reward, such crown, and such
attainment, to be ashamed that the little troubles and vexations of the world
disturb them? Can any one who is going home keep from being ashamed if he made
much of the troubles of the journey, heat, or dust, or crowd?

Euodia and Syntyche “I beseech Euodia, and beseech Syntyche, that they be of one
mind in the Lord”—Php_4:2. In this dual biography, some interesting facts are
given. It is fair to think of these two women as being good women. They were
"laborers in the gospel,” and their "names are in the book of life.” But they
were not of the same mind. It appears that their disagreement was about a
trifle, indeed, much ado about nothing. It might have been merely a bit of
gossip, or a flash of temper, or an inadvertent word. The earnest Christian
finds it quite difficult to account for his likes and dislikes, and it becomes
almost impossible to justify bitter disagreements. Both women were to blame. It
takes two to make a quarrel. The results of the quarrel here, whatever may have
been its origin, has come down through all the centuries of the Christian era.
There is no record that they were ever reconciled on earth. The application for
one participating in heavenly citizenship is plain: If there be bitterness to be
healed or differences to be composed, do not wait until the shadows enfold. The
Golden Mean “Let your moderation be known to all men”—Php_4:5. In the realm of
faith, here is a warning against bigotry and dogmatism. The admonition is by no
means out of date. There is the constant need to be on guard lest any one drift
into haughtiness and exclusiveness. An intolerant attitude is not a mark of
heavenly citixenship.

There is also a warning respecting matters of character. It is almost a
universal tendency for one man to find fault with another. The heavenly citizen
must be careful lest he judge his fellowman harshly, and conclude that he is
inferior in wisdom and devotion, and be led to deal offensively with one who
does not see “eye to eye” with him.

Likewise, there is the call to moderation in matters of conduct. The daily life
must portray reasonableness, not severe judgment. The lesson here and the high
duty of the Christian is, “Reasonableness of dealing, not strictness of legal
right, but consideration for one another.” The strong, sincere, pure heavenly
citizen has a quick sense of the essential, and that which is not—is ready
within well understood lines to give and to take, and to preserve that aspect of
ease and beauty which belongs to whatever is strong and free. The Discipline of
Thought “Whatsoever things are true, whatsoever things are honorable, whatsoever
things are just, whatsoever things are pure, whatsoever things are lovely,
whatsoever things are of good report; if there be any virtue, and if there be
any praise, think on these things"— Php_4:8. In the Christian life the
thought-realm is the seat of the greatest difficulty with which man is
confronted. One’s thoughts are so elusive, so difficult to control, so entirely
independent of any law, that to order them aright well nigh seems impossible.
This difficulty is honestly met and frankly dealt with here, and its solution
proposed, the worth of which can be known only by personal test. The power of
thought is the strongest force in the life of man. The holiest moments are often
invaded by unholiest imaginations, and thought uncontrolled at such times makes
vivid things long since past. On account of this it is that thought manifests
its greatest strength as an avenue of temptation. Hence, for the heavenly
citizen God has imposed a rigid self-discipline, and lays upon him the
responsibility of thought-selection. And when one has learned his own
helplessness, he yields himself to the Master and relies upon his promise to
undertake the responsibility of guarding his heart and his thought. This passage
sets forth the prescribed liberty of Christian manhood, It is a sort of
inventory of the mental furnishings of the heavenly citizen. Here are the things
given for meditation and practice, and which, if sincerely used, has the
glorious assurance of peace “which passeth understanding.”

Man’s Care Conquered by God’s Peace "In nothing be anxious; but in everything by
prayer and supplication with thanksgiving let your requests be made known unto
God. And the peace of God which passeth all understanding, shall guard your
hearts and your thoughts in Christ Jesus”—Php_4:6 f. This is one of the finest
and the wisest precepts God ever gave to his children. It is that to which full
obedi-ence will relieve all burdens, and produce peace in the midst of storms,
It is clear that some cares are wholly justifiable. The injunction to pray about
them implies as much, and obedience to divine precepts necessitates them. On the
other hand, there are cares that are certainly wrong, and for the reason they
flow from an evil source. Too often, such cares originate in envy, suspicion,
ambition, consciousness of guilt, pride, or ill-temper. And besides these there
are cares that are not easily classed as lawful or unlawful. Is there a
touchstone by which these may be tested as to whether right or wrong? It is
quite clear that there is, and the passage before us names it. It is prayer. Any
care that you can confidently pray about is lawful. To let in the light of
heaven on anxieties and cares, that is, to pray about them, is to expel the
evils in them. Christians need a power which can drive out the strong man armed,
being stronger than he. And this power is wrought in the abiding ministry of
prayer. The result of obedience to this lofty and gracious precept is among the
most abiding things in time and eternity: “And the peace of God, which passeth
understanding, shall guard your hearts and thoughts in Christ Jesus.” The Power
of the Cross “I can do all things in him that stvengtheneth me” —Php_4:13.

Paul is the most vigorous, efficient, self-realizing character in the pages of
the New Covenant. He who bids the heavenly citizen imitate the humility of the
Master who took upon him the form of a servant is him-self one of the world’s
masters. He knows his mind and carries through his purpose. There is no doubt
that he was impatient of dull wits, and maybe was too ready to call a tiresome
unbeliever a fool, the priestly bully a white wall. Yet he is accorded the honor
of the strong man, one who leaves his mark, creates ideals, and makes history.
“I can do all things” seems to portray him in his highest excellency. The
heavenly citizen is one who can do all things, or to express it in the words of
the Master, who through faith can remove mountains. The characteristic note of
the gospel is not sacrifice but salvation. Calvary is the symbol not of
renunciation but of life. The true citizen of heaven may find with assurance the
due proportions of Christian discipleship in the witness of the saints to the
manifoldness of Christ, The gospel of the cross is the proclamation of power. It
presents for the contemplation of men a spectacle of divine tenderness solely
for the cause that it is the message of victorious life. For Paul the gospel is
the fixed tiling in the Christian reli-gion; the inviolable unchangeable center
of authority; the standard presentation of the fact of Christ which gives unity,
cohesion, and solidity to all the riches of wisdom and knowledge which are hid
in him.

Finally, Heavenly Citizenship carries in it the power of the world invisible,
and the grandeur of the fact that the redeemed man’s life is lived always and in
the whole of it within the possessing hand of God.


========================================================================
  CHAPTER 3: BUSINESS LIFE OF A CHRISTIAN CITIZEN
========================================================================

Business Life of a Christian Citizen THE BUSINESS LIFE OF A CHRISTIAN CITIZEN By
Cled E. Wallace The subject assigned me for discussion this morning is as
important as President Morris indicated in his introductory remarks. I shall
introduce it by reading a passage of scripture which has been used a number of
times in this series of discussions: “Brethren, be ye imitators together of me,
and mark them that so walk even as ye have us for an example. For many walk, of
whom I told you often, and now tell you even weeping, that they are the enemies
of the cross of Christ: whose end is perdition, whose god is the belly, and
whose glory is in their shame, who mind earthly things. For our citizenship is
in heaven; whence also we wait for a Savior, the Lord Jesus Christ: who shall
fashion anew the body of our humiliation, that it may be conformed to the body
of his glory, according to the working whereby he is able even to subject all
things unto himself” (Php_3:17-21). In that time many walked as enemies of the
cross of Christ, and many now walk in the same manner. They mind "earthly
things,” and their service is wholly given over to the demands of the flesh. In
view of the end that awaits all such, it is a matter for tears. Since we are all
in the flesh and some of the demands of the flesh are imperative, it is well
enough that we study and reatudy our relationships. In spite of the recurrent
cries against marking brethren, all Christians have a mark on them that can be
clearly read by informed and intelligent brethren. I am a marked man. Everybody
who knows me has me marked for what I am or for what he thinks I am. Every
individual I know, or have any particular inteiv est in, I have classified in my
own mind as to his ability, his loyalty to the truth, his characteristics both
good and bad, and every Christian ought to be satisfied to be marked for what he
is. Any effort on the part of a public teacher to conceal the mark that truly
identifies him should be branded as an indefensible act of hypocrisy.
Responsible teachers should take a definite stand on questions that have a vital
connection with the welfare of the cause of Christ and be willing to meet all
the consequences of such a stand. A Christian presents the anomaly of a dual
citizen-ship. He has experienced two births, one of nature and one of grace, one
of the flesh and one of the spirit. Nicodemus, the brilliant Jewish ruler, was
well informed on matters of nature but ignorant and confused where principles of
the kingdom of grace were involved. The announcement of Jesus to the effect that
a man must be bom anew to see the kingdom of God amazed him. “Except one be born
anew, he cannot see the kingdom of God. . . . Except one be bom of water and the
Spirit, he cannot enter into the kingdom of God” (John 3:3-5). This intelligent
Jew could not understand how this could be, and many today are likewise confused
regarding the matter. The fleshly birth in which we had no choice does not
entitle us to any of the blessings of the kingdom of heaven. “That which is bom
of the flesh is flesh; and that which is born of the Spirit is spirit.” When a
sinner accepts the gospel and becomes a Christian, the fact that he is a
Christian with a heavenly citizenship does not cancel out the fact that he is a
human being living in the world. He still lives in the flesh, and there are some
earthly demands upon him which must be met. He has a celestial relationship, but
he is yet on earth, and some of these earthly demands are both essential and
practical. This heavenly citzenship is supreme, and is the Chris-tian’s chief
concern. Flesh is subordinate to spirit, and men have been crowned with eternal
glory for forsaking houses and lands, making enemies of fathers, mothers, sons,
and daughters, and even surrendering their lives in loyalty to him whose throne
is in heaven and whose rule extends to the earth. “He that loveth father or
mother more than me is not worthy of me; and he that loveth son or daughter more
than me is not worthy of me. And he that doth not take his cross and follow
after me, is not worthy of me. He that fmdeth his life shall lose it; and he
that loseth his life for my sake shall find it’' (Matthew 10:37-39). Jesus
warned his disciples that they could not serve both God and mammon and must not
allow earthly existence to blind them to their heavenly treasures as others did.
“Lay not up for yourselves treasures in heaven. * * * But seek ye first his
kingdom, and his righteousness ; and all these things shall be added unto you.”
He startled the men of his time by telling them that they should not work for
the meat that perishes, but for that which abides unto eternal life. Man is
human and needs material food, but he cannot live by such food alone. There is a
part of him which must be nourished by the word of God or a degeneration lands
him in perdition. Fat, healthy men can go to hell. The rich man who found
himself engulfed in anguish after death was clothed in purple and fine linen and
fared sumptuously every day while on earth.

It is not difficult to figure out in the light of the Scriptures why a man loses
everything if he neglects his soul. The kingdom of heaven has more to offer its
citizens than any earthly government can offer. I am a patriotic American
citizen. I love this government of ours and believe it to be the best in the
world even svith its recognized faults. Such a patriotism is in no sense hostile
to the privileges and obligations I enjoy as a Christian. There are certain
so-called inalienable rights which a model government guarantees its citizens.
All such blessings are temporary and are of a strictly limited nature. The right
of life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness is confined strictly to earth and
material relationships. No earthly government presumes to go beyond the grave
with its blessings. It cannot even guarantee long life, freedom from disease or
exemption from economic ruin. Compare this with the objects of the Christian’s
hope which are transcendent and glorious. When his outward man is decaying, his
inward man is renewed day by day. He looks forward to a house not made with
hands, eternal in the heavens, when mortality shall be swallowed up of life. He
is to be released from the burdens and groanings incident to life in the flesh
and enjoy eternal life in heaven in a resurrected body fashioned after that of
the Lord’s own glorious body. Earthly governments serve a good purpose in
regulating human relationships, but it is none of their affair to groom human
beings for eternal life. They themselves are temporal and deal with temporal
things. The kingdom of Christ is not of this world, is wholly unlike any other
kingdom that ever existed or ever will be established; yet its citizens are in
the world and must associate and do business with the world. There is a dual
danger here. Some may be too greatly influenced by the world, and warnings
against; this are numerous. “Love not the world, neither the things that are in
the world, If any man love the world, the love of the Father is not in him. For
all that is in the world, the lust of the flesh and the lust of the eyes and the
vainglory of life, is not of the Father, but is of the world. And the world
passeth away, and the lust thereof: but he that doeth the will of God abideth
forever” (1 John 2:15-17). “Ye adulteresses, know ye not that the friendship of
the world is enmity with God? Whosoever therefore would be a friend of the world
maketh himself an enemy of God” (James 4:4). On the other hand, others may feel
constrained to withdraw from the world to a degree that amounts to asceticism.
We often hear remarks from the extremely devout to the effect that a Christian’s
associations should be confined largely to fellow-citizens of heaven. Paul has
some decisive things to say on this question. He wrote to the brethren in
Corinth not to keep company with idolaters, fornicators, murderers, sorcerers,
drunkards, and the like. For fear they might understand him and run to fanatical
extremes he explained that such was a disciplinary measure against brethren who
were guilty of such conduct and was not intended to mean that we must not keep
company with men of that sort in the world, for in such a case we would simply
have to get out of the world. We are in the world and cannot escape association
with some pretty rough characters who also live here. The ideal of a Christian
demands that he mingle with, do business with, the world, even enjoy the social
life of the world, and at the same time maintain the standards of conduct the
King demands. How else, in-deed, can he be the light of the world and the salt
of the earth? Paul instructed Christians that they might accept an invitation to
a feast given by an unbeliever, in that case probably a pagan, and eat what was
set before them and otherwise act in a decorous manner. Christians cannot be the
light of the world by shunuing unbelievers. They must contact them, Jesus was
found in the busy marts of trade and other places where people congregated. He
was criticized by the devout for associating, even eating, with publicans and
sinners. A follower of the Lord is unequally yoked with unbelievers only when he
enters into an alliance that compromises his loyalty to Christ or puts him at a
dis-advantage in the discharge of his duties as a Christian.

Some practically minded men have charged that Christianity is impractical. They
are victims of an illusion. They opine that the gospel is a nebulous theory of
metaphysics fitted only to occupy the minds of that portion of humanity who have
nothing much to do except think about going to heaven. Some wag many years ago
started the gag that religion is all right for “long-haired preachers and
short-haired women” but men of business with serious affairs to look after could
not afford to bother with it. I am seriously maintaining that the gospel is the
most practical system in the world. It is assumed that men have the right to
marry, rear families, provide for their needs and comforts and engage in
legitimate business. It is admitted that the Bible is not a handbook designed to
supply the details of how to breed cattle, build a city or run a farm. For all
that a knowledge of the Bible and even a partial acceptance of its teaching has
resulted in better homes, better government, wider liberties, more abundant
economic life and other material blessings for the human race. Its fruit is
invariably good. The Bible is responsible for hospitals, schools and many types
of advancement it does not specifically mention or describe in detail. God is
specific in matters of doctrine and worship. If a man would become a Christian
he must do exactly what the Lord says he must do to become a Christian. No man
can know what God wants in the way of worship except what he says about it. He
is not at liberty to alter specific revelations regarding these things. General
principles control many other activities and they must be applied to various
situations as devout hearts and enlightened minds may be able to apply them. The
Golden Rule which requires that we do unto others as we would have them do unto
us, would settle much of the world’s strife and resolve it into a reign of peace
should it be generally accepted and applied. It would abolish war and others of
the world’s greatest evils.

One day recently, I went out to the golf course in Austin where I live, at least
I live there when I am not somewhere else. I play golf, spend some time and
money at it, keep in good health and also in a much better humor than some of my
critics do. Some preachers take too little exercise, eat too much, get too fat,
die too early, and somebody is supposed to advance the explanation that they
wore themselves out in the service of the Lord. A Christian citizen should not
lie. Well, I went out to the golf course and saw some men digging holes under a
big tree. My curiosity was aroused and I asked Tom Penick, the Pro out there,
what the idea was. He said: “Why, preacher, they are feeding that tree.” They
put stuff down in those holes that the roots of the tree took up into the trunk
and branches of the tree to increase its size and health. He showed me other
fine trees which had similarly been rescued from a scraggly, half-dead state,
and transformed into things of beauty. Christianity puts principles into the
character, into the heart, into the life of a man that will make him a good
business man, make him what he ought to be in his family and all other
relationships. A knowledge of the contents of the Bible is calculated to
immeasurably benefit every business and professional man. Its worth is only
vaguely appreciated by many who suffer and lack much ljccause of their ignorance
of it and do not know what is the matter with them. To illustrate just how
practical true religion is in commonplace affairs I cite a few specific
references in the Scriptures. Paul preached the gospel in Thessalonica and
turned many people from idols to God. He wrote them a letter when they were
little more than babes in Christ and gave them some elementary in-struction in
right living. Among other things, he said: “But we exhort you, brethren, that ye
abound more and more; and that ye study to be quiet, and to do your own
business, and to work with your hands, even as we charged you; that ye may walk
becomingly toward them that are without, and may have need of nothing” (1
Thessalonians 4:10-12). We may call this business life of a Christian “every-day
religion.” Nothing has ever been thought of more practical than this. All
Christians have a business relationship in those things that pertain to their
physical and material welfare. The teaching of the scriptures reaches out to men
in the office, on the farm, in the school room and to the woman in her kitchen,
nursery or parlor. What, then, about a man who says he does not have time to be
a Christian? This is a common excuse and I think I have heard all of them during
the years of my work as a preacher. There are no new ones. They have all been
offered and they are all rotten with fallacy and misunderstanding of the true
issue. If a man should say he could not see the city for the people and the
houses, or could not see a forest for the trees, you would know that he needed
some information as to what a city or a forest is. If he thinks he does not have
time to be a Christian, he needs some information about what Christianity is. He
possibly has an idea that it is an intellectual diversion of some sort, like
digging into some antique philosophy. Nothing is further from the truth.
Somebody is reported to have asked Lord Tennyson one time to define a living-
poet. He is reported to have said that “a poet is a reed (a musical instrument)
through which all things blow into music.” Somebody paraphrased that language to
read that “a Christian is a reed through which all things blow into religion.”
All that a Christian does should be right and the righteousness of God should be
seen in it. “I have been crucified with Christ,” said Paul, “and it is no longer
I that live, but Christ liveth in me.” A true Christian in business is doing the
sort of business that Christ endorses.

Paul left Titus in Crete to “set in order the things that were wanting,” Here is
a bit of inspired advice Titus was authorized to pass on to the disciples,
“Faithful is the saying, and concerning these .things I desire that thou affirm
confidently, to the end that they who have believed God may be careful to
maintain good works” (Titus 3:8). He adds that “These things are good and
profitable unto men.” The idea is that Christians should profess honest
occupations and lead tranquil and quiet lives in all godliness and gravity. This
is pleasing to God. A man who has a legitimate business, attends to it, is
thrifty, industrious, liberal, pure in his life, and thus exhibits a becoming
walk toward them that are without, makes a valuable contribution to the dignity
and honor of the church of the Lord into which he was inducted by a spiritual
birth. Idleness, fussiness and excitability are things that hinder and detract.

There were some in the early church who evidently thought otherwise and Paul
reprimanded them in this language: “Now we command you, brethren, in the name of
our Lord Jesus Christ, that ye withdraw your-selves from every brother that
walketh disorderly, and not after the tradition which they received of us. For
yourselves know how ye ought to imitate us: for we behaved not ourselves
disorderly among you; neither did we eat bread for nought at any man’s hand, but
in labor and travail, working night and day, that we might not burden any of
you: not because we have not the right, but to make ourselves an ensample unto
you, that ye should imitate us. For even when we were with you, this we
commanded you, If any will not work, neither let him eat. For we hear of some
that walk among you- disorderly, that work not at all, but are busy-bodies. Now
them that are such we command and exhort in the Lord Jesus Christ, that with
quietness they work, and eat their own bread. But ye, brethren, be not weary in
well-doing" (2 Thessalonians 3:6-13). The gospel condemns such idle, disorderly,
busy- bodies and the church should not tolerate them. I knew about a case one
time where a church was im-posed on by a man and his family who fastened
them-selves on them for support, He was rather domineering in his demands that
he be supplied with certain things, including money, and this continued for many
months. The leaders of the congregation were too soft- heaided, or soft-headed
to shake him off. They did not know what to do with him. This instruction from
Paul should have been followed. The church should wean a fellow like that. Bible
teaching in regard to caring for the needy does not obligate or even authorize a
church to hang a feed bag on a lazy and arrogant parasite. The word of God
abounds in principles designed to enrich the life of a Christian citizen and
make him a good business man.

It follows that a Christian in his business life, in his social and material
relationships should be strictly and uncompromisingly honest. “Lie not one to
another; seeing that ye have put off the old man with his doings, and have put
on the new man, that is being renewed unto knowledge after the image of him that
created him” (Colossians 3:9-10). I read about the golden city, the home of the
soul and find that nothing unclean enters into it. Murderers, fornicators,
idolaters together with all liars are excluded. A liar is close-kin to a thief.
Any man who will lie will also steal if the temptation is strong enough. The
Christian in business is often in the midst of an economic struggle and the
temptation at times is strong to take advantage of somebody by using fraudulent
methods. “Take thought for things honorable in the sight of all men” (Romans
12:17). It is the climax of a Christian’s honor that he would rather die than
lie. Remember that Ananias and Sapphira lied and died both. There can be no
permanent profit in dishonesty. "The wages of sin is death.”

We naturally connect business with profit. The worldly business man confines his
interest in profit to material things that have to do with happiness and
contentment on earth. The Christian business man must keep in mind that there is
a higher profit in a world to come. Paul in his letters to Timothy discussed
matters of supreme gain. "But godliness with contentment is great gain: for we
brought nothing into the world, for neither can we carry anything out; but
having food and covering we shall be therewith content. But they that are minded
to be rich fall into a temptation and a snare and many foolish and hurtful
lusts, such as drown men in destruction and perdition. For the love of money is
a root of all kinds of evil: which 'ome reaching after have been led astray from
the faith, and have pierced themselves through with many sorrows” (1 Timothy
6:6-10). Some might think, the way some of us preach, that the only way a
Christian can be guilty of worldliness is to dance, play cards, or go in
swimming. One of the greatest temptations to worldlinesa is found in the conduct
of legitimate business, social life, even home life. Many people who are hoaest
and cannot be tempted to engage in things that are known to be sinful, may allow
business or pleasure which are above criticism in themselves, to interfere with
some of the duties of the Christian life. They allow the cares of the world, the
deccitfulness of riches and the pleasures of this life to choke out the word and
they become unfruitful. If a man allows his business, or a woman suffers the
cares of home life to crowd the word of God out of their lives, they become
guilty of a fatal sort of worldliness as deadly to the soul as any commonly
acknowledged sin. Nothing of a material or temporal nature can become the
supreme thing in the life of a Christian. The things of the kingdom must come
first. Martha was troubled about many things but Jesus reminded her that “one
thing is needful/' The Christian should exhibit a fine sense of values based on
the plain teaching of the word of God.

There is nothing wrong about a man becoming rich, if there is no ground for just
criticism of the methods he employed in becoming so. He must not trust in such
riches but on God who gives him such things to enjoy and use. There is nothing
wrong in the ownership of property. Whether a man has little or much is not
really a vital matter, but what he does with, and what his attitude is toward,
his little or much does amount to something. This reveals him more than anything
else can. The man who reaped rich returns from his piece of ground, built new
barns and filled them, and bade his soul enjoy it for many years was called a
fool by the Lord. It is not charged that he was a thief or that his business
methods were shady. He was a worldly-minded man who grounded his hope on the
uncertainty of riches. Had he been unselfish, rich in good works, ready to
distribute, he would have been laying up in store for himself a good foundation
against the time to come that he might lay hold on that life which is life
indeed. (See 1 Timothy 6:17-19). If a man loses his soul he loses everything. We
are in the flesh for only a very short time. Use should be made of present
opportunities so that when the time comes for mortality to be swallowed up of
life, the climax of the Christian's hope may be reached when he enters upon his
heavenly and eternal inheritance.


========================================================================
  CHAPTER 4: SOCIAL LIFE OF A CHRISTIAN CITIZEN
========================================================================

Social Life of a Christian Citizen THE SOCIAL LIFE OF A CHRISTIAN CITIZEN’ By
Jack Meyer

You will understand that the thoughts that move through the heart of a person
who has been gone after graduation from this school, for 16 or 17 years are
almost entirely overwhelming. That sentiment is in no wise affected, but is
entirely sincere, and, I might, say, just a little unexpected to me, because
while I knew that through these years I have cherished a real, genuine affection
for A.C.C., for so many of the people, for the school itself, for my former
associates, I thought that I was “man enough” to take charge of myself
emotionally a little better than apparently is the case right now. As one comes
on the stage and into this talk, some-thing gets hold of a fellow that, as the
people who have a brand of religion that we don’t endorse would say, is “better
felt than told.” But anyway, for about a minute or two before I “settle down” I
want you to understand as I tell it simply and briefly, and yet sincerely and
earnestly, that it is just a pleasure that cannot possibly be explained. Through
these years I have cherished and nourished, nurtured and looked after very
closely with an abiding interest everything that pertains to this school. Though
I have been more or less planted in the deep south for a number of years, I have
kept in as close touch as possible with the affairs of the school. There has
never been a day, there has never been a moment, when I have not been supremely
connected with the school, and I certainly do profoundly appreciate more than I
can say the factors involved in making: it possible for me to be here now, to be
associated with you, with Brother Don Morris, with all the entire personnel of
the school.

It is my purpose to “get down to business'’ in this talk right now. A man
.shouldn’t come 800 or 1000 miles to appear on anybody’s program and spend much
time in preliminaries—and I greatly appreciate the brevity of Brother Morris’s
introduction. I am rather hard to catch a hint, though. Brother Morris said that
he was trying to make these programs start on time and close on time. I heard
the first part of that but I just “suspected,” I “think” he said also, close on
time. To say the least of it, I’m not taking this platform with the attitude
that I know anything especially to tell you people, but on the other hand I am
not taking this platform to make a Sunday school talk of ten minutes. That
doesn’t mean I am here for two hours now, but we are here for the business in
hand—“The Social Life of a Christian Citizen.”

I want you to understand this and I want you to take this in the right spirit,
in the right attitude—it is given in that way—the only book that I have read in
the preparation for this talk is this one right here— the New Testament. I do
not believe it is necessary for a gospel preacher, when he gets on somebody’s
program, to go running the first thing to someone else’s book. I am not saying
that in a critical spirit or in a wrong attitude, and I am not saying that we
shouldn’t read any book except this one. We shouldn’t even go to school in that
case, but I just mean to say that the quotations and the all of this talk are
produced and can be found right here in the pages of this word.

Suppose we talk now for a time about the social life of the Christian citizen.
We want to keep in mind what these terms mean. Christian citizen can be best
ex-plained with these passages. In Php_3:20, we find Paul saying that “our
citizenship is in heaven,” and then that remark can best be explained by three
or four passages; for example, in Acts 2:36, either at the time of the
conclusion or at the time the audience interrupted his speech, the apostle Peter
declared that he “hath made him both Lord and Christ, this Jesus whom ye
crucified.” What did Peter mean by that? Going on further in 1 Timothy 6:15 Paul
declared that he was the “King of kings and the Lord of lords.” And in
Colossians 1:13 : “He delivered us out of the power of darkness and translated
us into the kingdom of the Son of his love.” Now read Ephesians 1:22-23—and you
want to keep your pronouns straight in this passage: “And he (that is, God) put
all things in subjection under his.” (that is Christ). Now, let’s go back. “And
he put all things in subjection under his feet and gave him to be head over all
things to the church, which is his body, the fulness of him that filleth all in
all.” Paul declares in these passages that the kingdom, the body and the church
are one and the same. So far as I have been able to read with profit in my
Bible, I find no phase, or aspect, or anything else of the kingdom, or any
future age or anything of that sort except that peculiar “phase,” if you please,
of the kingdom or the body or the church over which Jesus now is exalted as King
of Icings, and Lord of lords, and rules, reigns and presides as the head
thereof. And since Jesus is enthroned at God’s right hand in heaven, as
practically all of us, in line with the New Testament, agree —reigning there
upon his own throne, God’s throne and David’s throne of Old Testament prophecy,
the headquarters of the kingdom are to be found there, and I understand then why
Paul said that our citizenship is in heaven. And then you want to keep this idea
in mind. Since Jesus Christ reigns now in heaven over the kingdom which is the
church on earth, there must be some stand-ard of authority for this kingdom, for
this church, for this body, and I find that staled in John 14:26 where Jesus
told the apostles that he would send the Com-forter, or the Holy Spirit, who
would “teach you all things and bring to your remembrance all that I said unto
you,” meaning that Jesus didn’t teach them all of the truth, but he taught them
all that in his own wisdom it was best to teach them at that time, and that he
would send the Holy Spirit to finish and complete the job. So he said in John
16:13, that the Spirit would come and guide them into all truth. Then you will
find in 1 Corinthians 2:12-13, the apostle Paul affirming that they spoke in
words, not merely ideas, which the Spirit taught or supplied. Consequently,
Hebrews 8:5 says, “For see, saith he, that thou make all things according to the
pattern.” Now that passage was quoted from Exodus 25:40, where God gave the
pattern for the tabernacle to Moses and said in effect: “Go by the pattern in
building it.” Now, of course, Hebrews 8:5 is not telling us to build a
tabernacle. It is telling us that, as Moses went by the pattern in building the
tabernacle, so are we to go by the pattern, and this (the New Testament) is it
in all things affecting our relationship to God and man, so that this is a
standard or this is a voice to go by. We have the liberty to investigate what
others have said, to read the books of other men, but this New Testament, stands
paramount; this stands as the complete, final and all-sufficient revelation of
God to man, representing the faith once for all delivered unto the saints.
Consequently, if I am talking today about the social life of the Christian
citizen, I can only use this book as my authority.

Then when you look at that term, “social life,” of course that word “social”
restricts the lesson a little more, narrows it down to that part of our life
that comes in contact with other people; social—having to do with associations,
with contacts, with companionship, with fellowship with other people. So, then,
we are considering at this time how the Christian citizen —the person who is a
citizen of the kingdom over which Jesus the Christ reigns, we are considering
how the Christian citizen who is to go by this pattern which the apostles and
their colleagues have given us, we are considering how the Christian citizen is
to act in his contact with people of the world. I was very glad to see that
program which came to me put that word “citizen” in there. That gave us a
foundation to work on.

Now, this question: Somebody says, “But what difference does it make how we
live? Is it necessarily a question of great importance that we ought to preach
about it? Does it deserve a place on a lectureship pro-gram?” In the preaching
of the preachers, the teaching of the teachers, the instruction of the fathers
and mothers, and the emphasis of all of that, does it make a great deal of
difference about how we ought to live? I give you two scriptural answers to
that. The first one, of course, is in Php_1:27, where the Spirit had the apostle
to say: “Only let your manner of life be worthy of the gospel of Clirist,”
establishing there that the gospel gives a standard for living, whereby the
gos-pel is a measuring rod. And then another passage, 1 Corinthians 15:33. “Be
not deceived”—now let us stop a moment. When the Holy Spirit says, “Don't you be
deceived,” that’s serving notice on us that he is getting ready to tell us
something that people frequently get confused about. I, therefore, am especially
interested in it and it attracts my attention, and I read the whole verse now:
“Be not deceived, evil companionships corrupt good morals.” . I want you to see
something else right there. Or rather, I want us to be impressed with it, as I
am sure that you already see it. Paul gave us the positive side of it in that
first passage, “Let your manner of life be worthy of the gospel.” In this second
passage he turns and specifices something that we should be warned against.
Jesus Christ preached the truth and told people positively and definitely how to
live and what to believe and do, and then he turned right around and in the next
breath he said, “Beware of the leaven of the Pharisees and Sadducees,” Now, I’m
not advocating that anybody should go to war to the extent of carrying a chip on
his shoulder, acting ugly or insulting. I am not advocating that, but I just
mention that to let us be profoundly impressed with the idea that the belief
that you sometimes hear people express that you can preach the gospel and let
everybody else alone is flatly contradicted by these passages of scripture.
These two examples I gave you, as well as others of course, with which we are
familiar, show that the New Tes-tament preachers, beginning with Jesus Christ,
told us what to believe and do, and then turned right around and specified and
warned against the things we were not to believe and the things that were not to
be done. So it is, we have a twofold task set out for us, all of us, and
especially those of us that consider ourselves young people here today. We have
a job cut out now. The apostle says that you had better conform your so-cial
life, your life in contact with other people, to the principles of the gospel.
Then the apostle says, fur-thermore, that you had better see to it that you be
hot deceived by the idea that you can be strong enough to overcome some things
that put you in a compromising position, and that drag others down, but that
you'll be too strong to be unfavorably affected. And so it is that we have the
positive and the negative of the social life of the Christian.

Now I want to lay down four principles, four basic laws, in the regulating of
our social life Of course, this New Testament which we have been talking about
regulates it, because here is a standard and in heaven is a king where we get
our orders, but now, here are four very effective and helpful rules to go by. I
am not proposing and I don’t accept the responsibility of mak-ing out a 24-hour
schedule for any of us, telling us every place to go and every place not to go,
everything to do and everything- not to do, to say and not to say, though as we
move along in this talk, as it suits us we will be glad to specify some things,
but we are seeking in this lesson to lay down some basic laws which, if a man
will accept and use, will guarantee to keep him out of trouble, to keep him out
of questionable affairs and places and indulgences. The first one is in itself
very basic. This is it: that the nature of the kingdom, of the body, of the
church —the nature of the kingdom of Christ in which we hold citizenship—is
different from that of the world. And we read in John 18:36 the proof of that,
where Jesus says, “My kingdom is not of this world.” Paul begins to elaborate on
that when he says in Romans 12:2 : “Be not conformed to the world but be ye
transformed by the renewing of your mind that ye may prove what is the good and
acceptable and perfect will of God.” Paul says, “Don't be conformed.” Jesus
says, “The kingdom over which I am to reign is different from the world.” Then
if you will go with me to that familiar passage in 2 Corinthians 6 and drop into
the middle of that paragraph beginning with the 16th verse you will find this,
“And what agreement hath a temple of God with idols? for we are a temple of the
living God; even as God said, I will dwell in them and walk in them, and I will
be their God and they shall be my people,” Then he goes on to quote from the Old
Testament and say: “Wherefore, come ye out from among them and be ye separate,
saith the Lord, and touch no unclean thin#; and I will receive you and will be
to you a Father, and ye shall be to me sons and daughters, saith the Lord
Almighty.” If you will consult that passage, he is quoting from a number of
places, the gist of the whole thing being simply this: as back in the Old
Testament the nation of Israel constituted a distinct people, a dis-tinctive
nation, so the kingdom today which is the Israel of God, and the only Israel
that God knows, or the only Israel that God will ever know, that kingdom which
is the church, which is the body today, is a distinctive nation, and constitutes
a distinctive people. That doesn't mean, I take it, that we are to withdraw into
caves and live the life of a hermit, but, as they were to live distinctively so
far as their every day per-sonal life was concerned, so are we to live
distinctively as regards the character of the life of the church. It matters not
how many good and honest and moral peo-ple may grace this old world today, out
yonder in de- nominationalism and sectarianism, or in any other situation in
which they may not be identified with anything religiously, it ought to be said
truly that the average life of the church of Jesus Christ is consid-erably
higher than that of the world. I would that there was some way to impress that
upon all of us, beginning with myself, because I need that as much as anybody
else, of course. I would that could be burned indelibly into the hearts of
people as a basic, fundamental law, regulating the social life of the Christian
citizen as a recognition of the fact that we are not to be as other people, that
we are to be different. And I do not advocate by any means that we are to be
cranky or anything of that sort, but simply that we are to be as
suggested—different, higher, better, holier, and purer people with regard to
character.

That, of course, involves our relationship and our contact with other people,
because they will see us and we will demonstrate before them the lives we live.
Now, if you can go out here in Abilene where you live or in Birmingham where I
live and find a gathering of people of the town, and find members of the body of
Christ in every one of those gatherings, going where the world goes, doing what
the world does, saying what the world says when they get there, then you can
only say that the church is no different from the world. But if we recognize
that fundamental law that the nature of the church is to be different, then we
ought to be in a fair way to regulating our whole life so as to keep us out of
anything that is questionable whatsoever.


========================================================================
  CHAPTER 5: WORSHIP IN THE PROGRAM OF A CHRISTIAN CITIZEN
========================================================================

Worship In the Program of a Christian Citizen WORSHIP IN THE PROGRAM OF A
CHRISTIAN CITIZEN By Early Arcaneaux Brethren, Sisters, and Friends:

I assure you that it is a pleasure to me to come before you to contribute what I
can to the interest of this occasion and possibly contribute in some small
degree information to some. The information that I may be able to give, of
course, is all in the possession of most of you who are present. It should be in
the knowledge of every Christian, yet it is not always true that Christians have
the knowledge that they should have and that we might expect them to have.

“Worship in the Program of a Christian Citizen” is the subject assigned to me. I
suppose that it was intended to suggest that a Christian is a citizen of the
kingdom of Christ. Of course, I believe that is so. We want a little study of
the words in the investigation of any subject. Before we can intelligently
discuss it we must have some conception of the meaning of the terms we use. I
shall not take them up in the order. I take it for granted that no one would
object to this definition of a Christian—a man in Christ. A man in Christ is a
Christian. A man out of Christ is not a Christian; no matter how good he is, no
matter how often he prays, no matter how much he gives, he is not a Christian
and there is no way under heaven to make a Christian out of him out of Christ. I
suppose everybody believes that. I don’t suppose anybody would object to that.
Well, we’ll not preach a sermon now on how to get into Christ, but I don’t know
any way to get men into Christ except the way the Bible says they get in,
although a great many people say they are in that didn’t do that, but I am not
here to argue that point tonight especially. But I do wish to make this
statement: a man out of Christ, of course, cannot offer to God Christian
worship. He can’t (that’s good English, isn’t it?) not will not, but can not; of
course a man out of Christ can’t offer to God Christian worship. He can do
something and call it worship to God, but that’s not Christian worship. Now a
great many people out of Christ often say to men in Christ, “I’m just as good as
you are. I can get to heaven just as well as you can.” They propose to do it,
out of Christ,

You remember when Paul was on trial for his life and liberty when the Jews
requested that he be released at Caesarea and sent back to Jerusalem, planning
to lie in wait and take his life, Paul said, “I appeal unto Caesar.” Why did
Paul do that? Why was Paul allowed to do that? and thus take himself from under
the jurisdiction of every court in the Human empire except that of the emperor
himself at Rome? Well, he was a Roman citizen. Before that when Roman soldiers
had rescued him from the Jewish mob, they bound him with a chain and were
getting ready to get the truth out of him by scourging. He said to the
commander, “Is it lawful—you know, that’s an interesting question and a very
important question—is it lawful for you to scourge a man uncondemned without a
trial, who is a Roman citizen, a Roman?” This man said, “How in the world did
you get to be a Roman? I obtained it with a great sum of money.” Paul said, “I
was free-boni.” Though a Jew, his father or grandfather or great-grandfather
through some service to Rome had become a citizen and the son was bom a citizen
of Rome. Now, so far as I know, the apostle Peter couldn’t have made that appeal
unto Caesar. Those chains were taken off when Paul said, “I’m a Roman.” It
wasn’t lawful,, and they immediately took the chains off and Paul was not
scourged when his Roman citizenship became known to the Roman officer. The
Governor said, “Thou hast appealed unto Caesar, unto Caesar shalt thou go.” Why
couldn’t Peter or any other apostle have appealed to Cajsar? Because they were
not Roman citizens.

Now, in the ordinary affairs of life it would be a re-flection on your
intelligence to state facts of that sort. Every person knows that a man not an
American citizen cannot exercise the right of an American citizen, but citizens
of Satan’s kingdom persistently contend that they can do anything that a citizen
of the kingdom of Christ can do, be just as good, just as well off, and can go
to heaven just as well without ever becoming a citizen of Christ's kingdom as
they can by being a citizen of that kingdom. In Colossians 1:13-14, the apostle
Paul said to Christians in his day, “God has delivered you out of the power of
darkness, that is, the kingdom of the devil and has translated you into the
kingdom of his dear Son, in whom we have redemption through his blood, even the
forgiveness of our sins.” To be in the kingdom of of Christ is to be in Christ.
To be in the kingdom of Christ is to be a citizen of that kingdom, a Christian,
To be in the kingdom and to be in Christ is to have redemption through his
blood, even the forgiveness of our sins.

I want to talk about that word “program" just a moment. I suppose from the first
discussion in this lectureship that means the plan of a Christian’s activi-ties.
In the plan of his life, worship is included. There must be worship., the
worship of God in the program of a citizen of the kingdom of Christ. Well, of
course, worship of God is a part of the program of a Christian, I think every
man should understand that before he becomes a Christian. I think if the price
seems too great, he ought not to start. If he cannot afford to give time enough
once a week to worship God, he ought ately after church service today.” I’ll
start to the bedside of possibly my dying mother immediately after the worship
today. And he did. He started after the service, not before. A great many times
people are too prosperous to worship God. They get prosperous and they forget
God. That ought to be the occasion, one of the occasions on which we must feel
the obligation to worship God. Sometimes people in great bereavement don’t
worship. They think that’s an excuse not to worship. The sweet singer of Israel
had just received the most scathing denunciation ever addressed, I think, in
this world to a man, being told that your child is going to die and that the
sword shall never depart from thy house. The child did die. David had been
fasting, mourning, praying. He saw the servants whispering among themselves. He
understood what it meant. They were afraid to tell him the child was dead lest
he be overcome with grief. He said to them, “Is the child dead?” They said, “He
is dead.” David arose, bathed himself, anointed himself, changed his raiment,
went up to the temple of God and worshipped, went home, and called for food.
Then they knew he had lost his mind. Whoever heard of anybody acting that way
when somebody had died, a member of his family, his infant? They asked him,
“What does this sort of conduct mean? While the child lived you mourned, fasted,
prayed; you wouldn’t be comforted. of some is” (Hebrews 10:25). It seems that
even in the days of the apostles Christians, some of them, had begun to treat
lightly, had begun to neglect the regular assembly of God’s people to worship,
We are tempted to quote, “Forsake not the assembling of yourselves together on
the first day of the week,” but the verse doesn’t say that, of course. But the
verse does suggest that there was a regular meeting. We cannot learn when nor
how often from that verse. We have to appeal to other passages of scripture to
find that out, but the point here, and the only point I make on this verse is
that Christians are commanded to assemble, commanded not to forsake the
assembling of themselves together. Of course diobedience is a sin and when we
don’t assemble with Christians when they meet to worship God, we sin, we are not
living in obedience to God’s command.

I heard once of one extreme case—most people would consider it extreme and I
think most church members would say that it is extreme, but I wish we had more
extremists like that in the church, In a little town out west of here at the
foot of the plains, this brother was called to the telephone, and I was told
that brother was largely responsible for the existence of the church in that
community. I could understand that. The call came, and it said that his mother
was dangerously sick That call came early Sunday morning. This brother said,
‘Til start just immediately after church service today.” I’ll start to the
bedside of possibly my dying mother immediately after the worship today. And he
did. He started after the service, not before. A great many times people are too
prosperous to worship God. They get prosperous and they forget God. That ought
to be the occasion, one of the occasions on which we must feel the obligation to
worship God. Sometimes people in great bereavement don’t worship. They think
that’s an excuse not to worship. The sweet singer of Israel had just received
the most scathing denunciation ever addressed, I think, in this world to a man,
being told that your child is going to die and that the sword shall never depart
from thy house. The child did die. David had been fasting, mourning, praying, He
saw the servants whispering among themselves. He understood what it meant. They
were afraid to tell him the child was dead lest he be overcome with grief. He
said to them, “Is the child dead?” They said, “He is dead.” David arose, bathed
himself, anointed himself, changed his raiment, went up to the temple of God and
worshipped, went home, and called for food. Then they knew he had lost his mind.
Whoever heard of anybody acting that way when somebody had died, a member of his
family, his infant? They asked him, “What does this sort of conduct, mean? While
the child lived you mourned, fasted, prayed; you wouldn’t be comforted.

Now he is dead you appear to be comforted, you change your raiment, you go up to
worship, you come back to take food.” David replied, “While the child lived, who
knew but that God would be merciful and spare his life? But now he is dead. I
know he can not return to me, but I shall go unto him." Out of the depths of a
suffering and broken heart, confessing his guilt, praying God to forgive that
guilt, he went up into the temple and worshipped. Abraham, being tried, offered
up his only begotten son, the Bible tells us. At the foot of the mountain he
said to the servants, ‘The lad and I are going yonder to the top of the mountain
and worship,” What does that mean? “I’m going up there, the lad is going with
me. I’m going to build an altar, I’m going to bind that boy. He doesn’t know
what is going to be done, but I’m going to bind him, place him on that altar,
take his life, set fire to the wood and bum him as a sacrifice to God. We will
go up yonder to worship and return,’’ Who will return? The lad and I. We’re
going up there to kill him, yes, but God had promised that boy should be the one
through whom Abraham was to become the father of a great nation. Abraham
believed that God was going to do what he he said he would. He believed God.
Abraham was a man of faith; and'he believed too that he was going to kill that
boy, but he believed that boy was going to come back down the mountain with him,
because Paul said, “He accounted that God was able even to raise up even from
the dead; from whence he did also in a figure receive him back” (Hebrews 11:19).
But we worship, many of us, if it is pleasant, if it is agreeable, if it is
convenient, if it suits us. How far is that from the conduct of faithful
Abraham! But what do we mean by worship? What is worship? I think if we could
sum up, put into one word all of our ideas of respect, admiration, adoration,
reverence, love, recognition of authority, we would have a pretty good idea of
what the word “worship” means. The word “worship” most frequently in the New
Testament literally means kiss the hand, the mark of respects, of love for one.
The literal meaning of the word “worship,” the word that is translated “worship”
is “bow down.” Some one has defined man, and I have thought that a pretty good
definition, as a worshipping animal, Man is a worshipping animal. Nearly
everybody worships something, maybe everybody. Of course, I need not say for
your information that men ought to worship God, that Jesus quotes God as saying
through Moses, when the devil said that he would give him all the kingdoms of
the world if he would worship him, “Get thee hence, Satan, for it is written,
Thou shalt worship the Lord, thy God, and him only shalt thou serve.” Thou shalt
worship the Lord, thy God. That’s not enough, God is a jealous God. Thou shalt
worship the Lord, thy God, and him only shalt thou serve. Those two words are
very fre-quently used together. Worship and serve. Thou shalt worship the Lord,
thy God, the author of your being, the creator of your body, the one in whom you
live, move and have your being, who gives us life, breath, and all things.
Worship him, and him only shalt thou serve.

You remember when Peter went to the household of Cornelius, since an angel had
directed Cornelius to send for him, Cornelius, of course, had some exalted ideas
about the dignity and importance of this man, the apostle Peter, and he fell
down before him to worship. Peter said, “Stand up. I also, myself, am a man.” He
hadn’t become Lord God, the Pope, at that time. Stand up. Don’t fall down on
your face before any man to offer worship, don’t pay divine honor to man or
angel. “Worship the Lord, thy God, and him only shalt thou serve.” Sometimes
people say, “We are not idolaters. We know those images and those pictures are
not divinity.” Yes, and every intelligent heathen on earth knows that. They know
that too. It was idolatry to make an image of the thing you worship and fall
down before that image. You remember the beloved John on Patmos when a mighty
angel stood before him, John fell down before him to worship. The angel said,
“See thou do it not. Worship God. I am also a fellow servant” He didn’t mean
that he had once been a Christian on earth.

No, that angel didn’t mean that, but he was a servant of God as John was a
servant of God. “See thou do it not.” What? Worship the mighty angel. Worship
God. “Thou shalt worship the Lord, thy God, and him only shalt thou serve.”

We read in the Old Testament about God’s people at one time. The record says,
“They feared Jehovah and served idols.” They hadn’t entirely gotten over their
fear of God, but they served idols. If I were to make a speech against idolatry
among Christians, I suspect some Christians would think that was entirely
unnecessary. Certainly Christians wouldn’t need to hear anything of that kind.
Covetousness is idolatry, and no idolater shall enter into the kingdom of God,
and I think it is the most prevalent kind of idolatry. But I want your attention
to a very impressive passage of scripture, trying to bring before you the
importance of the matter of worshipping God regularly, recognizing that as a
part of your program as a citizen of the kingdom of Christ. In the first chapter
of Romans immediately following Paul’s well known statement, “I'm not ashamed of
the gospel of Christ, for it is the power of God unto salvation to everyone that
believeth, to the Jew first and also to the Greek.” Then Paul says, “For the
wrath of God is revealed from heaven against all ungodliness and unrighteousness
of men to hinder the truth in unrighteousness, because that which is known of
God is manifest in them, for God manifested it unto them.” ("God has not left
himself without witness,” said Paul in the 14th chapter of Acts.) "For the
invisible things of him since the creation of the world are clearly seen,
(things you do not see, we do clearly see), even his everlasting power and
divinity through the things that are made.” “The heavens declare the glory of
God and the firmament showeth his handiwork.” That great and noted governor, Bob
Taylor of Tennessee, once went to hear another great, distinguished Bob make a
speech, Bob Ingersoll. He went home, the governor did, and made this one single
comment on the speech. “I saw a man made in the image of God stand up and say,
‘There is no God.’ ” No wonder David said “the fool has said in his heart,
'There is no God’.” A few years ago a young atheist went out to make his maiden
speech. He stood before a large audience of intelligent men and women and began
this way: “Ladies and gentlemen: I have entirely got rid of the idea of a
supreme being, and I thank God for it.” He had succeeded about as well as
atheists usually do in getting rid of the idea of a supreme being.

You imagine a man strutting around down here on this little grain of sand on
which we live, which if you were out yonder somewhere near the center of the
solar system, with the most powerful telescope that man ever made, you couldn’t
find this earth we live on. Imagine a man strutting around down here looking at
the stars, the planets, the sun, and the moon, and the millions of solar systems
like ours if he knows they exist and declare, “There is no God.” So I call him a
fool. Well, suppose you had him on the stand, and ask him, “You say there is no
God?” “Yes.” “Is there anything you don’t know, past, present, or future, in the
earth, sea, or sky?” And modestly he admits, “There are some things of course,
even I do not know.” “All right. Thank you.” question: “If there is one thing
you do not know, how do you know but that the one thing you don’t know is that
God is?” And, of course, he wouldn’t know that either. They call themselves
agnostics. That's a good name for them, not knowing ones. But they think they
know and that they almost have a corner on knowledge. But agnostic means not
knowing. Now you will understand why I make those statements. They are people
that don’t worship God. They are not bothered with that. They don’t worship God,
they don’t believe in God, they say they don’t. They don’t pretend to serve God
. Of course you wouldn’t expect them to worship God. “For the invisible things
of him since the creation of the world are clearly seen being perceived through
the things that are made.” We see his attributes through what he made as we see
a man’s wisdom and skill in any piece of design or workmanship. Spurgeon said,
“Men have scoffed at and ridiculed the idea of design in nature, but nobody has
ever answered it.” And a man that can’t see design in nature, I think, is just
as sure for heaven as a pink-skinned baby. You don’t have to look far to see
design. You look at a human eye or a human ear. You won’t have to study long to
see design there if you can possibly see design in the watch, or anything else
man designed for one particular use. And the eye is a hundred times more
wonderful than a watch, and if I were to say the watch wasn’t made, wasn’t
designed, it just happened, it grew, it evolved, every atheist on earth would
say I was crazy, and every one of them would be right.

“Even as everlasting power and divinity are known through the things that God
has made that they may be without excuse because that knowing God they glorified
him not as God.” Now here is the thing I desire to call your attention to. God
left them without excuse. They knew God in the beginning. Up yonder made in the
image and likeness of God, not down there in the slime of the ocean bed, a
million years before the tadpole. Here is Paul’s theory of evolution. Somebody
wants to stop me right now, to say you understand I’m a Christian. I believe the
Bible, I’m an evolutionist. I’m a Christian evolutionist. A white black-bird!
"Because that, knowing God, they glorified him not as God, neither gave thanks.”
A great many people think that you don't have to do anything; and if you do
nothing you will be sure to go right into the pearly gate. They don’t worship.
What was their first long step away from God? They glorified him not as God. The
majority of people in the United States today do not glorify God as God and
thousands of church members do not glorify him as God regularly, if worship is
any part of glorifying God as God. Second, neither gave thanks. Let us turn back
to the Psalms just a moment and read a statement that I think every Christian
should memorize, the first two verses of Psalms 107 : “Oh, give thanks unto
Jehovah, for he is good.” You know what the meaning of the word "worship” is?
Worth-ship, a quality of and type of worth. If God is good, if God is great, if
God is omnipotent, if God loves men, and sent his Son to redeem them, if God is
the giver of every good and perfect gift, what is he worth to us? You say, “Oh,
nobody could answer that. That’s beyond our comprehension, and you think you
ought to recognize it, maybe say something about it once in a while?” “Oh, give
thanks unto Jehovah, for he is good, for his loving kindness endureth forever.
Let the redeemed of Jehovah say so.” If you believe God is good, every once in a
while tell him you think he is. Tell others you think so too. Thank him for his
goodness and manifestation of that goodness and fatherly care and loving
kindness. “He careth for you.” What a wonderful statement. Cast all your care,
all your anxiety, all your worry upon him as upon a faithful creator, for he
careth for you.

But, let’s note a little farther here in the first chapter of Romans. They
became vain in their reasonings, and their senseless heart was darkened. That is
step number three. They were doing something now. Professing themselves to be
wise, they became fools and worshipped and served the creature rather than the
creator. Paul said they exchanged the truth of God for a lie. They went into
idolatry, and Paul describes the course, that downward course of idolatry that
changed the glory of the incorruptible God for the likeness of the image of
corruptible man, and, of birds, and four-footed beasts, and creeping things.
Down, down, down! Paul’s theory of evolution. “Wherefore God gave them up in the
lusts of their hearts unto uncleanness.” That’s verse 24. In verse 26 again,
“For this cause God gave them up to vile passions.” Verse 28, "And even as they
refused to have God in their knowledge, God gave them up unto a reprobate mind
to do those things which are not fitting.” Three times solemnly repeated, “God
gave them up,” but they had first given up God. They had forgotten God, they had
failed to worship, they had failed to give thanks, and went into idolatry, they
substituted their vain reasonings for the light of divine revelation, and as
their idea of God descended from the almighty, ever-living Creator of heaven and
earth down to creep-ing things of the earth, their ideals went along with their
idea of God to the basest immorality practiced as worship to their gods. The
picture Paul paints in the first chapter of Romans is not too dark if a man has
read the history of idolatrous nations of the past or even of the present time.
And now, a few words with regard to the items of worship in Christian worship. I
shall not have time to discuss them at length, of course. We all understand, I
suppose, that singing is an act of worship. It is praise to God; that's a part
of our worship. Public teaching, exhortation, study together of the word of God
is an act of worship. A contribution is a part, an act of worship. I not very
long ago heard of one congregation that did not want money mentioned in
religious services. They thought that desecrated it, that it was too material,
too earthly, ought never to be mentioned; and I think before their day some
church objected and thought they ought not to make any public contribution
because that desecrated it. That didn't appeal to their ideas of the spiritual.
But listen, in Hebrews 13:15-16, “Through him,” that is, through Christ, our
great high priest, and every Christian is a priest. Old Testament priests,
Jewish priests, were typical of Christians. The high priest typified Christ.
Christ is our high priest. God made us to be a kingdom and priests unto his God
and Father (Revelation 1:6). John wasn't prophesying when he wrote that; hie was
recording history. God made us to be a kingdom and to be priests. Some folks say
that the Bible is prophesying and talking about the kingdom. But John made his
statement about both, said the same thing about both—he made us a kingdom and
priests. Now through that great high priest he says, “We offer up a
sacrifice”—that is an act of worship. Throughout the Old Testament sacrifice was
a part of worship. We have sacrifices to offer, certainly. Through him, then,
let us offer up a sacrifice of praise to God continually, that is the fruit of
lips. That spells vocal praise, in boxcar letters, if you pardon the classical
expression. Nobody could misunderstand that. I suppose nobody would think that
was mechanical, instrumental music unless they thought it was a Jew’s harp, but
we don’t use Jew’s harps. We are not under the Jewish law; we are not under law
to David either. We are under the law of Christ. But somebody wants to remind me
that Paul said, “psallo.” That means to use a musical accompaniment. Back in the
Psalms every time David used that word he specified the instrument. In the New
Testament inspiration says, “psallo,” and it spocifices the instrument, Singing,
making melody with your heart unto the Lord, not the harp of David, but
h-e-a-r-t as the instrument with which you are to accompany your singing
according to the command of Christ (Colossians 3:16). And the verse says, “And
whatsoever you do, in word or deed, do all in the name of the Lord Jesus.” Not
Moses, not David, not “I think,” “I like it,” “I don’t see any harm in it,” but
whatsoever you do in word or deed, do all in the name of the Lord Jesus.
Instrumental music never was a part of Christian worship. Many insist that it
is, although they can’t read one word about it in the New Testament. They do
read about the Lord’s Supper. They say they can get along without that; they
don’t have to have that.

I know of no better illustration than those of the disrespect that millions of
people manifest for the authority of the King of kings and the Lord of lords,
who said, “All authority on heaven and on earth is given unto me.” I suppose no
religious proposition ought to be clearer to every Bible reader than this, that
an act of worship should be an act of faith. An act of worship, then, must be a
prescribed act, an authorized act, because that’s the only kind of an act that’s
an act of faith. Let us note this reading: “Through him, then, let us offer up
the sacrifice or praise to God continually, that is the fruit of lips which make
confession to his name. But to do good and to communicate forget not: for with
such sacrifices God is well pleased.”

“Communicate” happens to be the same word translated “fellowship” in Acts 2:42.
“They continued steadfastly in the apostle’s leaching, and fellowship, in the
breaking of bread and the prayers.” I think a good while ago the scholars were
about equally divided on whether that meant fellowship in the general sense or
the contribution. Some of them said one, some said the other. I voted off the
tie. I decided it means the contribution. And for this reason: There were three
specific acts there —I don’t think the other was a general spiritual condition.
That looks like the contribution began back there in Jerusalem, the birthday of
the church which was Sunday morning, the first day of the week. That was the day
Christ arose from the dead, the day on which on several occasions he appeared to
the apostles, the day on which Thomas missed meeting the Lord because he wasn’t
with the others on the day, the day the Holy Spirit came, the day the gospel
began to be preached, the day the church was born, the day the kingdom of Christ
was inaugurated, They continued from then on in the apostles' teaching, in
worship, breaking of bread and prayer. And I note here in Hebrews, “But to do
good and to communicate, forget not for with such sacrifices God is well
pleased.” There is your praise, there is your contribution, the sacrifices every
Christian priest offers to God through his great high priest and sacrifices with
which God is well pleased. Your money contribution, then, God says, is a
spiritual sacrifice. And that is the business of Christian priests, to offer up
spiritual sacrifices.

Paul beautifully describes to us again in Php_4:18 the thing of the contribution
is acceptable, well-pleasing to God. Back to that second chapter of Acts just a
moment. Just a few days ago since I had that long distance call, I tried to find
out a little something about that, and I read two or three commentaries. I
wanted to see if I could verify some ideas I had. Finally I picked up Hackett,
and Haekett made this point that had already occurred to me. Maybe Hackett
suggested it to me a long time ago, I don’t remember, but he said fellowship
means contribution, quoting this passage in Hebrews, and that he thought, as I
stated awhile ago, that three of those words specified acts and the other did
not mean a spiritual condition. I didn't consult anybody else. Hackett agreed
with me, and so I didn't look up any more. Why should a man look any further
when he has found what he wants? And that was good authority. Right in that
connection I want to mention another thing or another passage on the same point
(1 Corinthians 16:1-2).

Now concerning the collection of the saints that didn’t originate the
contribution, that was order in the special contribution. “Now concerning the
collection. for the saints as I have given order to the churches of Galatia,
even so do ye. Upon the first day of the week let every one of you lay by him in
store as the Lord has prospered him that there be no gatherings when I come.”
And all my life and until not very long ago, every time I read “by him” it
seemed like just so much blank space. What does that mean? Nothing that I can
see, and I have never been able to see, but I just read it and go on. “Lay by
him in store.” I was reading Pendleton not long ago and he said that may
correctly be translated “by itself,” but McKnight’s book translates it, and I
accepted that, because I can see some meaning in that and I have never been able
to see any at all in the other translation, “Lay by itself into this fund upon
the first day of the week as you have prospered.” But I am concerned with
another thing here. Somebody is always wanting to know why don’t you read the
passage that says they ate the Lord's Supper on the first day of every week?
Well, 1 Corinthians 16:2 says “every first day of the week” in the original. The
translators didn’t think it made any difference so they just translated it
“first day of the week.” When you state that people do things on the first day
of the week, that means once a week. It couldn’t mean anything else. If you
think it means something else, what do you think it means? Do you think it means
once a month? Once a quarter? Once a year? Well, you do not designate any other
annual day that way. Or any other day of the month that way. You don’t say
payday is the first day of the week. It might be occasionally. You don’t say
Christmas is the first day of the week. You say that “Monday is wash day.” I
might give you another illustration, a better one, but I’ll not do it—on
Saturday, How many, how often, once a year? Now, I thought I was just hinting.

I want all of you to understand that I was officially told before I started to
talk as long as I wanted to. I suspect he will repent of that, but I’m going to
hasten to a conclusion, and by the time I say that about six times, I’ll get
ready to quit. Just briefly, listen attentively while I state these
propositions. Let’s see: Singing, oh, yes, I don’t want to forget this. Some of
you say you didn’t read the book of Revelation, did you? Didn’t you read about
the harp over there? Yes, I did. Did you read about the bowls of incense? Did
you read about the bowls of incense in the same verse? What did you do about
them? Do you bum it? Folks say, “I like instrumental music. I like to hear it.”
Well, I like to smell incense. That’s a good argument. I’m not going to
apologize to the author of that plagiarized statement. But I want to read that
verse briefly, just refer to it (Revelation 5:8). “Elders fell down before the
lamb.’’—Some say they are not any of our elders. Well, maybe not.—“having each
one a harp and golden bowls full of incense.” Then someone says you ought to
have bowls. But listen— “which are the prayers of saints,” What is? The incense,
the bowls of incense. It doesn’t mean bowls of incense. The first thing that
anybody that ever studied the book of Revelation, ought to learn is that it is
mostly given in symbols and that a thing never symbolizes itself. “Ah, it means
just what it says.” No, it doesn’t. No, the book of Revelation doesn’t, a good
deal of the time, at least, it doesn’t. There was one man who was once teaching
the book of Revelation, that is, he was standing before a class and they were
going through Revelation, and they read about a beast with seven heads, ten
horns, and somebody said, “Brother, what does that mean;” He said, “It means
just what it says.” No, it doesn’t- There isn't such an animal! Now these elders
each one has a harp and golden bowls full of incense which are the prayers of
saints. Is it a stretch of imagination to think that if bowls of incense mean
prayer, that a harp means praise? And you have a harp, yes, sir, and bowls of
incense. The verse tells us about their using the harp, “and they sing a new
song.” They were playing the harps of God. Praising him with the fruit of their
lips, making melody with their hearts unto the Lord.”

Now, when the Samaritan woman said, “You say that in Jerusalem is the place
where men ought to worship. We worship in this mountain,” Jesus said, “Believe
me, the hour is coming and now is when neither in this mountain or in Jerusalem
will you worship Jehovah.” That is, you won’t have to go to either of these
places. Why? Because there’ll not be any certain place. We are the circumcision
who worshipped by the spirit and have no confidence in the flesh (Php_3:3). The
Jews had a fleshly covenant and it is called the flesh in Galatians 3:3 and they
offered animal sacrifices. Those sacrifices and every other Jewish type were
nailed to the cross, legislated away by the authority of God forever. Any theory
that has those types, that old earthly temple made by hands in which God says he
does not dwell, shall be revived and fleshly carnal ordinances restored, animal
sacrifices offered again on this earth by the authority of God, turns the clock
of God back, makes it run backwards. The man that advocates them as a theory
dethrones Jesus, denies everything the New Testament teaches and proposes to
make the shadow come back and take the place of the substance. But, enough on
that point. I mention now these propositions, and I mention them briefly, just
as briefly as I can, then I’ll leave the subject with you.

Every once in a while somebody says, “If you will just read to me where God said
for me to eat the Lord’s Supper on the first day of every week, I’ll do it,” but
they wouldn't. And now, let me ask you this, lay down this proposition. If you
want me to read where God says for me to eat the Lord’s Supper on the first day
of every week; I’ll do it just exactly the minute you read that we ought to meet
on the first day of every week. I’ll read it in that same verse. Do you think we
ought to worship? Most folks do, but they say we don’t have to eat the Lord’s
Supper. I defy any man to undertake to prove that Christians are to meet on the
first day of the week without proving they ate the Lord's Supper when they met.
Now, a great many people think that this practice rests on just one verse. Well,
what if it did—if that verse teaches it? One man said to me once when I quoted,
“You are baptized into Christ”—he was a proteslant preacher— “Well, the Bible
just says that twice.” Yes, that’s all. God just said it twice. That wasn’t
enough for him. Most people think that the weekly observance of the Lord’s
Supper depends on Acts 20:7 alone. I just want to broaden that foundation a
little.

First, Christians are commanded to eat the Lord’s Supper. I’ll not take time to
read those passages. You know he commands you to do this “in memory of me”
(Matthew, Mark, Luke, 1 Corinthians , 11 th chapter), Christians are commanded
to eat the Lord’s Supper.

Now, No. 2. Christians are commanded to assemble together (Hebrews 10:25). That
doesn’t say the first day of the week, I didn’t either. All right.

Now, No. 3. Christians ate the Lord’s Supper when they assembled (1 Corinthians
11:20-33). That doesn’t say the first day of the week. I know it doesn’t. I
didn’t either.

Now, No. 4. (1 Corinthians 11:33), Christians assemble to eat. When? How often?
One man said to me once, “That was to eat a regular meal.” I said, “You think
so?” “Yes.” I said, “Well, the verse says that if any man is hungry, let him eat
at home.” “Well,” he said, "wo old there be any sin in eating a meal if you were
not hungry? You would just be making a glutton of yourself. Would that be a
sin?” Some people ought to eat before they go to church and they could stay,
they wouldn't be in any hurry to get home, on Sunday morning. But if any man is
hungry, let him eat at home. They came together to eat, don’t forget this. What
do you come for? If you worship on the first day of the week—but the Lord’s
Supper is no part of the worship, what do you come together to do? They came
together to eat, and he was talking about the Lord’s Supper. That was the
purpose of their meeting and that is not Acts 20:7.

Now, No. 5. 1 Corinthians 16:1-2, already quoted, “Lay by in store on the first
day of the week.” That passage assumes they would be together. Some translators
have translated that as “lay by at home.” I know that’s wrong. “Have you ever
looked into the original?” I wouldn’t have to look into it to know that it is
wrong. Paul said, “Lay by itself on the first day of the week that there be no
collections when I come.” I know, then, it wasn’t put up at home. I know another
thing. If it had been, most of it would have been gone before Paul came to
collect it. That wouldn’t have answered his purpose, and everybody ought to know
that. Some folks say they met on Saturday and then Paul said to lay by in store
on the first day of the week. If that’s right, what do you suppose was the
matter with Paul anyway? They met on Saturday, and he says lay by in store on
the day, the day you don’t get together, so it won’t have to be collected when I
get there.

No. 6. Acts 20:7, when the disciples came together on the first day of the week
to break bread, Paul preached to them ready to depart on the morrow. I wish I
had time to elaborate these propositions just a little, but I’ll not do it, I’ll
just state them over. We are commanded to eat the Lord’s Supper, we are
commanded to assemble, they ate the Lord’s Supper when assembled, they assembled
to eat the Lord's Supper, they assembled on the first day of the week to eat the
Lord’s Supper. You put these six propositions together, and you have a six-ply
cable that’ll hang any Seventh Day Adventist on earth by the neck as high as
Hamun until he is dead, and there’s not a man on earth can meet it, can answer
it. A few years ago I was reading after Dr. Scofield, and he commenced on Acts
20:7. “They came together on the first day of the week to break bread,” and he
said, “You know, some people derive from that the custom that all churches
everywhere should eat the Lord's Supper on the first day of every week. What a
tremendous gen-eralization from just one incident!” I’ve given you the answer to
that in these six propositions that I have placed before you. That leads us to
the second fundamental or basic law that grows out of Number 1. Since the nature
of the kingdom is different from that of the world, it would follow naturally
that we cannot be guided and controlled by a desire for popularity. Now I
mention that for this reason. Ever so often in talking with some people about
whether they should do a certain thing they’ll not argue a great deal about
whether it is all right necessarily, but they’ll throw this up to us every time,
“If I don’t do that, why I’ll just be ostracized. Everybody else does it and
they all go, and many of—sometimes they say most of—the church (though I think
they slander the church right there) do go. Many of the young people and some of
the older ones do these things, and if we do not do them, we’ll be very
unpopular.”

Now it needs to be indelibly stamped upon our hearts that this basic law is that
we cannot afford to be guided by a desire for popularity. I’ll give you two
scriptures to prove that. In Luke 6:26, Jesus said, “Woe unto you when all men
shall speak well of you”—and I interrupt the quotation there to observe this: If
Jesus had stopped there I wouldn’t know necessarily what he meant, because I
would read in the second chapter of Acts where the early church had favor with
all the people, with the Holy Spirit evidently applauding that. But then the
Lord comes along and tells us, “Woe, when all men speak well of us.” So there
would apparently be a contradiction. But no, Jesus avoided that and he didn’t
stop there. We’ll read the whole verse now. “Woe unto you when all men shall
speak well of you, for in the same manner did their fathers to the false
prophets.” Why, he gave me something to work on there. He gave me a clue to help
me to solve the problem, and I turn there-fore right on through the Old
Testament and see num-bers of cases.

You might take this one as one that is as good as any—1 Kings 22. You remember,
to make this long story short here, that Jehoshaphat, King of Judah, visits
Ahab, King of Israel, and you remember that Ahab said “Rnmoth Gilead belongs to
me, but the enemy has it. Will you take your arms and help me?” Jehoshaphat
said, “Inquire of Jehovah, if it is all right,” and so they brought in four
hundred prophets that were in the employ of Ahab, and they said, "Sure, God
indorses that, go up and be blessed.” If you will read that scripture you will
notice that Jehoshaphat was suspicious because he said, reading from the
American Standard version, “Is there not a prophet of Jehovah here besides?”
Another way of saying that, “I don’t put much faith in these fellows.” Why?
“They are preaching, Ahab, to please you. I want someone who will tell the
truth, regardless,” and so eventually they brought in Micaiah. But before they
brought him in a servant said, “Well, all the prophets are propheeying good, now
you do that. You be governed by a desire for popularity. When you stand before
those people, tell them what they want to hear.” Old Micaiah said, “As Jehovah
liveth, whatsoever Jehovah speaks that shall I speak.” And that’s exactly what
he did. There’s a lesson taught there, people. These four hundred prophets were
moved by the desire for popularity and there was only one man who said, “I’ll
just have to say what God says.” Now, young people, that is, of course, a lesson
peculiar to those of us who do what the world calls preaching, but there's a
principle there that applies to every mother’s son and daughter among us, and
that is: we cannot follow the example of the four hundred but must follow the
example of Micaiah—not of regulating our social life by desire for popularity
but by the desire to please God.

One other, John 12:42-43. In the record there John tells us, “Nevertheless among
the chief rulers also many believed on him; but because of the Pharisees they
did not confess him lest they be put-out of the synagogue: For they loved the
praise of men more than the praise of God.” Right there in the presence of
Jesus, listening to him every day, highly placed people of influence,
acknowledging in their hearts that he was right,, and yet fearing to come out
and take a stand because they were afraid of what the people would say! This is
recorded as an example for us. So principle number two is established. We can’t
go in for popularity. And then, principle number three. I should judge anything
as to whether I can engage in it by the fruits of that thing. You may turn to
Matthew 7:20 for just one verse on that. Jesus said, “By their fruits you shall
know them.” I cannot always know or be able to say what is the harm of something
possibly within itself. I may not be able to look into any practice and say,
“Bight there is the harm of that,” and convince you that it is so. But if I can
look at the long range results and see the fruits of that thing, that its fruits
are bad, I know that something is there that warns us to stay away from it. Now,
young people, upon that basis, I, as a gospel preacher, attack with all
earnestness and with all kindness at the same time, but deadly in earnest, the
modem craze for dancing. You may ask me, “What's the harm in it, Brother Meyer
?” I think I could put my finger on it, upon several answers to the question.
But I’ve learned this, brethren, and I am not boasting about learning much —but
I think I’ve learned this in preaching; if we will restrict our “territory” to
that which they cannot even attack, give them as little as possible to get hold
of in meeting the issue, so much the better. And I say, therefore, to the world
that I believe it is sinful for God’s people to engage in the dance, and I think
that I can, when necessary, put my finger upon many answers to the question,
What’s the harm in it? Well, I just give the people of the world as little
exposure as possible, and I say to them, “Here’s something they can’t touch.
Here's an argument they can’t even reach. Here’s something they can’t even
quibble about, because even those people who defend it will usually acknowledge
that there are results for the general run of participants that are bad.” They
will reply: “I don’t have to do some of those things. I do not have to drink
because others drink at the dance. I don’t have to do some other tilings that
they do also, some of which are unmentionable. But at the same time I can engage
in it in a more restrained way and keep my virtue and purity.” I reply to them
that if the fruits of the practice are bad and you will acknowledge it—many of
God’s people who engage in the practice will acknowledge it—that within itself
establishes the fact that God’s people should have nothing to do with it. Jesus
says, “By their fruit ye shall know them, and a good tree cannot bring forth
corrupt fruit,” and vice versa. Consequently, if there are corrupt influences in
fruits growing out of the modern dance, whatever the harm may be, I know that
there is something about it that should make God’s people stay away from it.

I would consider that you would not even insult anybody here today by asking
what are some of the bad influences from it. This is just one. My observation
has been that our dancers gradually lose interest in spiritual afFairs, and I
speak for a congregation that has about as many young people as most of the
southern churches and about as many dancers in it, I think, as you will find in
the average large-town congregation—and, fortunately, about as many who do not.
Somebody says, “Well, then, why preach of against it?” Because, if sixty percent
of them dance when I preach against it, if I did not preach against it I presume
about one hundred percent would. That an-swers that. And though I speak for a
congregation of plenty of young people that do these things, they understand
that I am not an enemy when I take that position. They understand full well that
I believe with all of my heart that the people, both old and young—and some of
the older ones encourage them —who do those things are bringing reproach, they
are introducing an element, an atmosphere and influence into the church that is
positively and definitely bad, and our social life cannot afford to carry us
where the fruit is bad. The fourth proposition is that of the question of
influence—but I’ll not be able to spend much time on that because I notice that
we have a “high-speed clock.” But to say the least of it, in 1 Corinthians 8 and
1 Corinthians 10, the apostle Paul argued that Christians, though they might
partake of the’ meat sacrificed to idols and not do this as an act of worship,
they had best leave it off because some would consider they were doing it as
worship and would be emboldened to be carried into things that were wrong.
Therefore, for the sake of their influence Paul says we’d better leave it off.
“Whatsoever ye do therefore, whether ye eat or drink, do all to the glory of
God.” Then, Matthew 18:7, I don’t know, brethren, a stronger passage on this
subject than this. Jesus said, “It must needs be that the occasions (of
stumbling) come; but woe to that man through whom they come.” Young people, we
are answerable for our influence over people. You might dance, you might do
this, that, and the other without hurting you whatsoever, but there are
countless thousands who cannot, and if that be true, we are responsible for the
proposition that we must forego certain things, give up certain things because
of our influence upon other people. I’ll tell you this. In Birmingham where I
live the very young people of the church who will defend dancing will
nevertheless criticize the life out of us if we use anybody in passing the
emblems at the Lord's table that does dance, and we do not knowingly use such
characters. They'll say, "there is no harm in it,” and yet they have no
confidence whatsoever in a person who will dance and then get up before the
public in the assembly worship. Suppose tomorrow it should be known that I was
one of the dancers. I have as much right to do it as you. It might take a rather
strong floor to accom- mtwlate my bulk, but I have the same right as you do. You
wouldn't have any confidence in me whatsoever. You would say, "Meyer, as a
citizen and a preacher you are responsible for your influence. You are doing
something that the fruit is bad. You are trying to be popular, you are not being
distinctive,” and when you say that you have the four basic propositions of this
discussion.

I believe these, people, are the four basic laws that govern us today in the
regulation of our social conduct. I would like to close this—believe it or not—
with Acts 17:31. The apostle says, “Inasmuch as he hath appointed a day in which
he will judge the world’’ by how often they got their name in the paper, by
whether they led out at the dance, by how many prizes they have won in bridge,
by how much they could take and still walk steady? It doesn’t say that. It says,
“He has appointed a day,” young people, “in which he will judge the world in
righteousness, by the man whom he hath ordained, whereof he hath given assurance
unto all men, in that he hath raised him from the dead.” He’s going to judge us
in righteousness. Lay down your principles, now: that the kingdom is to be
different; that we are not to seek for popularity; that we are to give attention
to the results of that thing; we are to give attention to our influence. If you
will regulate your social life as a Christian citizen by these fundamental laws,
then you will be prepared finally to be “judged in righteousness.” I thank you
for your very kind and earnest attention.


========================================================================
  CHAPTER 6: CITIZENSHIP IN AN ESTABLISHED KINGDOM
========================================================================

Citizenship in an Established Kingdom CITIZENSHIP IN AN ESTABLISHED KINGDOM By
Luther G. Roberts

I. Introduction

1. Blessings which we enjoy as citizens of this nation, the United States of
America. We, as citizens of the United States, are wonderfully blessed in this
fair land of ours. The constitution of the United Stales says that there are
certain inalienable rights which every citizen may claim, namely, the rights of
liberty, life and the pursuit of happiness. These are God given rights. Here we
have freedom of speech, the freedom of the press, and freedom to worship God as
his word directs. In the United States we have the prerogative to live a life of
useful service to our fellow men, and that brings happiness and joy to them and
to ourselves. We have the privilege of owning our homes, comfortable places of
shelter, privilege of earning a living, and the privilege of assembly to
worship. We have the protection of the great government. of ours. We should
truly be thankful for these and the many other privileges and blessings we have.
But as grand and great as are the blessings and privileges which we possess as
citizens of this nation, there are more glorious privileges which we may enjoy
here. We may be citizens of a higher and holier gov-ernment or kingdom.

2. Higher privileges in a greater kingdom. In this higher government we may
enjoy freedom that is freedom indeed; freedom from sin, freedom from fear of
death; we have the right to the remission of sins and the hope of eternal life.
Here we may be the children of God, heirs of God and joint heirs with Jesus
Christ. Here we have fellowship with Christ, the communion of the Holy Spirit,
fellowship with the saints, sharers in the grace of God, and fellow-worlcers
with the Creator of the Universe. It is in this higher kingdom where we have
“joy unspeakable and the peace that passeth all understanding.” All this we have
in the kingdom of our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ. This kingdom is an
established kingdom now, over which Jesus Christ rules as “King of kings and
Lord of lords.”

3. Men deny the fact that the kingdom is now established. There are many, some
who claim to be members of the church of Christ, who deny the existence of the
kingdom of Christ in fact. There are vague theories advanced by those who deny
that the kingdom is in existence now, that at some future age the kingdom will
be set up on earth, and Jesus will reign a literal thousand years on earth in a
millennial age. They deny that the kingdom exists in fact now, and likewise deny
that we are actually in the kingdom at the present time. The purpose of this
sermon is to show that the kingdom is established and that we may be citizens of
it.

II. Discussion.

1. Prophetic declarations concerning the establish-ment of the kingdom of
Christ.

(1) In the Old Testament we find the following prophecies, among others,
relative to the kingdom's establishment. Centuries before the incarnation of
Jesus in human flesh, God, through the mouth of his holy prophets, foreshadowed
the establishment of the kingdom. Isaiah foretold the establishment of this
spiritual kingdom over which Jesus Christ rules as King, some 750 years before
the birth of Christ. “And it shall come to pass in the latter (last) days, that
the mountain of Jehovah’s house shall be established on the top of the mountains
and shall be exalted above the hills, and all nations shall flow unto it and
many people shall go and Bay, Come ye, and let us go up to the mountain of
Jehovah, to the house of the God of Jacob; and he will teach us of his ways, and
we will walk in his paths: for out of Zion shall go forth the law, and the Word
of Jehovah from Jerusalem” (Isaiah 2:2-3). From this prophecy we learn that the
time of the establishment is to be in “the latter or last days”; the persons who
are to compose the Lord's house are to be "all na-tions"; and that the place of
the beginning of the house is Zion or Jerusalem. But again, we hear Isaiah
speaking concerning Jesus Christ the king. “For unto us a child is bom, unto us
a son is given; and the government is to be upon his shoulder; and his name
shall be called Wonderful, Counsellor, Mighty God, Everlasting Father, Prince of
Peace. Of the increase of his government and of peace there shall be no end,
upon the throne of David, and upon his kingdom, to establish it, and to uphold
it with justice and with righteousness from henceforth even forever. The zeal of
Jehovah of hosts will perform this” (Isaiah 9:6-7). In this prophetic
declaration we have set forth the birth of the king, his character and power, as
seen in the names given, the fact of the government, its establishment, the rule
or reign on David’s throne, the character of the reign— with peace and justice,
and the duration of the king-dom—"even forever.”

Another prophet, Daniel, one of God’s servants, a captive in Babylon, under King
Nebuchadnezzar, about 600 B. C., interpreted a dream which the king had dreamed
and in doing so he predicted the time of the establishment of the kingdom of
Christ. Nebuchad-nezzar in a dream had seen an image of gold, of silver, of
brass, iron and clay. This was an image of man with his head of fine gold, his
breast and arms of silver, his belly and his thighs of brass, his legs of iron,
his feet part of iron and part of clay. Daniel gives the meaning of the image to
represent four kingdoms. They were Babylon, the head of gold, which lasted until
538 B.C. Following Babylon was the Medo- Persian kingdom from 538 B.C. down to
336 B.C., the breast and arms of silver. This kingdom was inferior to Babylon.
After that there was to be a third represented by the belly and thighs of brass,
and it was to bear rule over all the earth. This was the Macedonian kingdom with
Alexander the Great, the head, from 336 B.C. to 146 B.C. Then there followed the
Roman Empire. The seven-hilled city was builded and from 146 B.C. to 476 A.D.,
the Roman Empire ruled the people of the earth. In Daniel 2:44 the statement is
made, “And in the days of those kings shall the God of heaven set up a kingdom
which shall never be destroyed, nor shall the sovereignty thereof be left to
another people; but it shall break in pieces and consume all these kingdoms and
stand forever.” Daniel tells when this kingdom would be established, “In the
days of those kings.” What kings? The kings of the last nation—Rome. Rome fell
in 476 A.D. Therefore, that kingdom of which Daniel prophesied has been
established.

Moreover, there was another event that the prophet Joel foretold would occur in
this same period “the last days.” Joel said, “And it shall come to pass
afterward, (or in the last days—Acts 2:17) that I will pour out my Spirit upon
all flesh, etc.” Joel states an event that is to occur in the last days, when we
find this event actually happening we shall have the period “the last days,”
which is the “last days” or age of God’s kingdom on this earth.

Once more we call attention to Daniel and a vision which he saw. “I saw in the
night—visions, and, behold, there came with the clouds of heaven one like unto a
son of man, and he came even unto the Ancient of days, and they brought him near
before him. And there was given him dominion, and glory, and a kingdom, that all
the peoples, nations, and languages should serve him: his dominion is an
everlasting dominion, which shall not pass away, and his kingdom that which
shall not be destroyed” (Daniel 7:13-14). This is a vision of Jesus Christ, the
Son of man, coming unto God, and receiving a kingdom which shall stand forever,
which Daniel saw in 555 B.C. Zechariah gives another prophecy in 520 B.C. of the
building of the true temple of Jehovah. “Behold, the man whose name is the
Branch: and he shall grow up out of his place; and he shall build the temple of
Jehovah; even he shall build the temple of Jehovah; and he shall bear the glory,
and shall sit and rule upon his throne; and he shall be a priest upon his
throne; and the counsel of peace shall be between them both” (Zeeh. 6:13, 14).
Here we learn that the man whose name is the Branch will build the temple of
Jehovah and shall sit and rule upon his throne and be a priest upon his throne.

(2) Prophecies in the New Testament concerning the kingdom. In the year 30 A.D.
we read a number of utterances concerning the kingdom (Matthew 3:1-2). “And in
those days eometh John the Baptist, preaching in the wil-derness of Judea,
saying, Repent ye; for the kingdom of heaven is at hand.” Jesus says, “The time
is fulfilled, and the kingdom of God is at hand” (Mark 1:15). The twelve
apostles were commissioned by Jesus, “And as ye go, preach, saying, The kingdom
of iieaven is at hand.” The seventy disciples were sent out and charged, “say
unto them, The kingdom of God is come nigh unto you” (Luke 10:9). In 31 A.D.
Jesus taught his disciples to pray, saying, “Thy kingdom come. Thy will be done,
as in heaven, so on earth” (Matthew 6:10). On the earth was the place where the
kingdom was to come. Again in the year 32 A.D. Jesus made the promise, “Upon
this rock I will build my church; and the gates of Hades shall not prevail
against it. I will give unto thee the keys of the kingdom of heaven; and
whatsoever thou shalt bind on earth shall be bound in heaven; and whatsoever
thou shalt loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven” (Matthew 16:18-19). It is
to be done on earth. How can Peter use the keys of the kingdom to bind on earth
if the kingdom itself were not on earth, and that in the lifetime of Peter? This
statement shows that the building of the church or kingdom was at that time in
the future, but the cir-cumstance that shows it was in the not too far distant
future is, that it was to be in the lifetime of the apostle Peter. Shortly after
this incident Jesus said, “Verily I say unto you, there are some here of them
that stand by, who shall in no wise taste of death, till they see the kingdom of
God come with power” (Mark 9:1). The kingdom of God was to come with power in
the lifetime of some of those who heard him make this statement. All of those
who heard the statement are dead, and therefore the kingdom has come. In the
year 33 A.D. Jesus said at the institution of the Supper, “I will not drink of
the fruit of the vine, until the kingdom of God shall come” (Luke 22:18). Also
there were some who “thought that the kingdom of God should immediately appear”
(Luke 19:11); and some, “who also waited for the kingdom of God” (Mark 15:43).
Jesus died, was buried and raised from the dead the third day, and was with his
disciples about the "space of forty days, and speaking the things con-cerning
the kingdom of God.” "They therefore, when they "were come together, asked him,
saying. Lord, dost thou at this time restore the kingdom to Israel? And he said
unto them, It is not for you to know times or seasons, which the Father hath set
within his own authority. But ye shall receive power, when the Holy Spirit is
come upon you; and ye shall be my witness both in Jerusalem, and in all Judea
and Samaria, and unto the uttermost part of the earth” (Acts 1:6-8). Jesus had
stated prior to his death that some of them should see the kingdom come with
power. Just before his ascension he informs them that the power should come with
the Holy Spirit. Jesus then ascended into heaven. Ten days later we have the
account of the coming of the Holy Spirit upon the apostles, “And he was numbered
with the eleven apostles. And when the day of Pentecost was now come, they were
all together in one place. And suddenly there came from heaven a sound as of the
rushing of a mighty wind, and it filled all the house where they were sitting.
And there appeared unto them tongues parting asunder, like as of fire; and it
sat upon each one of them. And they were all filled with the Holy Spirit, and
began to speak with other tongues as the Spirit gave them utterance” (Acts 1:26
to Acts 2:4). The Holy Spirit came on the first Pentecost after the resurrection
of Jesus, the power came then, and at that time, that day, the kingdom of God,
of heaven, of Christ, was established. Peter preached the first complete gospel
sermon and about three thousand were added in that day.

(3) Prophecies fulfilled. On the day of Pentecost mentioned here in Acts 2:1,
the prophecy of Isaiah 2:2 was fulfilled. This was the beginning of the last
days, for Peter said, speaking of the coming of the Holy Spirit, “This is that
which hath been spoken through the prophet Joel: “And it shall come to pass in
the last days, saith God.” This was the right time, "the last days,” the
required place, "Jerusalem,” and the proper persons, "all nations.” This was in
the days of the Roman kings as required by the prophecy of Daniel. Jesus had
ascended to the Ancient of days and received the kingdom as Daniel saw in the
niglit-visions (Daniel 7:13-14; Acts 1:9). This was the time of the beginning of
the reign of Christ, hence his kingdom had its establishment at this time. In
that memorable sermon on Pentecost by Peter, he said, "Brethren, I may say unto
you freely of the Patriarch David, that he hath died and was buried and his tomb
is with us unto this day. Being therefore a prophet, and knowing that God had
sworn with an oath to him, that of the fruit of his loins he would set one upon
his throne, he foreseeing this spake of the resurrection of Christ” (Acts
2:30-31). In verse 34 he states that Christ was at the right hand of God
exalted. Since he was raised to sit on David’s throne, and was then exalted at
God’s right hand, it is inescapable that Christ sat on David’s throne when he
went to heaven. This is in perfect fulfillment of the prophecy of Zechariah. He
was to sit and rule upon his throne at the same time, but he was to be a priest
on his throne, but he was made a priest when he ascended to heaven, he could not
be a priest on earth (Hebrews 8:4), hence he began to sit on his, David’s,
throne, (Isaiah 9:6), when he ascended and sat at God’s right hand. But his
reigning was simultaneous with his sitting, therefore his reign started at his
exaltation at the right hand of God. This was on Pentecost 33 A.D. at which time
the kingdom was established, and people had citizenship in it. Jesus is now
“King of kings, and Lord of lords” (Revelation 19:16); “the ruler of the kings
of the earth” (Revelation 1:5). “He must reign till he hath put all his enemies
under his feet. The last enemy that shall be abolished is death” (1 Corinthians
15:25-26). When death is abolished by the resurrection, then the reign of Christ
will end, not begin (1 Corinthians 15:24; 1 Corinthians 15:28). After Pentecost
there is not a statement in the New Testament pointing to the coming of the
church or kingdom in the future, but the kingdom and church are spoken of as in
existence in fact. “And he made us to be a kingdom, to be priests unto his God
and Father” (Revelation 1:6). “I, John, your brother and partaker with you in
the tribulation and kingdom and patience which are in Jesus” (Revelation 1:9).

Paul to the church at Thessalonica, said, “To the end that ye should walk
worthily of God, who called you into his own kingdom and glory" (1 Thessalonians
2:12). Again, in Hebrews 12:22-23, Paul writes, “But ye are come unto mount
Zion, and unto the city of the living God, the heavenly Jerusalem, and to
innumerable hosts of angels, to the general assembly and church of the firstborn
who are enrolled in heaven, and to God the Judge of all, and to the spirits of
just men made perfect,” then in verse 28, he follows this with this truth,
“Wherefore, receiving a kingdom that cannot be shaken, let us have grace,
whereby we may offer service well-pleasing to God with reverence and awe, for
our God is a consuming fire.” In writing to the church in Colossae, Paul
admonishes the saints, “Giving thanks unto the Father, who made us meet to be
parkers of the inheritance of the saints of light; who delivered us out. of the
power of darkness, and translated us into the kingdom of the Son of his love; in
whom we have redemption, the forgiveness of our sins” (Colossians 1:12-14). They
were in the kingdom. So, Paul preached “the kingdom of God” in Rome (Acts
28:31). Also, Philip the evangelist preached the “good tiding concerning the
kingdom of God” and when the people believed they were baptized, The Lord added
the saved to the church (Acts 2:47). The church, the kingdom of Christ on earth,
was established on Pentecost in 33 A.D. and has been in existence since that
time.

If people are bom again now, they are in the kingdom of God for Jesus said,
“Except one be bom of water and the Spirit, he cannot enter into the kingdom of
God” ( John 3:5). To be bom of water and the Spirit is to enter into the kingdom
of God, therefore, if people are bom of water and the Spirit in this age they
enter into the kingdom of God, and the kingdom exists in fact.

2. Some consequences to people today if the kingdom is not established.

First, if the kingdom is not established now, in fact, our citizenship is not in
the kingdom of Christ, and we do not enjoy the blessings of citizenship in the
heavenly, spiritual, kingdom. Ne do not enjoy the re-mission of sins, and we
cannot eat the Lord’s Supper. The Lord’s Supper was to be eaten in the kingdom,
when the kingdom should come, if the kingdom has not been established, we cannot
eat the Lord’s Supper. But the church at Corinth had the right to eat the Lord’3
Supper, if they would do so in the proper spirit and manner, therefore the
members of the church in Corinth were in the kingdom of God.

Again, if the kingdom is not an established institution, the Gentiles, we who
are assembled here, have not, and our fellow-Gentiles through the earth of every
century of the Christian era did not have the privilege of seeking the Lord and
enjoying salvation. In the council at Jerusalem regarding the question of
requiring the Gentiles to be circumcised, as recorded in Acts 15, Peter related
how he had been chosen to preach to the Gentiles that they might hear and
believe, and Paul and Barnabas told of their work among the Gentiles. Then James
made a speech in which he made the statement found in Acts 15:14-17). The
expression, “After these days,” is a part of the quotation from Amos the
prophet. This does not mean that after the Gentiles had heard the word the
tabernacle would be rebuilt, but after the things Amos had mentioned in his
prophecy had occurred. Why was the tabernacle of David to be rebuilt ? “That the
residue,” that is the remainder, “of men might seek after the Lord, and all the
Gentiles upon whom my name is called.” They could not seek after the Lord until
the tabernacle of David was rebuilt. But the Gentiles were already, at this
time, seeking after the Lord, and the Lord had directed Peter to go and preach
to and baptize them. Therefore, the tabernacle of David was rebuilt. The kingdom
was established before Peter preached to the Gentiles as recorded in the 10th
chapter of Acts. But remember that if the tabernacle of David is not rebuilt,
plainly if the kingdom of Christ is not established, the Gentiles caimot enjoy
remission of sins. But Christ commanded that the gospel be preached to every
creature, and that repentance and remission of sins be preached in his name
among all nations, and promised that, “he that believeth and is baptized shall
be saved” (Mark 16:15). But the great commission is nullified and void if the
kingdom is not established. But the commission of Christ is in effect. Gentiles
are subjects of it, and may obey the gospel and have their sins remitted. The
kingdom is an established fact.

3. Responsibility in the kingdom as a consequence of being citizens of the
kingdom.

Citizenship in the kingdom naturally carries with it a certain responsibility
and obligation. The first of these duties as a consequence of citizenship in any
govern-ment is to support the government. We support the civil government which
gives us protection and freedom by paying taxes and obeying the laws of the
kingdom. Likewise, we are obligated as citizens of the kingdom of Christ to
support it with our money, material possessions and with a life in harmony with
the demands of the king. Being a citizen means more than entering the kingdom.
One is not an influential citizen for Christ’s kingdom unless he is a good law
abiding citizen in the civil kingdom. The best citizen of the spiritual kingdom,
however, should be the best citizen who is in the civil kingdom. We render
service to the spiritual kingdom and king by serving our fel- lowmen in the
civil kingdom. There are some worthwhile citizens found in the civil kingdom
who, sad to say, are not in the spiritual kingdom. Some are members of both the
spiritual and civil kingdoms who are of little value or worth to either. But the
greatest citizen, the one the most useful and helpful, in the civil kingdom, is
the one who is likewise a citizen of the spiritual kingdom of Christ and who is
incorporating the principles of the kingdom of Christ in his daily life as a
citizen of the civil kingdom. The person who receives the respect, esteem and
honor of his fellowman is the one who exhibits in daily life the characteristics
of the head of the spiritual kingdom—Christ Jesus, our Lord. Poor living, living
according to the principles of Satan’s kingdom, hurts the cause of Christ more
than even poor preaching in the pulpits. The demands of the spiritual kingdom
are set forth in the following scriptures (Micah 6:8; Ecclesiastes 12:13-14;
Titus 2:11-12; Matthew 7:12; 2 Peter 3:11).

Let Christians resolve to support the kingdom of Christ with their lives, and
money, as well.

Another responsibility involved in citizenship in the kingdom of Christ, as in a
literal, material kingdom, is to defend the kingdom against all enemies. It is
the duty of the citizen of the earthly kingdom to defend the government against
its avowed enemies, saboteurs, fifth columnists, law violators, and all enemies
subversive of the best interest of the nation. In the spiritual kingdom we must
defend the kingdom against the enemies of the truth, the avowed enemies,
saboteurs, fifth columnists, and ungodly. Jude admonishes, “Contend earnestly
for the faith which was once for all delivered unto the saints” (Jude 1:3). Paul
gives the nature of our weapons, the armor of our warfare, and recommends the
wearing of the armor, and the use of the weapons against the enemy (1
Corinthians 10:3-6; Ephesians 6:10-18). The kingdom of Christ must be defended
against false teachers of false doctrines from within or from without (2 Timothy
4:1-7; Acts 20:28-32). A third obligation resting upon the citizens of the
spiritual kingdom is to extend the kingdom; that is, to gain new converts, and
take new strongholds, from Satan’s kingdom or territory. Jesus, the king, gave
the orders for enlarging the kingdom when he said to his apostles, his
ambassadors, “Go ye into all the world and preach the gospel to every creature”
(Mark 16:15). Again, when he instructed his disciples, “The harvest indeed is
plenteous, but the laborers are few: pray ye therefore the Lord of the harvest,
that he send forth laborers into his harvest” (Luke 10:2). Paul, by the Holy
Spirit, said to Timothy, “These things write I unto thee, hoping to come unto
thee shortly, but if I tarry long, that thou mayest know how men ought to behave
themselves in the house of God, which is the church of the living God, the
pillar and ground of the truth” (1 Timothy 3:14-15).

Again, he makes known the plan of God to the faith-ful in Christ Jesus at
Ephesus concerning the work of the church, “To the intent that now unto the
princi-palities and the powers in the heavenly places might be made known
through the church the manifold wisdom of God, according to the eternal purpose
which he purposed in Christ Jesus our Lord” (Ephesians 2:10-11); “Unto him be
the glory in the church and in Christ Jesus unto all generations forever and
ever. Amen.” (Eph, 3:21). In writing to the church of the Thessa lonians, Paul
stated, “For from you hath sounded forth the word of the Lord, not only in
Macedonia and in A chain, but in every place your faith to Godward is gone
forth" (1 Thessalonians 2:8). The Philippians were “seen as lights in the world,
holding forth the word of life,” “in the midst of a crooked and perverse
genera-tion.” So, as citizens in the kingdom, we should, “Go out in the waving
fields and gather some sheaves today.”

Since the kingdom is established in fact, people may enjoy citizenship in it in
fact. Becoming a Christian, a citizen of the kingdom in fact is a serious
matter. We understand this idea in matters of citizenship with reference to
civil governments, in contracts, and member-ship in fraternal orders. Being a
Christian in fact, is more than being a Christian in judgment and heart. Is one
a citizen of the United States because he has decided it is the greatest nation
on the earth, and because his sympathies, and desires are all with the U. S., if
being a foreigner here, he has not complied with the laws of naturalization?
Certainly not. Is a man the husband of a woman, though he has decided she is the
only one for him, and his sympathies are with her, when he has not taken the
vows of matrimony? No. Then from the same reasoning one is not a citizen of the
kingdom of Christ if he has not been “born again" by complying with the
conditions of Christian citizenship. Again, we do not think it unreasonable for
a king or government to demand that one comply with certain laws of
naturalization to become a citizen. Then why think it unreasonable that Christ
demands compliance with certain regulations in becom-ing a citizen of his
kingdom?

Finally, one may have a nominal faith in God, the Bible, in Jesus Christ, in the
church and benevolent works, which are the fruits of Christianity, but refuse to
comply with the laws of adoption into God’s family and never become a citizen of
the kingdom of heaven. One may partake of and enjoy many of the blessings
resulting from Christianity and yet be lost, for not obeying the gospel of the
Son of God, and becoming a citizen in the established kingdom, becoming a
Chris-tian, in fact. May those who hear the gospel, or those who learn it, by
reading a gospel sermon, obey that gospel and become heirs of eternal life,
citizens of the kingdom of heaven, the church of Christ on earth. One must
believe in Jesus as the Christ, must repent of his sins, confess his faith in
Christ, and be buried with him in baptism and raised to walk in newness of life,
to obtain citizenship in the kingdom of Christ.

III. Conclusion. Kingdoms of the earth rise to power of a world-wide extent,
sway the scepter of authority over the peoples of the earth, and then slowly,
but surely, yield to the mutations of time and perish from the earth. Lordly
Babylon lifted her proud head to rule the people of earth, but then, in her
fatness and revelry was over-thrown and soon forgotten. Imperial Rome raised her
head sublime and from the seven-hilled city ruled the nations of the earth, but
then crumbled and ceased to be. Napoleon, with his ambitions of world-wide
domin-ion, though conqueror for a time, yielded to time, his kingdom toppled and
he, the man of destiny, became an exile on a lonely isle. Kingdoms of this earth
pass away, they cannot endure; but the kingdom of Christ shall endure forever
and shall not pass away.


========================================================================
  CHAPTER 7: THE CITIZENS OF THE KINGDOM ORGANIZED FOR WORK
========================================================================

The Citizens of the Kingdom Organized for Work THE CITIZENS OF THE KINGDOM
ORGANIZED FOR WORK By L. R. Wilson My subject presupposes that the kingdom of
Christ has already been set up and all Christians are now citi-zens
thereof—-indeed, the theme of this entire lectureship assumes this fact. It is
superfluous therefore for me to elaborate on this phase of it. Paul took it for
granted the Philippians well understood his meaning when he said, “our
citizenship is in heaven” (Php_3:20). They were so familiar with the idea that
the apostle used an elliptical sentence—putting the term “heaven'1 for the
church, or kingdom of heaven. Matthew often referred to it as “the kingdom of
heaven,” while Paul frequently spoke of it as a “heavenly place.” It is
designated by these high terms because it is a spiritual institution,
heaven-born, and blood bought. An article appeared in one of our papers a few
days ago from the pen of a very able brother in which he de-clared the terms
“organize1’ and “organization” were not to be found in the Bible. Such timely
warnings are needed; I thank God we have brethren with the vision and foresight
to warn of the dangers which some of us might not see were it not for them.
However, we should not beat a retreat at the sight of the first danger signal.
Danger signs should serve to keep us on our guard but they should not deter us
from pressing the battle for truth and right. Ideas are sometimes expressed in
the word of God where more than one English word may be used to convey the
meaning. The term “organize” has been so overworked by the religious bodies that
the very meaning of the word is repulsive to some of us. When I lived in Tidsa,
Oklahoma, I was told that one of the denominational churches there had thirty-
seven organizations within the congregation. A member of another denomination
there told me they had eighteen different organizations in the church she
attended. The denominations are top-heavy with organi-zations. No one knows this
better than they. For several years many of the denominations have been seeking
to get rid of some of their organizations but they do not know how. The
organizations have fastened their tentacles around them with a death grip; it is
impossible to destroy the organizations without destroying the denominations
also. This fact is so clear that those of us who are free from the encumbrances
of human organizations are determined never to become a victim of them. Although
these men-made organizations loom before our eyes as huge monsters, threatening
to devour us, we ought not to be afraid of anything of which God is the Author.

Let me now give you a picture of the New Testament church—which is the kingdom
of Christ—and the Divine arrangement which God has ordained to govern this
sacred institution.

I. Christ is the head of the church. Paul very specifically says, “And he is the
head of the body, the church” (Colossians 1:18). Again he says, God "wrought in
Christ, when he raised him from the dead, and made him to sit at his own right
hand in the heavenly places, far above all rule, and authority, and power and
dominion and every name that is named not only in this world, but also in that
which is to come: and he put all things in subjection under his feet, and gave
him to be head over all things to the church, which is his body, the fullness of
him that filleth all in all” (Ephesians 1:20-22). From these scriptures we learn
that Christ was made the head of the church—or kingdom—after his resurrection.
Since he was raised to die no more (Korn. 6:9) it is not possible for him to die
out of office. He cannot then have any successor or vice-juror on the earth.
Christ is as much the one and only head of his church today as he ever was, and
all our orders must come from him.

II. The apostles of Christ are still in the church. While Jesus was in the flesh
he chose twelve disciples to be with him, whom he later named apostles, and gave
them the first place in the church (1 Corinthians 12:28).

These twelve were his plenipotentiary representatives and assigned to special
duties. (1) They were chosen to be Christ's witnesses. Just before his ascension
Jesus said, “ye shall be my wit-nesses both in Jerusalem, and in all Judaea and
Samaria and unto the uttermost part of the earth” (Acts 1:8). Ten days
thereafter Peter boldly declared, “This Jesus did God raise up, whereof we are
all witnesses" (Acts 2:32). At the house of Cornelius the same apostle again
said, “Him God raised up the third day, and gave him to be made manifest, not to
all people but unto witnesses that were chosen before of God, even to us, who
ate and drank with him after he rose from the dead" (Acts 10:40-41). We still
have the testimony of these witnesses today, and it need not be repeated. This
testimony will stand as long1 as the world stands.

(2) The apostles were chosen to be Christ's Ambassadors. Paul said, “We are
ambassadors therefore on behalf of Christ, as though God were entreating by us:
we beseech you on behalf of Christ, be ye reconciled to God” (2 Corinthians
5:20). As Christ’s ambassadors the apostles were the executors of his will. They
had authority to bind and to loose on earth {Matthew 16:19; John 20:22-23). This
work was of such a nature no one could succeed them in it. What they bound—by
the guidance of the Holy Spirit and special powers giv- en unto them—is still
binding1, and what they loosed is still loosed,

(3) The apostles were to be judges of God’s people. This Jesus stated in the
following words: "Verily I say unto you, that ye who have followed me in the
regeneration when the Son of man shall sit on the throne of his glory ye also
shall sit upon twelve thrones, judging the twelve tribes of Israel" (Matt.
19:28). It cannot be denied that “the regeneration” of the world is not going
on, and Christ is now seated upon the “throne of his glory.” This being true the
apostles are now seated upon thrones and judging “the twelve tribes of Israel.”
Certainly the “twelve tribes” signify all of God’s people. God no longer regards
the flesh of any man. “For he is not a Jew who is one outwardly; neither is that
circumcision which is outward in the flesh: but he is a Jew who is one inwardly;
and circumcision is that of the heart, in the spirit not in the letter” (Rom,
2:28, 29). Again Paul says, “There can be neither Jew nor Greek, there can be
neither bond nor free, there can be no male and female; for ye all are one man
in Christ Jesus. And if ye are Christ’s, then are ye Abraham’s seed, heirs
according to promise” (Gal. 3:28, 29). The “twelve tribes of Israel” signified
all of God’s chosen people in ancient times; all Christians are his chosen
people today, and as such they constitute the “true Israel of God.” The apostles
were seated upon thrones from the first Pentecost after the resurrection of
Christ and have thus remained ever since. They do not occupy material thrones
any more than Christ now occupies a material throne; they are enthroned in the
hearts of men, and are now judging the Lord’s people by what they wrote. Not
only are we judged by the words which Christ spoke while he was on the earth
(John 12:48) but we are also judged by the words of the apostles—his chosen
ambassadors. The threefold work of the apostles was of such nature it was to
continue throughout the ages. It was not such that other men could ever take
their places; nor was this necessary. What they did is as much alive today as it
was while they remained on earth. We have apostles in the church then today, but
they are the same apostles we had when the church was first begun.

III. In apostolic times the Holy Spirit ordained elders in every congregation
(Acts 14:23). These were called overseers, pastors, presbyters or elders (Acts
20:17, 28). It was the duty of these to take the spiritual oversight of the
congregation. They were God’s shepherds—under Christ, the Chief Shepherd. They
could make no laws for God whatever. Their duty was to familiarize themselves
with the law which the head of the church has already given and declare it unto
others. Moreover they were to protect the flock from false teachers and look
after the spiritual needs of the individual members, just as a shepherd looks
after the needs of all his sheep. The chief business of a shepherd is to see
that his flock is properly fed, watered, sheltered and protected from wild
animals. This is the relation God’s under-shepherds sustain to the congregation
over which they are today. Let us not forget that a shepherd goes before his
sheep and leads them, but he must exercise care not to get too far ahead lest
the sheep lose sight of him and wander away. God’s shepherds should lead their
flock, but they should be careful that all the ahee.p remain in sight lest they
be lost. It would be interesting—though tragic, I am sure—to know how many
members are lost every year because the elders lose sight of them, and they lose
sight of the elders?

IV. In apostolic times each congregation had a plurality of deacons (Phil. 1:1;
1 Tim. 3:8-13). The term “deacon” signifies a servant. It is not the word for
bondservant, or slave. It signifies one who serves in some special sense. The
duties of the deacons were of a material nature. This is evident not only from
the word itself but from the need which arose in the Jerusalem church, which
occasioned the appointment of the first deacons (Acts 6:1-6). When it was called
to the attention of the apostles that the Grecian widows were being neglected in
their daily needs they “called the multitude of the disciples unto them, and
said, It is not fit that we should forsake the word of God, and serve tables.
Look ye out therefore, brethren, from among you seven men of good report, full
of the Spirit and wisdom whom we may appoint over this business,” The deacons
then looked after the “business” of the church. This is a broad term and may
comprehend all the material needs of the congregation. A man chosen as a deacon
should be a man of some business ability. Any real business man will exercise
judgment in the conduct of his affairs; so also with the affairs of a
congregation—if they are the sort of deacons they should be.

V. The New Testament church had evangelists in it. The apostle Paul stated their
duties in these words: “I charge thee in the sight of God, and of Christ Jesus,
who shall judge the living and the dead, and by his appearing and his kingdom:
preach the word; be urgent in season, out of season: reprove, rebuke, exhort
with all longsuffering and teaching. For the time will come when they will not
endure the sound doctrine; but, having itching ears, will heap to themselves
teachers after their own lusts; and will turn away their ears from the truth,
and will turn aside unto fables. But be thou sober in all things, suffer
hardships, do the work of an evangelist, fulfil thy ministry” (2 Tim. 4:1-5).
The primary job of an evangelist is to “preach the word.” No greater work was
ever given to any man than this. We need to keep on our guard lest we make the
preaching of the gospel a secondary matter. Kinging door bells, making good-will
speeches for women’s clubs, and directing young peoples’ social activi-ties may
be important but they should never over-shadow the preaching of the gospel.
Whatever else an evangelist may be he should make his preaching first and
foremost. To come before an audience with a re-hash of illustrations and
incidents which have been used over and over is inexcusable. Although an
evan-gelist has the same gospel to preach ever and ever he should strive to
present it in the most simple, powerful yet pleasing manner of which he is
capable.

Before I pass from the work of the evangelist let me observe that the amount of
traveling a man does has nothing to do with the message he preaches or the
duties he performs. The tendency to distinguish between a man who settles down
to preach in one place and a man who travels about is growing. We often speak of
the "evangelist” assisting the “local preacher” in a revival. Sometimes we see
reports in the papers from brethren who are giving up “local work” and going
into the “evangelistic field.” Our intentions may be good but our use of terms
may cause a misunderstanding in the duties and the labors of those who preach
the gospel. An evangelist is any one who preaches the word. He may devote all
his time to preaching or he may devote very little to it. But whether he gives
much or little of his time to preaching he is an evangelist. Only a few years
ago we heard much about whether the New Testament churches (congregalions) had
“full-time” preachers to labor with them. The truth is they often had several
evangelists who devoted all their time to preaching. It is a great mistake to
look upon preaching as a “profession.” It is no more a profession than is the
work of an elder or deacon. Preaching the gospel is a work which is inseparably
bound up with our Christian life. Every Christian .should be an evangelist. Do
not misunderstand me. Not all Christians should leave all secular work and
expect others to support them liberally while they preach. Only those who can
render a service of such importance that brethren are glad to support them
should wish to do so. It is regrettable that some brethren are always “hunting a
place” to preach—i.e,, they are hunting a place where they may receive enough
for their services that they will not have to do any other work. A man should
make himself so useful in preaching the gospel, his brethren will not let him do
anything else. No man is worthy to be called an evangelist who looks upon his
work as a profession.

VI. A church must have a membership. We should not think of “the membership”
however as excluding the evangelist, the elders, and deacons. The membership of
any congregation embraces the entire body. It is unfortunate that we have
created somewhat of a gulf between the general membership and the men who take
the oversight of the spiritual and material affairs of the congregation. Every
member is important to the body. When every member comes to realize he has an
important place to fill, and a work which is vital to the body as a whole, he
will be more concerned about his duties.

You can now understand what I mean by the organi-zation of the citizens of the
kingdom. Christ is the head; the apostles whom he chose are his plenipotentiary
representatives; the elders in each congregation are the servants especially
chosen to look after the material needs of the local body; the evangelists are
those who preach the word, whether they devote all their time to this particular
work or only a part; the membership of any congregation comprehends the entire
body, regardless of the work each does. This is a very simple arrangement, and
the beauty of it is this simple arrangement is the most efficient known to man.
The reason is, it is God’s arrangement. Men err when they seek to improve on
God’s divine order. This simple order, however, should not prevent us from doing
the work God has given us to do in a systematic way. The truth is, it should
afford us the very opportunity we need for doing all our work in a decent and
orderly way. Nothing can be done effectively in a haphazard and indifferent
manner. It has been said, "Order is heaven’s first law.” In doing the work God
has assigned to us let us do so in the most orderly, systematic way of w'hich we
are capable. One of the qualifications of an elder is that he should be
"orderly.”

It is generally conceded that God has given us a throe-fold work. The first is
that of preaching the gospel, by which the world is to be saved. The second is
that of edifying the membership of the body. This must be done through the
constant teaching of God’s word. The third work is that of caring for the
material needs of the membership. The first two duties have to do with man’s
spiritual needs, and come under the direct supervision of the elders. In this
work they may be assisted by one or more evangelists whom they may choose. The
material needs of a congregation belong primarily to the deacons. The first
requirement is for each and every individual to know what his work is and to
qualify himself for it in the most efficient manner, then perform his work with
diligence.

Let us note some matters now regarding the sys-tematic methods which may be used
in doing the work God has assigned to us. We cannot give too much study to a
question of this kind. Evangelizing the world is a much bigger task, and far
more important than many of us have suspected. In order to accomplish the
greatest good we ought to have some well-laid plans. The man who ambles along,
trying to decide where to go, usually goes nowhere. The same is true with a
congregation. The elders of a congregation should carefully consider the various
ways of teaching the gospel and the most effective means of doing so. In
selecting a man who can give all his time to the preaching of the word the
elders should use the greatest care possible. When they have made a choice they
should then do all they can to assist the one they have chosen. Evangelists
sometimes find their task quite difficult because they have so little
encouragement and cooperation from the elders. On the other hand the man who has
been asked by the elders of a congregation to devote his time to the preaching
of the gospel in any locality should keep close to the men who have placed their
confidence in him, and who hold his hands up while he thus labors. Most church
troubles originate with the elders and evangelists. Sometimes a preacher is so
devoid of judgment and sincerity that he divides the elders of a congregation in
the hope of achieving some selfish purpose. Such a foolish act is a heinous sin
before God. As long as the elders and the “full-time" evangelist of a
congregation labor together in perfect accord there is little likelihood of any
serious church trouble. The first duty of the elders is to map out a
constructive program of teaching—with the full cooperation of the evangelist and
deacons—then pre-sent the program to the whole congregation in an in-telligent
manner and ask the entire membership to co-operate in carrying it out. When this
is done seldom will there be any difficulty in accomplishing that which has been
planned. We often complain at the membership generally because they do so
little, when as a matter of fact they have never been given anything to do; and
if they undertake to do anything of any importance without the advice and
approval of the elders they meet with a rebuff. In addition to the “pulpit
preaching*' expected of the “full-time” evangelist most congregations have some
class teaching on Sunday morning, Sunday evening, and through the week. If such
teaching is systematically and effectively done some one must supervise it.
Usually it is best to have one of the elders do this directly. For example, one
elder may be appointed to have the direct oversight of the Sunday morning Bible
classes for a period of one year. He then may ask those to assist whom he thinks
will serve best. All the teachers and helpers in this work are then directly
responsible to this one, who is responsible to all the other elders. Another of
the elders may be asked to supervise the Sunday evening classes, who likewise
selects the teachers, leaders, and those who are to serve in a public way in
this work. Another may be asked to look after the services which are regularly
conducted through the week. Every congregation should have some systematic plan
for distributing printed matter. One of the most effective means of teaching is
through the printed page. Every congregation should set aside a certain amount
each year for the distribution of gospel literature. One of the elders may be
given charge of this part of the work. Where there be any radio work one elder
may be assigned the job of looking after it. Usu- ally the “full-time
evangelist” does most of the actual work, of this kind, yet there are many
details which must have special attention in this work, and the as-sistance of
the elders can mean much toward its suc-cess. Nearly every congregation stresses
“visiting” by the members. Certainly we cannot emphasize personal work too much.
Every member of the congregation should be a personal worker. But in addition to
this some systematic order of visiting may be mapped out which will help. All
new members should be visited and encouraged. All prospective members should
likewise be called upon. Then the sick need visiting. Many times they are in
need of both material and mental assistance. If the right people call on these
it may mean a great deal to them. If the wrong ones call on them it may do more
harm than good. There is certainly a great need for some constructive work along
this line in most of our congregations. One of the elders may have charge of
this part of the work. Nearly every congregation expects the “full-time”
evangelist to “assume” all the duties of the elders, together with the preaching
of the gospel, and to make good in all of them. If he fails then he is eased out
and another man is called. We should not expect the evangelist to give all his
time to preaching, and do the work of all the elders, all the deacons and
sometimes the work of the janitor too. The best reason for placing one of the
elders in charge of each of these various duties is that each may assume a
definite responsibility. When all of the elders together presume to look after
all of these duties as a body they are usually neglected. There is an old
saying, “What is everybody's business is nobody’s business.” When all the elders
taken together try to look after all the work together it is usually not done.
But if one man be made responsible to all the ethers for the doing of a specific
job then it has a chance of being done. This is simply doing the work God has
given us to do in a systematic and orderly way—and in the most efficient way.
The work of the deacons should likewise be done in a systematic way. The first
job is to plan the finances. This should always be done in advance of the needs.
For example: The deacons should carefully consider the financial ability of the
congregation and the work it should do. In view of these matters they should go
over each item of work carefully and decide about how much will probably be
needed to take care of the various needs of the congregation. We usually speak
of this as preparing a “budget.” Call it a budget, an estimate of the expenses,
or whatever you wish if some foresight is not exercised in such matters a
congregation will not only find itself embarrassed many times but will fail to
perforin the work it should. When the deacons have estimated the expenses of the
congrega-tion it should then be presented to the elders for their approval. It
is certain the deacons cannot function independent of the spiritual overseers;
neither can the elders succeed without the cooperation of the deacons. When the
elders, deacons, and evangelist have agreed on a financial estimate of the
congregation’s needs and presented it to the entire membership—together with the
way and manner such finances are to be used—the congregation will nearly always
support the program presented. Of course, such a program will have to be kept
constantly before the members. If it is not many will forget about the needs of
the work and will wonder if it really is being done. In addition to the planning
of a budget for the whole congregation, which should be done by all the deacons,
there are many other duties which they should see after. To illustrate: One of
the deacons may be appointed by the others to look after the building and the
grounds. He may watch about the needed repairs of the building, the employing of
a janitor, the care of the building in every detail. If a light globe is needed,
if a bench or chair needs repairing, if the roof begins to leak, if the yard
needs cleaning, if the janitor is not doing his work as he should, let all
reports and complaints be made to the one who has been appointed to look after
such.

Another deacon may be asked to look after all the charity work. This is not the
preacher’s job. Suppose the preacher is asked to give aid to a half dozen
families in a single month. He modestly replies each time, “One of the deacons
has been appointed to see after such work; I will call him at once and ask him
to attend to this matter.” The one who has been selected to see after such work
ought not to have to wait and talk it over with all the other deacons and elders
before coming to a decision and doing something. The case may be urgent. Such a
person may err in judgment sometimes, but the congregation should stand by him
as long as he has this job assigned to him. If he should make too many errors
then the deacons may appoint another to do this; but as long as one of the
number is acting in this capacity he should take his work seriously, exercise
his best judgment, and the others should stand behind him in it.

Another deacon may be asked to keep the books, write all the checks, pay the
bills and act as a treasurer. This is quite a job in a congregation of any size.
His accounts should be rendered monthly and the congregation should oe kept
informed of exactly what is being done. In order to help this one to keep his
books straight and allow no grounds for criticism, the other deacons—at least
some of them—should aid in counting the funds when they come in so that there
can be no question as to the amount the treasurer has to spend. Regardless of
the particular duty assigned to any deacon he is directly responsible to all the
other deacons, and they to the elders, and to the whole congregation. And lest
we forget we are all directly responsible to God I may be asked now, if all
these various duties are carefully and effectively looked after by the elders,
the deaeons, teachers, and others who are chosen to help in certain capacities,
just what is the “full-time” preacher going1 to do?

Friends, a man who devotes his time to preaching the word, if he be worthy of
his high calling, will find plenty to do. In the first place, if he preaches and
teaches an average of once each day—and most of them will average more than
this—he will need some time for adequate preparation. But he ought to use this
time and not squander it. When he goes into the pulpit he should realize the
weight of responsibility resting upon him. He should understand that the destiny
of souls is in his hands; hence, he should present the message of salvation in
the most effective manner possible. In addition to the sermons he preaches and
classes he teaches, the preacher will find many opportunities for suggesting
ways and means to the elders and deacons for more efficient work; he will find
numerous opportunities for preaching and teaching outside the four walls of the
church building; he will find many opportunities of aiding in the circulation of
gospel literature; he will have many cases called to his attention by one of the
other members of the congregation where he will need to go in person and do a
special work which no one else is able to do. The evangelist will find more work
than he can possibly do even when all the others are doing their work to the
extent of their ability. Indeed, the more work all the other members do to
promote the kingdom of God the more opportunities will be presented for the
evangelist to teach the word of God and thus fulfill his ministry as God would
have him do.

You now understand what I mean by the citizens of the kingdom being organized
for work. God has given the organization, and assigned to us the work he would
have us do. We need no other organization. Every thing we need to do can be done
in the most effective and efficient manner conceivable through the simple
organization God has given. When each and every individual in the
congregation—the evangelist, the elders, the deacons, and all the others realize
the importance of doing the work for which they are fitted, and doing it gladly
and thoroughly, then we will have the citizens of the kingdom at work.

Now that we have this plan of work, which is so sim-ple and so efficient, let us
really work. No plan or system is of any value unless we use it. The parable of
the one talent man should never be forgotten. He was lost not because of any
tiling he had done, but because he failed to do anything. In the parable of the
vine and the branches the dead branch was broken off, not because it bore sour
grapes, but because it bore no grapes. One of the greatest tributes to Jesus
was, "He went about doing good” (Acts 10:88). With the organization our King has
given and the advantages we have over others because of this divine arrangement,
and with God’s Holy Word to guide us, we cannot fail in the work he has for us
to do—if we work. Our job is a big one, but not impossible. If we work at the
task God has assigned to us with the zeal and enthusiasm he would have us work
we cannot fail. I have never had any doubt regarding the final victory. Our
cause is right; our Lord and King is leading; with an unfaltering trust in him,
and a determination which will never surrender we will conquer in his name.
Tonight I call upon every child of God to resolve in your heart that you will go
forth to battle for truth and right, that you will dedicate your life, your
strength, your all to the cause of King Jesus until the struggle is over and
final victory has been won. To you who are yet in the kingdom of darkness, I
appeal to you to remain where you are no longer. Leave the ranks of the foe,
enlist under the blood-stained hanner of Prince Emanuel, and go forth to battle
with us till all the world has been won for Christ. If you remain in the kingdom
of darkness then you will go down in defeat and everlasting ruin at last. If you
become a citizen of the kingdom of our Lord and King, and bravely fight for his
cause you may be sure of final victory.


========================================================================
  CHAPTER 8: EVERY CHRISTIAN CITIZEN A TEACHER
========================================================================

Every Christian Citizen a Teacher EVERY CHRISTIAN CITIZEN A TEACHER By Byron
Fullerton Brethren and Friends:

I esteem the invitation to appear on this program as a great honor, and I am
deeply grateful to all concerned for opportunity that is afforded. I am also
pleased with the subject which has been assigned me. That subject is: '‘Every
Christian Citizen A Teacher.”

Statements from the word of God, together with considerable experience in the
teaching field have given me some insight into the importance of teaching the
word of the Lord. Let us look at some of what the Bible says about its
importance. As Matthew records the great commission, Jesus told his disciples to
go teach all the world, baptize those that were taught, and then to further
teach those who were baptized. This command is the basic one that mnkes and
develops Christians. It is the fundamental command of Christianity. Paul tells
us in Romans 10:17 that faith comes as a result of learning the word of God. In
John 6:44-45, Jesus tells us that no man can come to him except he be taught. It
is impossible for any human being to be saved without this teaching.

Let us look at the matter in another way. When men are taught anything they have
the power to listen with the intention of understanding, or to give a very lax
attention to the matter with the idea of neither understanding or believing what
they hear. When they give a listening ear they consciously or unconsciously
weigh the matter and decide whether to believe, or to disbelieve the thing
taught. If genuine faith in that which is taught is produced action based on the
faith then follows. Action depends then on the thing taught and not on something
else. If action is in harmony with the teaching and that which is believed, the
conscience approves. The approving is dependent on the teaching and the
believing. The order then is ```````````````1. Teaching; 2. Listening Ear; 3.
Believing Heart; 4. Obedient Life; 5. Approving Conscience.

Let us look at some familiar examples of how this works. The mother of India is
taught that if she throws her babe to the sacred crocodiles, and the baby is
caught and eagerly swallowed, the wrath of her God is appeased. She listens to
this teaching, she believes it, she acts on it, and her conscience approves.
Mine and yours would revolt, because we have been taught to the contrary. In
ancient times certain people were taught that Moloch was a god that demanded a
sacrifice of children thrown into a fiery furnace. They lent a listening ear to
this leaching, they believed, acted and their conscience approved. The approving
conscience was in harmony with the teaching. You and I have been taught the
truths of God’s eternal word, we have listened with an open heart, we have
believed, we have acted according to the teaching, and the faith that it
produced, and our consciences have approved. We have been taught that we should
not forsake the assembly, of the necessity of partaking of the Lord's Supper. We
have listened to this teaching, we have believed it, and when we act accordingly
our conscience approves. When we fail to do it our conscience disapproves. I am
sure that we can see that teaching is the basis of all of our ideas, of our
ideals, of our convictions and of our actions in harmony with these convictions.
Of course I am using the term “teaching” in its broad sense to include all that
we are taught in every way, and not just what we receive in a formal way in the
class room. From these scriptures and this reasoning we can see that the basic
work of the Christian citizen is the teach-ing of the word of God, which
produces the faith that in turn produces children of God. As an organization the
church is responsible for this work of teaching. In Ephesians 3:10 Paul tells us
that it is through the church that the manifold wisdom of God is to be made
known. In 1 Timothy 3:15 he says that the church is the pillar and the ground of
the truth. As a body the church is the Lord’s institution for doing this work.
But, since the church is made up of individiual Christians that places the
responsibility squarely on the shoulders of each Christian citizen. In the para~
ble of the talents Jesus teaches us the lesson of personal responsibility
according to our ability. The five talent man was not held responsible for
having five talents but for the use he made of them. The one talent man was not
held responsible for having one, but for the use that he made of it. He was not
condemned because of having only one, but because he went in cringing fear and
hid that which was entrusted to him. God says in Ephesians 4:16, “From whom the
whole body fitly joined together, and compacted by that which every joint
supplieth, according to the effectual working in the measure of every part,
malceth increase of the body unto the edifying of itself in love.” Notice that
it is by that which every joint supplies, and the work that each part does that
the body is increased and edified. The body cannot be stronger, or more
effective in its work than each part. In John 15 Jesus gives us the lesson of
the vine and the branches. He tells us that each and every branch is to bear
fruit, and that all that fail to bear fruit will be cut off and cast into the
fire. The responsibility of teaching then, falls on each and every citizen of
the kingdom.

Let us go back to the church for a moment, and con-sider further its part in
this teaching. Since it is through the church that God has ordained that his
manifold wisdom is to be made known, it is the work of the church to get the
gospel to the people of this world. He has ordained that this shall be done by
preaching and teaching. The church is local in its nature so far as this
teaching is concerned. The directors of the work of the local church are its
elders. The first responsibility for this teaching then rests on those godly,
consecrated men who are the elders of the various congregations. They sometimes
make the mistake of leaving this directing to the preacher, but they cannot thus
shift their responsibility. When they accepted the work of an elder they took
upon themselves this great responsibility of taking the lead in giving the
life-giving word of God to the world.

These men should carefully supervise the teaching program of the church over
which they are the over-seers. They should choose the teachers of the various
classes, and see that the teaching is properly done. They should instruct each
individual in the work that he as an individual may do at some other place than
the meeting house, and at some other time than when the church has assembled
together. It is also the work of the elders to see that each member of the
church has an opportunity for training in how to go about the part of the
teaching he should do. There is no more important part of God’s plan than the
great body of elders who direct the teaching program of the church throughout
the world. Honor to them. In preparing the individual for teaching, the first
duty of the church is to furnish him with the knowledge that he shall in turn
impart to others. That is God’s order, as it is given unto us by Paul as he
wrote to Timothy. He has to teach to other good men that which he had received,
and they, in turn, were to teach others. The first responsibility of the church
in its teaching program is to furnish each person who will come, especially each
Christian, with the opportunity to learn from the Bible, under the very best
situation possible. Of course the primary factor in getting this done is the
group of men and women who make up the teaching staff of the local congregation.
The elders have the re-sponsibility of seeing that the very best men and women
available are chosen to do this work. These teachers should have the very best
opportunities possible for training in the art of teaching. Each state in the
union spends millions of dollars training those who are to teach our children
the secular subjects in the public schools. We all recognize the wisdom of this
if we are to continue our system of popular education in this country. It is an
absolute essential under the present system. Yet, when we think about teaching
the word of eternal life, some among us have the idea that just anybody that
knows a little about the Bible can teach it as it should be. Some even have the
idea that if a person is popular with the members of the class, that they are
qualified to teach people the Bible, the knowledge of which is essential to
their eternal salvation.

I once held a meeting for a church that had a mem- her of a denominational
church teaching the young people's class, just because he was a teacher in the
public schools, and popular. The very first requirement for a teacher of the
word is that he or she must be a Christian, for how can he teach another to be
something that he refuses to be. Then the example of having the leaders of the
church allow such people to teach weakens the position of the church in the
minds of all. They get the idea that after all denomi- nationalism is not so
bad, or living unchristian lives is not to be severely condemned. We teach too
much by the life that we live to think of allowing any but a faithful Christian
to teach a class. The ability of the elders to do their work would be questioned
if they allowed such a thing to happen. I cannot be too emphatic about this
matter of allowing worldly people to teach the Bible to our children. Such
people cannot teach it as it is, and be true to their convictions. The next
requirement of a teacher is that he have a wide general knowledge of the Bible,
and a detailed knowledge of the lesson that he may be teaching at any particular
time. Some would remind us that character is the object of our teaching, and
that a knowledge of these facts is of minor importance, but I am reminded that
Jesus said we must know the truth in order to be free. I am also sure that the
greatest pro-tection we have against false doctrine is a real knowl-edge of the
truth. It is certainly true that the building of Christian character is the
purpose of our teaching, but it is equally true that stable character is built
on truth that is known. This body of facts from the Bible is the framework on
which we build the character that is the objective of Christian teaching.
Teachers in our public schools are required to know much more of the subject
than they will ever teach. This is supposed to give them an insight into causes
and effects that are an advantage in making facts clear to the pupils who are
being taught. Teachers of the Bible need to be equally well prepared, so that
they may make clear the teachings of God’s word.

Some people have a natural ability that will help them in developing into good
teachers, but this, like musical ability, must be developed, A persou may have
some natural ability as a mechanic but, unless he has some training in using and
developing this ability he will never be a mechanic. The same thing is true with
those who have some natural ability as teachers. This ability can be increased
and developed by proper training. The state recognizes this and spends the money
spoken of before. An untrained teacher can do a lot of good teaching the word,
but a trained teacher can do much more. It is the responsibility of the church
under the leadership of the elders to see that this ability is developed. Too
much depends on this teaching of the Bible to let the matter of developing our
fine men and women into really capable teachers go neglected. We are dealing
with eternal destinies and the souls of men. Our teachers need not only a
knowledge of the word that they are to teach, but they also need to know those
they teach. There is much difference in the nature of a four year old child, and
one twelve years of age. Their ability to comprehend that which is taught is
entirely different. A different method of teaching is needed. Yet in many places
we still send not only an untrained teacher in to teach these beginners, but
even one who has made no preparation for this particular lesson, and often knows
nothing of the facts of the lesson. If it is at all possible to do better it is
criminal neglect of the opportunities not to do better. Not only are facts being
learned by the child, but attitudes are being formed that will help to lead to
heaven or hell. A teacher needs then to know the age characteristics of the
group she is to teach, their capacities, their ability to comprehend, and the
method of teaching that is best suited to all of these. The next thing a teacher
needs to know is the method of teaching that will get the best results
considering all the conditions under which she has to work. To do , this she
needs to know a variety of methods, because different situations will probably
demand different methods, or at least some variation of the method. It is the
duty of the church under the ledership of the elders to provide this training
for the teacher. If the teacher has had training for teaching in the public
school she should be able to apply these methods to the teaching of the Bible,
but most are not able to do so. There needs to be special training in applying
methods to the Bible teaching. There ought to be training schools conducted by
every church.

Some think we ought to spend all of our time and money on preaching, and little
or none on class room teaching of the Bible. Surely, no one would seriously
propose that we do less preaching. It ought to be in-creased. No one would
question the method of gospel meetings, evangelistic efforts which have been the
main reliance of the church for growth. These meetings are our principal means
of getting the gospel to the unsaved. The church that ceases to be evangelistic
in its efforts will die. The Lord meant for his word to be preached. But, the
basis of all gospel preaching is teaching. About the only difference that I can
find between preaching and teaching is the exhortation and rebuking that is done
in the preaching. Teaching, rebuking and exhortation make up our preaching, but
teaching is always basic.

People do not attend gospel meetings in crowds as they once did. The automobile
has enabled them to go to so many more places that these meetings are no longer
the social affairs that they once were. Ordinarily we have a very few in our
audience who are not members of the church, or children of members. The Lord has
told us to teach, but has not told us that there is a definite time, or a
specific place or method to be used. He has given us examples of different times
and different methods. Jesus used the method best adapted to the circumstances.
That is what we should do. If we cannot teach the unsaved in our gospel
meetings, because they will not come, we certainly ought to de-vise other means.
A successful teaching program is no doubt one of the best ways of doing this
tiling that the Lord has told us is so vital to his work. This teaching program
cannot be successfully carried out unless we are willing to provide the means of
doing it. Rooms must be provided. Certain materials are necessary if the
teaching is to be done effectively. But, the main factor is the teacher. It will
always be the teacher. The personality of the teacher colors everything taught.
This brings us back to the statement made previously that these teachers need to
have special training for their great task. Our children, and all who come to us
for instruction are accustomed to the trained teachers and the facilities of the
public schools. How can we expect our children and others to be very interested
when we bring them to our classes in the Bible and have not made provision for
them to be successfully taught? We are saying to them that we do not regard the
Bible teaching very highly, or we would make greater provisions for teaching it.
They will get the idea that we, who are the followers of the Christ, regard the
matter lightly. They will naturally get the idea that it is not of very great
importance. This is the natural conclusion, and we are responsible for their
reaching it.

I have not forgotten my subject, “Every Christian Citizen A Teacher.” These
things have been said about the class room teacher of the Bible to emphasize the
point that the individual must have training in order to do the individual
teaching that is our subject. He has the right to this training so that he may
successfully do his part in the Lord’s plan of using each and every Christian in
teaching the word.

Thus far we have studied the work of the elders and the teachers of our Sunday
morning Bible classes. There is another vital factor in the teaching program of
the local church, and that is the preacher. As pointed out above, he is
primarily a teacher. A sermon that does not have some teaching in it is not
substantial. It does not give the proper foundation for the exhorting or the
rebuking that may be done. In this teaching the preacher presents facts that are
logically arranged. He is using the lecture method of teaching. The facts that
he presents are the basis of the action that he hopes will be the results of his
preaching. In addition to his work of teaching the preacher is generally looked
to for a certain amount of leadership. In many places he is the leader. The
elders either forsake their task, or the preacher just takes it over. This is
not as it should be. The elders have their work to do, and ought not to try to
shift it to some one else. The preacher has plenty to do without taking the work
of the elders. But, as pointed out, he is a vital factor in the program of the
church outside of the pulpit work he is to do. His ambition should be to not
only prepare people for obedience to the gospel, but to assist in the
preparation of every member to be a teacher. By his preaching, his leadership
and his attitude toward the matter he exercises much influence over the teaching
program of the church. He should recognize that his work is much more effective
if he has the cooperation of all in this matter of teaching. He ought to be
enthusiastic about teacher training, and about the elders taking the lead in
getting the whole congregation to teach.

After the individual has the necessary infonnation as to what he is to teach,
and some knowledge of how to present it to those whom he may have the
opportunity to teach, he is in need of still further instruction. He may know
the subject matter, and how to present it in the class room, but he probably
lacks information on how to get the opportunities to teach others individ-ually.
Shall he just go calling on his neighbors and tell them he wishes to talk to
them about the matter of their salvation? He may get results that he does not
want if he just goes bluntly about it. Some one who knows how to do what we
sometimes call personal evangelism should give him instruction in methods of
doing this. The elders and the preacher should cooperate in doing this work. The
Federal Council of Churches has substituted a program of intense personal
evangelism for the old fashioned revival meetings. Failing to get audiences and
to increase their membership by the old methods they have turned to another.
Just another illustration of the failure of denominationalism. The church of the
Lord can never afford to forget the Lord's command to go and preach his gospel.
This command ought to ring in our ears continually. We need to be still further
awakened to the need of evangelism, or missionary efforts. We cannot afford to
follow the methods that have failed with the denominations. They have failed and
we ought to learn by their failures.

But, personal evangelism is one of the Lord’s methods of getting the gospel to
the unsaved. There were other teachers in the early church besides those who
taught publicly. In Acts 8:1-4, Luke records for us the fact that the disciples
were scattered abroad from Jerusalem, except the apostles, and that those who
were thus scattered went everywhere preaching the word. These were not what we
today call preachers. The apostles were not among them. Most of them were just
good citizens of the kingdom. Later we have the account, of the work of Aquilla
and Priscilla. John tells us that Andrew went and brought his brother to Jesus.
This kind of personal evangelism should go along with the public proclamation of
the word. Neither should be substituted for the other. They should rather
supplement each other. The Lord intends for us to use all scriptural means at
our command for the extension of his kingdom. Personal evangelism is the
personal contact method, it is using the sword of the Spirit hand to hand. It
uses all of the army of the Lord instead of just the preacher. It means work and
responsibility for all. There is nothing like responsibility, that can be
carried, for developing interest, character and ability. It uses every Christian
citizen where he can do the greatest amount of good. It strengthens each and
every one who engages in it. If one asks another to be a Christian he feels a
personal responsibility for setting the right kind of an example before him.

Another thing the teacher who is going to do this personal teaching needs to
know is the attitude he should take as he goes out to teach.

We hear a lot these days about “hard" and “soft” preaching. I confess that I do
not always know what is meant by these terms. I am sure there would be no
controversy if we were willing to take all the Bible teaching on the matter.
Paul told Timothy that the servant of the Lord should not strive, but be kind
and longsuffering. Paul writing to the Thessalonians told them that he was
gentle as a nurse among them. In chapter five, verse fourteen, he tells them to
warn them that are unruly, and to be patient toward all men. In 1 Timothy 6:11,
he told Timothy to follow love, patience and meekness. In chapter two, verse
twenty-five, he told him to meekly instruct them that oppose themselves. Writing
to Titus he gave instructions to be gentle, showing all meekness toward all men.
Christ set the example in the use of these traits. If a person showed a
disposition to learn what he was teaching he was not severe. Usually he took the
attitude of a teacher toward his pupil. This instruction from Christ and Paul
cannot be ignored. It is there and it is correct. But, some would remember only
these truths and ignore others. They would think only of the kindness and
longsuffering we are to manifest in our attitude toward others. These ought to
characterize what we do, but we need to get all the teaching on the subject.

Let us look at the other side of the issue. Paul in-structed Timothy to use the
word to rebuke, reprove and correct. In 1 Timothy 5:20, he said, “Them that sin
rebuke before all.” In writing to Titus he gave instructions that certain
persons should be rebuked. God tells us in 2 Timothy 3:16 that his word is
profitable for reproof and correction. In 2 Timothy 4:2, he told Timothy to
reprove and rebuke with all longsuffering and doctrine. In writing to Titus he
gave instruction to rebuke them sharply that they may be sound in the faith. We
find there were times when Jesus rebuked severely. No more stinging rebukes were
ever delivered than some that Jesus gave. On Pentecost the apostle Peter told
the Jews plainly that they had wickedly slain the Christ. He did not mince
words. They knew that he was talking about them and to them. We cannot ignore
these instructions any more than we can ignore those that seem to be of the
other type. If we will just remember that the Bible talks about both of them we
will have our problem solved. On Pentecost Peter first taught those assembled
there. He reasoned with them on the prophecies and the facts that proved Jesus
to be the long-1 ooked-for Messiah. He taught them carefully and logically.
After teaching came the stem rebuke for their sin. He did not hold back. He did
not equivocate. He was blunt in telling them that they were the guilty parties.
They could not doubt what he meant. He caused them to cry out and want to know
what they could do about the matter. Then he proceeded with his instructions.
The rebuke based on the teaching accomplished its purpose. Later before the
Sanhedrin court Peter was severe in his rebuke of those who were in a position
to know better, those who showed no disposition to learn. When Stephen was
before the council, he first preached to them long and carefully. After the
teaching, he was severe. Like Peter he did not mince words. They knew that he
was talking about them. If we follow the account in Acts we will find this was
the rule generally followed. First was the teaching. Sometimes there was rebuke,
sometimes not, depending on the conditions. Always the instruction preceded the
rebuke. Some are inclined to reverse this order. They want to rebuke first, then
argue, and then try to teach. The rebuke coming before the teaching, and the
attitude of arguing the proposition usually causes the person whom we would
convert to turn away the listening ear. It is no trouble for one who knows the
truth to win an argument with some one who is in error. But, if we go about the
matter in such a way as to win the argument and lose the soul of our pupil we
have lost. Please do not get the idea that I am talking about public debates. If
these are carried on properly they are fine. The whole matter resolves itself
into this; if we are going to teach we ought to have the attitude of the
teacher. This takes a lot more patience than many of us manifest. If a person is
not inclined to give heed to what we tell him right from the very first we are
inclined to rebuke. The rebuke might be in order, if we are sure that the person
is a wilful sinner. Usually a person thinks he is right in what he is doing. He
is just in error concerning what he has been taught. He would like to do what is
right, and thinks he is. To such a person we should say, “Let us sit down and
study this matter. I will listen to what you have to say, and then you listen to
me.” This is the attitude of students. Here we have the proper setting for
reaching the heart of the one we would like to reach. In this we will have to
expose the error, and present the truth. If we get the other to seriously
studying we have opened up the way for his conversion, for the gospel is the
power, and the truth will have its way in a good and honest heart.

Suppose we find one who is unwilling to learn ? What should be our attitude
then? First, we should be careful not to let him get the idea that we think he
is hopeless. It is a trait of human nature that people try to be about what
others think they are. If we take the attitude that he is wrong because he wants
to be wrong, he may think we are right. Then we can do nothing to help him. If
we are sure the person is hopeless, and will continue in error, the only thing
is to rebuke him, and then try to see that he does as little harm to others as
possible. But, many of those who seem unwilling to learn are not hopeless. I
have known some who seemed like this who afterward made fine, useful Christians.
We should never forget that the gospel is the power, and that it is really
powerful. We may give up hope, but does the Lord give up? Perhaps the person who
seems like this is merely trying to cover up his true feelings. He is too proud
to give up without a fight. Perhaps he is only waiting for some excuse to start
in the other direction. Perhaps a stern rebuke will wake him up. If we feel sure
that this is the thing needed we should not hesitate to give it. Still we should
let him know that the rebuke is not administered because we are angry, or just
because our feelings are aroused. A rebuke administered when emotions are
aroused is apt to arouse anger and resentment on the part of the other. Let us
remember love, meekness, patience and longsuffering. In endeavoring to teach
those who disagree with us we ought not to assume the attitude that we are right
and they are wrong, and we are glad they are wrong. We realize that they are
wrong, but we ought to let them realize that we are sorry that they are wrong. A
friendly, helpful attitude is the correct one. We are certainly not glad that
any person is in error. We are not glad that false teaching has been done, that
people have listened to it and their conscience has approved of their acting on
this false teaching. God tells us through the apostle Paul as recorded in 1
Corinthians 13, that love does not rejoice in that which is evil. It is human
nature to rejoice that we are right and the other person wrong. It gives us a
feeling of superiority, but it is unchristian to rejoice that another is wrong.
It is right for us to be thankful that we have, by the grace of God, found the
truth. But it is not right for us to rejoice that another is in error just in
order to give us a feeling- of superiority. The attitude of bigotry is the
attitude of the Pharisees which was so severely condemned by our Lord. It is one
a Christian should not have. Our attitude ought not to be that we are right, but
that the Lord is right. Whatever he has said in his word is bound to be right.
We then are primarily interested in what the Lord has to say about any
proposition. We should approach those whom we would teach with this in mind. We
should say, “Let us see what the Lord has had to say.” It then becomes a
cooperative search for the truth with you doing the leading, because you have
the knowledge of where to go to find the truth as the Lord has revealed it. For,
while we are teaching we are still students. The true Christian will always be a
student. He is continually searching the word for the deeper truths that God has
revealed. This attitude will do much to open up the way for us to present the
truth to those whom we would assist in becoming children of God.

Some seem to be afraid that if we present the whole truth to a person we are
liable to turn him away. We are afraid to tell the whole truth for fear we will
fail to convert him. We need to remember that anything the Lord has said, and
that is needed by the person, should be presented. It is our duty to present the
truth. The Lord has revealed it and it is truth. Our duty is to present, to
teach as the Lord has revealed, and it is the Lord's part to give the increase.
This fear of the consequences of the truth is entirely ungrounded. It is human
nature that the best in us shall be aroused by that which is difficult. It is
the evil side that is aroused by that which is easy. There is a strong appeal in
that which arouses the best within us. In the Reader’s Digest recently there was
a statement that people are atti*acted most to that which stays most closely to
the difficult and challenging teaching of Christ. Our secular writers recognize
the psychological truth behind this statement. In religion we look for the
truth. We desire to be just as secure in this as it is possible to be. We want
to be lifted up and set on a higher plane by the religion we profess. If it does
not do this we do not desire it. We need not be afraid of teaching just that
which God has given us, so long as we do it in the spirit of humility, and have
the right attitude toward those we would teach. The individual, as well as the
public teacher or preacher of the word will find that it is a hindrance if he
holds bitterness in his heart toward any person. Bitterness in the heart will be
manifested in what we say, and the general attitude we take. The only thing to
do with bitterness is to root it out. A spirit of bitterness is the opposite of
the spirit of Christ. The Jews persecuted Paul, severely and yet he said that
the great desire of his heart was for their salvation.

He even went so far as to say that he could wish himself accursed for their
sake. This is the proper spirit to be shown if we are to make the right
impression on those we would teach. Bitterness manifested turns the person away
from us. He will naturally think that there is something lacking in the religion
of the person who shows this spirit, and he will be correct. Hatred and
bitterness do not go with Christianity. However, we should not confuse plainness
of speech, boldness in declaring the truth, with bitterness. Some are so afraid
of offending those outside of the church that they tremble when a preacher
speaks plainly. On the other hand it is not necessary for any one to get the
idea that we are bitter just because we speak plainly, if we remember the golden
rule, and exhibit the spirit of fairness in what we say and do. The spirit of
fairness is one that goes a long way with the people of America. If people get
the idea that we are unfair they are apt to sympathize with the one who teaches
error. He becomes something of a martyr in their eyes. This personal sympathy
will probably mean sympathy with the erroneous teaching and this is the opposite
of what we want. The spirit of fairness is a manifestation of the spirit of
Christ. Christ and Paul took no unfair advantage of their opponents. Neither
should we.

We can be militant in our teaching and preaching without sincere people getting
the idea that we are just naturally belligerent, and that we are just looking
for a dispute. Plain, positive teaching and humility go together, although some
seem never to have found it out. The early church prayed that they might speak
with boldness, and we ought to pray the same thing. The use of personal
evangelism is one that we have allowed the sects to take away from us entirely
too long. God did not intend that the generals, and com-missioned officers in
his army should be the only ones to do the fighting. He intended that his whole
army should carry on the fight. That is the reason we find so much said about
personal responsibility. Each and every Christian should realize that he is
indeed and in truth his brother’s keeper. It is the very essence of Christianity
that we should be interested in the welfare, especially the eternal welfare, of
others. Every Christian citizens a teacher means that the whole army, is being
used against sin and unrighteousness. This is what the Lord intended his church
should do. A realization of our neglect of this vital matter in the past ought
to arouse us to our duty. It ought to cause us to repent, and that means that we
will begin at once to make use of all the forces of righteousness in the warfare
against sin and error. Perliaps it is, after all because of the habit into which
we have fallen of allowing the preachers to do all of the evangelizing. Perhaps
we have copied too much from those around us. Our greatest hindrance is the fact
that most of usUpreachers do not know much about personal evange-lism, I am
ashamed to say that I do not know what I should about the practical side of it.
This part of my training has been somewhat neglected. But I realize the
importance of it, and am working to overcome my neglect of it in the past. We
all ought to awaken to repentance in the matter. Elders ought to be aroused to
where they would get away from the idea that our evangelistic program begins and
ends with the public services at the meeting house. Each of us ought to pray for
the strength to prepare ourselves for the doing of this teaching that is
absolutely essential to the salvation of those for whom Christ died. Of course
it ought to be impressed on all of us in this connection that we all are
teaching very forcefully by the lives that we live. We probably have no idea of
just who is looking at us, and seeing just how we interpret to them the doctrine
of Christ in the things that we do. Paul told the Corinthians that they were his
epistles, and so are we today. We are the interpreters of the Christ to all with
whom we come in contact, and especially to those who know little of Bible
teaching. We write in every heart the things that we do. This is an advantage
for us. It is really the most effective teaching that we do. To do this
individual teaching effectively we need to be definite. We need to concentrate
our efforts. Choose some certain individual, and plan how to make the contact
with him. Then using the word, and the principles that have been set forth
previously, be per-sistent in our efforts to teach him. Our persistency must not
cause us to become obnoxious to the person whom we are teaching. If we do we
shut ourselves out from the opportunity of being of help to him. Being
persistent without being a nuisance is an art that is not easy to learn.' It
means using a great deal of skill. But it can be done, if we exercise patience.
It may be that we will have to do some teaching, and then wait a while for
another favorable opportunity to begin again. It takes time for teaching to be
assimilated. We need to sense when this time has come. Here patience and
persistence are our watchwords. Of course this concentrating of our efforts does
not mean that we are to work on just one person at a time. If we do not
concentrate we are apt to do nothing at all. “Just anybody” usually means
“nobody.” We also need to set aside the time when we will do this teaching. If
we do not we will never have the time. None of us can say that we do not have
the time for this is just a matter of planning our work. The busiest people are
those who can find time for still more work. Those who cannot find the time are
those who do little or nothing.

Another point that might be mentioned as being practicable is the idea of
cooperation in this teaching. If we find that we are not getting along as we
should in our teaching efforts we should select some other Christian whom we
think should be suited for the task of helping us. We are not after personal
glory. We are working for the salvation of souls. Sometimes it might be better
for two to work together on the same person. This personal evangelism campaign
of the Federal Council uses the method of sending people in pairs. Jesus used it
during his work on earth. We also need to know all we can about the person whom
we are trying to teach, his habits, his likes and dislikes, his hobbies, his
occupation, and his religious convictions or lack of them. All of these help in
teaching him. You say all of this is a lot of effort and trouble. I agree that
it is, but it is certainly worth it. Can anything be more useful in the kingdom
of God than getting all the Lord’s army into the fight against sin and error,
using the sword of the Spirit, which is the word of God? Can anything bring us a
greater thrill than leading souls to Christ? Seeing someone walk forward to
accept Christ as a result of teaching that we have done wiU more than repay for
all the work we may do in this field. Of course, the great difficulty in getting
this work done is arousing the desire to do this personal teaching in the hearts
of all Christian citizens. This is the work of the preachers and elders of the
local congregations, It can be done by teaching along this line, by raising the
spirituality of the children of God, by increasing their love for the souls of
men, and by persistent preaching on the subject. This is the way we have
increased the power of the church to give. It has taken years to build it up to
where it now is, and there yet remains much to be done. We are far from reaching
the peak in giving. Carrying out this plan of the Lord for all of his citizens
to carry their part of the teaching load will take a lot of work, and it cannot
be done in a short time. Like everything the Lord has commanded, it can be done
with intense work and patience. Preachers, elders and all others making a
concentrated effort will do the job. Let us arise and do it!


========================================================================
  CHAPTER 9: OPPORTUNITIES IN THE SOUTH AND SOUTHWEST
========================================================================

Opportunities in the South and Southwest OPPORTUNITIES IN THE SOUTH AND
SOUTHWEST By Frank L. Cox

Introduction

“For it is as when a man, going into another country, called his own servants,
and delivered unto them his goods. And unto one he gave five talents, to another
two, to another one; to each according to his several ability; and he went on
his journey. Straightway he that received the five talents went and traded with
them, and made other five talents. In like manner he also that received the two
gained other two. But he that received the one went away and digged in the
earth, and hid his lord’s money. Now after a long time the lord of those
servants cometh, and maketh a reckoning with them. And he that received the five
talents came and brought other five talents, saying, Lord, thou deliveredst unto
me five talents: lo, I have gained other five talents. His lord said unto him,
Well done, good and faithful servant: thou hast been faithful over a few things,
I will set thee over many things; enter thou into the joy of thy lord. And he
also that received the two talents came and said, Lord, thou de- liveredst unto
me two talents: lo, I have gained other two talents. His lord said unto him,
Well done, good and faithful servant: thou hast been faithful over a few
tilings, I will set thee over many things; enter thou into the joy of thy lord.
And he also that had received the one talent came and said, Lord, I knew thee
that thou art a hard man, reaping where thou didst not sow, and gathering where
thou didst not scatter; and I was afraid, and went away and hid thy talent in
the earth: lo, thou hast thine own. But his lord answered and said unto him,
Thou wicked and slothful servant, thou knewest that I reap where I sowed not,
and gather where I did not scatter; thou oughtest therefore to have put my money
to the bankers, and at my coming I should have received back mine own with
interest. Take ye away therefore the talent from him, and give it unto him that
hath the ten talents. For unto every one that hath shall be given, and he shall
have abundance: but from him that hath not, even that which he hath shall be
taken away. And cast ye out the unprofitable servant into the outer darkness:
there shall be the weeping and gnashing of teeth” (Matthew 25:14-30).

'‘Opportunities” is the big word, the consuming thought, during this
lectureship. We have just read the parable of the talents, which is a parable of
oppor-tunities. A talent, a certain sum of money, placed in man’s hand
represents an opportunity for service. In the parable of the talents we see?

I. Opportunities given. A certain lord, going into another country, called his
servants before him and en-trusted unto them his talents, or goods. Our heavenly
Father has given unto us, his servants, wonderful op-portunities—many and varied
opportunities. The greatest of all the opportunities entrusted unto us is the
opportunity to evangelize—to preach the everlasting gospel in those regions
where Christ has not been named.

We have been reminded that there are teeming mil-lions of people in Africa, in
India, in China and other parts of the world who know not God, who are in the
darkness of sin and death. Countless opportunities are in those fields.

We have been reminded of the millions in our own nation—in the Northeast, the
Northwest, the Middle- west—to whom the pure gospel of Christ has never been
preached. Countless opportunities for doing good are in our own nation. But we
now come to a consideration of opportunities in the Southwest—in our own section
of the nation. Millions of people in our section know little or nothing of
Christ and his simple plan for saving the world. They are lost, unsaved.

There are innumerable opportunities to preach the gospel to the lost at our very
doors. Perhaps there is a person living: just to the right, or to the left, or
across the street, or on the same farm, or on the same block who knows nothing
of God's forgiving mercy. Perhaps a fellowman who walks and works with you day
by day, or who lives beneath the same roof is not a Christian. Oh, the
opportunities! We do not need to search for them—we have only to lift up our
eyes to see them. A harvest of souls is at hand—ready and waiting.

II. Opportunities used. Two of the servants in the parable made the proper use
of their talents. Many disciples of Christ, likewise, are making the proper use
of their talents—at every opportunity they are preaching or teaching the word of
God to the lost.

Opportunities used bring upon the user heaven's praise and commendation: “Well
done, thou good and faithful servant.” The Lord is pleased and commends us when
we prove ourselves useful in promoting his cause and kingdom. Opportunities used
are multiplied. The talents of the faithful servants were greatly increased.
“For unto every one that hath shall be given, and he shall have abundance,”
Whatever opportunities may come to you, use them, use them diligently, use them
faithfully. They will grow; they will increase. You will grow and increase your
strength as you fulfill your duty to man and to God. Opportunities used bring
joy to the user: “Enter thou into the joy of thy Lord.” We enter the house of
joy through service. There is no joy comparable to the joy that is derived
through the saving of a soul.

III. Opportunities unused. We are aware of the fact that opportunities are
frequently abused, murdered. But in the parable of the talents, the
opportunities were merely unused—buried, neglected. It is sinful to abuse our
opportunities. It is also sinful to neglect our opportunities. Many of Christ’s
disciples commit no criminal act—they do not murder; they do not commit
fornication; they do not rob banks; but they sin in that they neglect to do the
good which is in theft* power to do. He who buries his talent—leaves his
opportunity unused—is guilty of a sin, a damning sin. An opportunity unused
brings heaven’s condemnation: “Thou wicked and slothful servant.” The Lord
sternly rebukes those servants who make no use of their opportunities. It may be
a small matter for men or for brethren in the Lord to rebuke us—such a rebuke
may not be deserved. But it is a matter of serious proportion when the Lord
rebukes us—the rebukes which the Lord administers are always deserved rebukes.
All the idle, slothful, neglectful members of the church stand rebuked before
the Lord. An opportunity unused is lost—taken away: "Take away the talent from
him, * * * from him that hath not, even that which he hath shall be taken away.”
Just here we are reminded of an unfailing law which is as true in the spiritual
realm as in the natural: That which we neglect is taken away. Strength unused
becomes weakness. Opportunities neglected are lost— they slip from our hands. He
who neglects to use his power, will lose his power. An opportunity unused brings
heaven’s curse: “Cast ye the unprofitable servant into the outer darkness: there
shall be the weeping and gnashing of teeth.” Disciples may be lost, eternally
lost, cast into the darkness of the outside, because of neglect of duty.
Criminals are on their way to hell. So also are those people who wear Christ’s
name, sit at his table, but bury their talents. Opportunities unused will bear
witness against us when we stand at last before the Judge of all the earth.


========================================================================
  CHAPTER 10: OPPORTUNITIES AMONG THE OTHER RACES IN THE SOUTH AND SOUTHWEST
========================================================================

Opportunities Among the Other Races in the South and Southwest OPPORTUNITIES
AMONG THE OTHER RACES IN THE SOUTH AND SOUTHWEST By Harry Payne The first word
in our title challenges our attention and calls for some explanation,
“Opportunities.” My dictionary (Webster's Collegiate, 1936), reveals the
following definition: “Fit or convenient time; chance.” We ask, “For what?”
Therefore we associate some verbal idea of thought or action with the idea of
"fav-orable time or good chance,” and we call the combina-tion “opportunity.”
Some have felt and stated that opportunity comes only once or very few times,
and goes unretuming on her silent way; but, in my opinion, the truth is more
nearly expressed in the following lines from the pen of Walter Malone: ' “They
do me wrong who say I come no more, When once I knock and fail to find you In;
For very day I stand outside your door, And bid you wake, and rise to fight and
win. “Wall not for precious chances passed away; Weep not for golden ages on the
wane; Each night I burn the records of the day; At sunrise erery soul Is born
again. “Art thou a mourner? Rouse thee from thy spell! Art thou a sinner? Sins
may be forgiven! Each morning gives thee wings to flee from hell, Each night a
star to guide thy feet to heaven.”

Looking- at our title again, what is the meaning of “other races”? Considering
the American people as the amalgamation of such a diversity of races, we might
with difficulty attempt to draw the line; but in this article we will take
“other races” as those who differ most pronouncedly from the general American
populace—both or either in color or language.

Again, the limits of our survey are widely extended —almost as boundless as the
clear blue skies that cover them—the South and Southwest. This region, to us at
the present will comprehend Virginia, North and South Carolina, Georgia,
Alabama, Florida, Mississippi, Tennessee, Kentucky, Arkansas, Louisiana, Texas,
Ok-lahoma and New Mexico, Quite a territory—and one that is filled with
possibilities that make for opportuni-ties to preach and teach the unsearchable
riches of our Master’s matchless gospel.

Let us glance at some matters connected with the population of our great South
and Southwest. According to the latest complete census figures at my command
(the 1930 census records) there are approximately 37 million people in this
area. Of this number there are in the neighborhood of 9 million Negroes, about
one million Mexicans (mostly in Texas, Oklahoma, and New Mexico), and a generous
million or more among other distinct races of people (as Gemans, Czechs, French,
Italians, Indians, Japanese, Chinese, Filipinos, Hawaiians, et al). These latter
present no very clearly-marked lines of separation from the general population
as a rule, through there are exceptions in certain localities—as the German
settlements of central Texas, the Indian reservations of Oklahoma, or the French
sections of Louisiana.

What of the gospel preachers among these 37 mil- ion people? Here are to be
found about four-fifths (4/5) of the total number of our preachers of the church
of Christ—approximately 2300 of our 3000 among the white, around 225 of the near
300 among the black, and four out of the seven Mexican preachers. What does this
show? It is a startling revelation even for our own white population. There is
only one preacher for about every 10,000 among us; but, among the negroes one
for every 35,000, and for the Mexicans only one for every 200,000. A deplorable
state of affairs! Are there not opportunities outcropping here? Let us notice
some of them.

1. To train and support preachers and teachers Looking at the above, we can
certainly find evidences of a need for more trained workers—workers that need
"not to be ashamed, handling aright the word of truth.” Is the time ripe? Are
the chances good? The answer is apparent. The outstanding work of such powerful
proclaimers of the word as Keeble, Hogan, Miller, Paul English (de-ceased), and
Vaughner—with many others—has proved itself time and again. We need more such
faithful men! True, they are not to be had by the wishing, nor by the wholesale
method of selecting. Conscientious, capable young men must be filled with the
desire to be leaders. And they must be trained. Where? A pertinent
question—where? Here Lady Opportunity certainly beckons to us. Help is sorely
needed by those among our colored brethren who are interested in founding a
school. Brother G. P. Bowser, of Ft. Smith, Arkansas, has been endeavoring to
get one under way for several years. If we are wide-awake, looking for
opportunities—here is one. Probably most of our efficient colored preachers
(and, brethren, they preach plainer and more forcefully—and, incidentally, with
more results—than the great majority of us) obtained their training by going
along with and imbibing the methods of some other gospel preacher of more
ex-perience among them. A good way, indeed—but they all cannot afford to do
this, nor can a very considerable number be trained in this way. A plan surely
could be and ought to be developed at this point. An opportunity!

We all know the tendency among the colored people to depend on the ones they are
pleased to call “our white brothers.” Their financial condition is usually at a
low ebb—and much teaching is needed among them on the great subject of Giving.
{Please show me where it is not needed!) At any rate, a large part of the
support for their preachers must come from us. And what kind of a program of
support for the colored race —that people which is at our very door and in our
own kitchens—does the average church among us have? Brethren, the Negro work, in
most cases, will have to be nurtured and supported by the white people for many
years to come. Call a colored preacher—a good oue—to your city or community (if,
of course, there is a Negro population there); support him financially and
otherwise; and watch him convert a surprising number of his people—and generally
some white people for good meature. For an example : Luke Miller conducted a
meeting in Temple, Texas, last summer (1940) through the combined efforts of the
two white congregations in that little city. Results: a congregation of 75 souls
was established; a short, eye-openmg debate was conducted with a sectarian
preacher with good results ; the white Christians were strengthened. There had
been no colored church there previously. Such an illustration brings us face to
face with another opportunity. But before passing from this thought (our
oppor-tunities to train and support preachers), we would fail in our purpose not
to take a look at Mexican work. We saw that the major portion of Mexican
population is in Texas, New Mexico, and Oklahoma, the latter having only about
8,000, Of this population, numbering near a million, there are only about 400
members of the New Testament church. And only four or five native preachers.

Some of us wag the head and give up with the thought that the great majority of
the Mexicans are nominally Roman Catholic. So they are, but that does not lessen
the vital force of the Great Commission (Mark 16:15, 16). It only magnifies our
obligation to train and support workers for this great and difficult task. To be
sure, we need more men who understand the nature and philosophy of these Mexican
“strangers within our gates.” We have, in men like Dias, Esquivel, Rodriguez,
Cantu, and Zamorano, the nucleus of a pow-erful force of gospel preachers. They
need help—and need it bad! Their work has long been done in quietness and
relative oblivion—as far as the average one of us is concerned or aware. But
there is now a spark of brighter light appearing though slowly it may be coming.
More support, yes, much more support, must be forthcoming before the great
harvest can be successfully reaped. As with the colored people, this help will
have to come from us. Several faithful, hardworking brethren among us have been
laboring with our Latin-American people for a number of years. Chief among the
“old guard" are Brethren H. L. Schug, John F. Wolfe, Jesse G. Gill, and J. W.
Treat. Their perseverance and determination is heartening. Other men are being
fired with the zeal—the spirit of true missionaries—and are doing much for the
cause among the Mexicans. Among them are Brethren T. R. Atkin-son, H. T.
Steadman, W. J. McDonald, and William Mc-Daniel. All of these mentioned,
together with the Mexican preachers, should be encouraged and sent to break the
Bread of Life to our Catholic friends of the South. To my mind, one of the
greatest opportunities we have anywhere is to be found in the support and
en-couragement we can give to Brother Wolfe and Brother Atkinson in their noble
efforts at El Paso. “The Pass of the North” it is called by the Mexicans—and it
can well be that pass through which the “light of the glorious gospel of the Son
of God” may be shed abroad into Old Mexico, A strong Mexican congregation at El
Paso, supporting and being aided by all of us in supporting the proposed
Training School for Boys and young men, under the able guidance of Brother Wolfe
and those who will be his assistants as teachers, you accomplish mighty works in
our Master’s name. Worthy of our attention and aid? What could be worthier than
the possibility of disseminating the word of God, the seed of the kingdom, to
the Latin-American populations of Mexico, Central and South America. Let us
remember the Escuela de Froftas (School of Prophets) —name of the Boy’s School
of El Paso—and support its noble efforts. As to the other races among us—Indian,
French, German, et al—even less has been done among them than with the negroes
and Mexicans. Much can be done by us in our mother tongue, though many German
Lutherans prefer their sermons in Deutsche, though there are many Acadian French
in southern Louisiana, and though the Indians of Oklahoma, New Mexico, and North
Carolina still hold to their native Cherokee, Hopi, or Creek languages. For the
most part, even with the Mexicans, much can be accomplished among them,
es-pecially among the later generations, by preaching to them in English.
Therefore, preach era and workers for this field ought to be trained and
supported. Too many times it is sadly true that a congregation of 200 to 500
members will make such a statement as this: “We can’t spare our regular minister
for that sort of work —and we are not able, after we take care of the bills
here, to support anyone else in doing such a work. Besides all that, it does not
build us up here.” Opportunities crushed to earth by selfishness, stinginess,
short-sightedness, spiritual stupor.

2. To Assist in the Regular Services and Building Programs Connected with the
former opportunity—and joined hard to it—there follows the chance and obligation
to “see the work through.” Here is where we so frequently fail—even in the
mission work we attempt among our own race. A real problem and a golden
opportunity is couched here. Who will meet and grasp the opportunity? Who will
face the difficult problem? An illustration: Brother Hogan is called to conduct
a meeting. A great ingathering results. Then Brother Hogan has to be on his way
to other evangelistic en-deavors. The white brethren heartily enter into the
support of the colored work for a time. Some of the leaders even go and help
conduct services (very few). But about December or January the ardent spirit and
helping hand is on the wane—and finally the struggling band of poor and untaught
Negroes becomes “that worthless, impossible, thick-headed bunch.” How may we
remedy this situation? An injection of perseverance, or more expressively,
“stiek-to-it-ive-ness,” would work wonders. Let us work on in the face of and in
spite of seeming defeat. Again, a suitable place of worship would prove
immensely beneficial. This is recognized in any endeavor—and should be
remembered in our work with our “other races.” And, as to the house of worship,
let us not erect it or move it to some secluded, out-of-the-way location on an
undesirable piece of property—fway over yonder in the back part of town. Our
help should always be with the best interests of the cause as a whole at heart
in all cases! Help with brotherly love and good common judgment.

All of these are opportunities. Without a doubt they are! They cannot be grasped
in a day—but they will still beckon tomorrow, if tomorrow shall be. Let us do
what we can with what we have—not forgetting to assist the “other races,” for
their souls are precious in the eyes of the Lord.

3. To Furnish Literature and Use the Radio Had you ever thought of giving a
tract or a leaflet containing solid, fundamental gospel truths to a Negro,
Mexican, or Indian? Surely you had, for we all know the value and power of the
printed page. But do we really and conscientiously grasp our opportunities to
use it effectively? Yes, it takes money to print, buy and distribute tracts,
pamphlets and other gospel literature ; therefore, it calls for a sacrifice on
our part, again and again, in order to supply that worthy reading matter which
will pay for itself many fold. Any well-written and simply-worded tract written
in English can be profitably given to your Negro cook or wash woman, or can be
distributed by the members of the colored church of your community. You could
even subscribe to the Christian Counselor, edited by Brother Marshall Keeble at
Nashville, Tennessee, or to the Christian Echo, put out by Brother G. P. Bowser
of Fort Smith, Arkansas. Put these in the hands of some conscientious colored
family, or leader of the church, with the urgent request that they read the
papers and pass them on to others- Try it! It will work! On the other hand,
among those who can only read or converse in another language, there will have
to be some translating as well as printing expenses met— especially of those
worthier pieces of gospel literature among tracts and leaflets. We have seen
that some commendable work is being done along this line by our brethren, though
the most of the material used comes through the American Bible Society. Those
who are leading in the Mexican work are planning some t hings at this point.
Brother H. R. Zamorano, at the direction of Brother Schug, et al, is now putting
out the paper called El Camino (The Way)—a Spanish periodical. This has been the
only thing available among the Mexican workers—and even it sometimes failed to
show up at the regular time because of lack of support. Besides, it has had to
serve the purpose of periodical, tract, pamphlet, etc. Let us help Brother
Zamorano put out his paper regularly. Subscribe for the paper and send it to
some Mexican family. Again, there is the need for more literature—Bibles,
Testaments, tracts, etc. No end of possibilities here, if we are just awake and
alive to them! The radio can be a potent element in conversion of the “other
races”—though not as many of them possess such a household luxury as do we.
Preaching in English will do great good for the Negro and other English-speaking
people—but to do the most good among the Latin-Americans the radio teaching
should be in Spanish. This could especially be effective at points like El Paso,
Del Rio, and along the border. Brother Walter W. Leamon’s proposed program over
a valley radio station will certainly bear fruit among the Mexicans there. Is
this not an example of a specific opportunity and are there not many others
similar or related?

But, brethren, in order for us to grasp the three great opportunities pointed
out above, there are some ines-capable needs among ourselves. First, we need a
changed attitude—a different spirit in general—toward the work among other
races. We hold so tenaciously to the idea of “We’re better than you
are"—regardless of our preaching about going “into all the world” and preaching
the gospel “to every creature,” God may not be a respecter of persons, but we
are! We must cease to hold these narrow prejudicial views which cause us to act
out of harmony with God’s eternal truth.

Brethren, we must come to the point that we are as willing to work for and pray
fervently for and pay regularly for conscientious laborers among the “other
races” as among ourselves. Let us lift up our eyes and raise our vision beyond
our home congregation. Let us intensify our efforts along all missionary lines.

Second, and inseparably related to the first, we need to open not only the
coffers of our hearts and souls, but those of our earthly material possessions
in support of this great and noble work of saving the lost. It takes and will
ever take liberal and regular giving to take advantage of our opportunities. Let
us put mission work on our church program—on our budget (inflexible though it
may have become). And may God help us not to be like the big, able wealthy
congregation that was spending $500 per month on its regular work at home, but
had found no suitable opportunity to spend more than $10 per month on any sort
of mission work among others. Let us not overlook the Mexican, the Negro—nor,
indeed, anyone—in our faithful discharging of the Great Commission of our Lord
and Savior Jesus Christ.


========================================================================
  CHAPTER 11: OPPORTUNITIES IN THE SOUTH
========================================================================

Opportunities in the South OPPPORTUNITIES IN THE SOUTH By Paul L. Wallace Of the
estimated 300,000 members of the church of Christ in the United States,
approximately 250,000 live in the territory denominated the South and Southwest.
The section under consideration in this paper is then the most completely
evangelized in the United States, and yet, after a correspondence with ministers
living in these states, the writer was impressed with the seemingly unlimited
field of labor. The hem of the garment has hardly been touched. For example,
only 1.4% of the total population of Texas are members of the church of Christ,
and Texas has more men and women worshipping after the New Testament order than
any state in the Union, This will give an idea of the opportunity among the
Anglo population in this area.

It is almost impossible to quote accurate statistics. The 1936 census bulletin
and the “New Directory of the Churches of Christ in the United States” (compiled
by Brother Leslie G. Thomas in conjunction with the U. S. Census Bureau) while
very informative are at best only summaries. Allowances for error must be made.

1. Texas. Texas, with a population of 6,000,000 people, has nearly one thousand
congregations established after the New Testament pattern. 85,000 men and women
are members of these churches. Despite the fact that there are so many churches
and despite the fact that the number of evangliste giving full time to the
ministry of the word is legion, there are fifty counties in Texas (with a
population of 750,000) in which there is no, or at least, very little, preaching
being done. Of the 254 counties in this state, 121 county-seat towns have
churches supporting a full-time minister; 76 county-seat towns have churches
without a full-time evangelist; and 57 county-seat towns have no congregation at
all. Among these towns are: Woodville, Coldspring, Rio Grande, Ft. Davis,
Stiles, Guthrie, Boerne, Stratford, Hansford, Lipscomb, Canadian, Stinnett,
Channing, Wheeler and Panhandle. Do not forget that this field of labor is at
our very door—in the state that boasts more members of the church than any in
the Union!

2. Louisiana. Joining Texas on the east is the state of Louisiana with its
far-famed city, New Orleans. Louisiana has 2500 members worshipping in fifty-two
communities. Shreveport, one of the larger cities, has two very zeal-ous
congregations; Monroe has a fine church; and many of the smaller cities (such as
Haynesville) have thriving congregations. Upon the other hand, prosperous cities
such as Lake Charles and Duncan Hill have no congregations. In Baton Rouge where
there are fifty members, the Nashville churches are helping to support Brother
A. W. Johnson. This promises to be a profitable work because the field is vast
and Brother Johnson is an exceptionally capable young minister. New Orleans, the
largest city in the South, has a population of one-half million. Brother R. W.
Turner has been laboring in this city and its environs for more than six years.
As a result the little band that began meeting in a vacant grocery store
building in May, 1935, has now grown to more than a hundred active members and
owns its own building in a very satisfactory location. This is a very promising
foothold and yet as you can easily see, only 1/50 of 1% of the total population
of New Orleans are members of the Body of Christ. In other words 99.98% of the
people in New Orleans are still in need of the gospel.

3. Mississippi. Mississippi is not altogether a neglected field as the gospel
has been preached for many years in the north-ern section of the state. Brother
J. F Doggett estimates that there are 150 congregations in this part though many
of them are weak, numerically and finan-cially. Out of a white population of
900,000, only twelve preachers are devoting full time to the work and some of
these receive outside help. Brother Doggett was not aware of a loyal
congregation south of Natches, Hattiesburg, and Jackson. This would leave
Biloxi, Gulfport, Pass Christian and other coastal towns practically untouched.
These are all prosperous and rapidly growing centers. Mississippi is one of the
few states that can be considered religious in the broad sense. It is strongly
denominational but the disposition of its people, its climate, its roads, its
many cities of ten to twenty thousand population and its closeness to stronger
churches make it one of the better fields in the South for evangelistic work.

4. Alabama. Alabama has 250 congregations with 20,000 members. In Birmingham,
Montgomery, Mobile, Florence, Sheffield, Jasper and many other of its beautiful
cities and towns, the work has been firmly established due largely to Brother
John T. Lewis, Brother Gus Nichols, Brother A. H. Maner and others who have
devoted much of their preaching work to this section. However, southern Alabama
has been neglected. Robertsdale, Bay Minette, Rosington, Brewton, Atmore and
Coffeeville all have congregations but no minister. Towns east and west of a
line drawn from Selma to Evergreen have no churches. All of these communities
would be ripe for evangelistic work. Brother Gus Nichols thinks that Pickens and
Tuscaloosa counties especially offer exceptional opportunities.

5. Georgia, Most everything that has been said in a general way about Alabama
and Mississippi might be said about Georgia. 5,000 members meeting in 50 places
are hold-ing forth the word of life. Atlanta, Macon, Savannah, Rome and Columbus
all have churches while Augusta, Athens and many other cities are in need of
evangelistic work.

6. Florida, Florida, because of the transitory nature of many of its residents,
is a harder field than the average Southern State, but is still not as difficult
as the average Northern State. There are approximately 100 congregations with
7,000 members and the church is growing rapidly. There are several congregations
in St. Petersburg, Tampa and Miami. Among other cities having good congregations
are Clearwater, Largo, Bradenton, Cortez, Sarasota, Dover, Plant City, Bartow,
Winter Haven, Auburndale, Mulberry, Eagle Lake, Haines City, and Gainesville.
Florida needs many more preachers and especially preachers who can devote all of
their time to the work. Brother Fred B. Walker informed us through the Gospel
Advocate a few months ago that Florida needs more than preachers who want to
fish and relax during the week and merely preach on Sunday.

7. New Mexico. During the past ten years the church in New Mexico has had an
amazing growth. The church of Christ in New Mexico was first established under
the preaching of Brother S. W. Smith at Bethel shortly before 1900 but at
present there are more than sixty congregations with a population in excess of
four thousand. Even with this progress there is yet much to be done. Of the
thirty-one counties in the state, eleven county seat towns have no congregation
and in some of them no serious gospel effort has been made. Only recently have
efforts been made to permanently establish the cause in Santa Fe, Gallup, Taos,
Raton and Vaughn. The places in New Mexico which may seem to be of very little
importance because of their small populations are in reality very important
because they are crossroads of civilization through which hundreds of thousands
from all over the world pass each year. New Mexico is indeed a promising field.

Several of the states in the South and Southwest have been neglected in this
paper because of the necessity for brevity, but this will be sufficient to
present the unusual opportunity before us. May we fulfill our ob-ligations and
receive in the end the blessed judgment, “Well done, thou good and faithful
servant . . . enter thou into the joy of thy Lord.”


========================================================================
  CHAPTER 12: OBLIGATIONS OF THE CHRISTIAN TO THE STATE
========================================================================

Obligations of the Christian to the State OBLIGATIONS OF THE CHRISTIAN TO THE
STATE By R. B. Sweet

What a Christian’s obligations are toward his government is of paramount
importance just now when the government of our own country is arming to the
teeth to be ready for possible invaders or, it may be, to take part in
destroying totalitarianism; when everyone will have a share in paying taxes for
the hugest building of armaments that has ever been made in peace times and will
likely exceed even all previous wartimes; when army camps are being built near
so many towns and cities in which we live; when every man in the nation between
the ages of 21 and 36 must register with the government for possible military
training! The houses of congress are ringing with debate over what we shall do
to help those nations which still stand out against the agression of the
dictators, Those debates will result in legislation that will demand from us
sacrifices that begin with the payment of taxes and end with the demand that we
offer our sons on the altar of liberty. Will we acceed to those demands or shall
we refuse to obey such laws. What is a Christian’s obligation toward his state?

Let’s shift the scene to a time many centuries age when a prophet of God
received a vision from Jehovah and look in on that vision.

“The word which came to Jeremiah from Jehovah, saying ‘Arise, and go down to the
potter’s house, and there I will cause thee to hear my words.' Then I went down
to the potter’s house, and, behold, he was making a work on the wheels. And when
the vessel that he made of the clay was marred in the hand of the potter, he
made it again another vessel, as seemed good to the potter to make it. Then the
word of Jehovah came to me, saying, ‘O house of Israel, cannot I do with yeu as
this potter?’ saith Jehovah. ‘Behold as the clay in the potter’s hand, so are ye
in my hand, O house of Israel. At what instant I shall speak concerning a
kingdom, to pluck up and to break down and to destroy it; if that nation,
concerning which I have spoken, turn from their evil, I will repent of the evil
that I thought to do unto them. And at what instant I shall speak concerning a
nation, and concerning a kingdom, to build and to plant it; if they do that
which is evil in my sight, that they obey not my voice, then I will repent of
the good, wherewith I said I would benefit them.'’’—Jeremiah 18:1-10).

Despite this clear vision of Jeremiah that God does take a hand in the affairs
of the world, having a concern for nations and directing their destinies, there
has been disagreement over what a Christian’s obligation is to his state. At
least there is lack of agreement concerning how far that obligation would carry
a Christian in his activities for his government.

There are three distinct steps in the investigation, or three stages through
which our study must develop. Let us begin with the easiest part of the question
first. All of us can take the first step together for there is general unanimity
on this point. We shall not put this in the form of a question that will invite
debate, but will make the positive statement that: The Christian has the
obligation to support his govern-ment, first, in the paying of taxes, dues and
customs, and second, in submitting to its laws, except when disobedi-ence to
those laws would cause a violation of the laws of God. The clearest statement of
this is found in the first seven verses of Romans 13 : “Let every soul be in
subjection to the higher powers for there is no power but of God; and the powers
that be are ordained of God. Therefore he that resisteth the power, withstandeth
the ordinance of God: and they that withstand shall receive to themselves
j'udgment. For rulers are not a terror to the good work, but to the evil. And
wouldest thou have no fear of the power? do that which is good, and thou shalt
have praise from the same: for he is a minister of God to thee for good. But if
thou do that which is evil, be afraid; for he beareth not the sword in vain: for
he is a minister of God, an avenger for wrath to him that doeth evil. Wherefore
ye must needs be in subjection, not only because of the wrath but also for
conscience's sake. For for this cause ye pay tribute also; for they are
ministers of God’s service, attending continually upon this very thing. Render
to all their dues: tribute to whom tribute is due; custom to whom custom; fear
to whom fear; honor to whom honor." This passage is the one upon which is
concentrated most of the discussions which I have found. However, there are
other statements in the New Testament of the same import. For example, we read
from Titus 3:1 : “Put them in mind to be in subjection to rulers, to
authorities, to be obedient, to be ready unto every good work.” And in 1 Timothy
2:1-4 we find: “I exhort therefore, first of all, that supplications, prayers,
intercessions, thanksgivings, be made for all men; for kings and all that are in
high place; that we may lead a tranquil life in all godliness and gravity. This
is good and acceptable in the sight of God our Savior; who would have all men to
be saved, and come to the knowledge of the truth.”

Again, in 1 Peter 2:13-17 : “Be subject to every ordinance of man for the Lord’s
sake: whether to the king, as supreme; or unto governors, as sent by him for
venegeance on evil-doers and for praise to them that do well. For so is the will
of God, that by welldoing ye should put to silence the ignorance of foolish men:
as free and not using your freedom for a cloak of wickedness, but as
bondservants of God. Honor all men, love the brotherhood. Fear God. Honor the
king.” In the light of these plain commands from the New Testament there is no
question but that a Christian is to support his government by the payment of
taxes. t No comment, or explanation have we found that would even suggest that a
Christian is to try to evade this obligation. Indeed, we find comments like this
from McGarvcy-Pendleton commentary on Romans 13 : “For, for this cause ye pay
tribute; for they are ministers of God’s service, attending continually upon
this very thing....” Christians in our age have well nigh universally forgotten
that the tax assessor and the tax collector are ministers of God, and many evade
making true returns with as little compunction as they would were the tax
officials the servants of the devil. This sin has become so universal that it is
well-nigh regarded as a virtue.”

We hope that Christians are not guilty of tax evasion as nearly universal as
these commentators seem to think, but we must certainly understand that the
Chris-tian has the obligation to pay taxes as they are levied by his government.
Jesus himself said, “Render unto Caesar the things which are Caesar’s,” in
connection with the question when it was put to him as to whether it was lawful
to pay tribute. We all remember the occasion of Peter’s being asked whether his
roaster paid the half-shekel tax and his answering impulsively that he surely
did. Then how, later, Jesus talked with him about it and instructed him to go
catch a fish and take the shekel that he found in its mouth to pay the tax for
both himself and Peter.

There is general agreement too that Christians are to submit to all the other
laws of the land, with this notable exception: when the law of the land would
require something of the Christian that he cannot do without violating one of
God’s laws, then he must obey God rather than men. We have the example of the
apostles Peter and John being commanded by the authorities “not to speak at all
nor teach in the name of Jesus.” This prohibition was imposed, by the way, at
the instigation of the religious authorities, not of the civil authorities. But
the civil authorities had been called in and were party to the proceedings. “But
Peter and John answered and said unto them, ‘Whether it is right in the sight of
God to hearken unto you rather than unto God, judge ye: for we cannot but speak
the things which we saw and heard” (Acts 4:18-20), Here is the inspired
precedent for the Christian’s obeying God’s law in preference to some law or
direction from men that conflicts with God’s law. God’s laws are always supreme
to all others and must have first place in the Christian’s loyalty and
observance. Surely, none will argue or take exception to that statement. Did you
notice that three times in that rather short Romans passage it is stated that
the civil authority is “a minister of God”? It is also said, in connection with
one of these statements, that he is a minister of God “for good.”

Thus far, then, there is general agreement: that a Christian not only may but
must pay his taxes and ob-serve all the laws of his state that do not conflict
with his duty toward God. The next step in our inquiry is to see whether a
Christian has the obligation or the privilege to serve in some official capacity
in civil government. Here is a problem concerning which there is a difference of
opinion and a parting of the ways although each party claims that his viewpoint
is amply supported by the plain teachings of the scriptures. For example,
Brother Lipscomb says in part, in his commentary on Romans: “When men refuse to
be governed by God, they must be governed by some power, and God ordains other
governments to punish them for refusing his. The higher powers are immediately
introduced to execu te wrath on evil doers—that is, the civil officer is God’s
appointed agent to do what he says the Christian cannot do.

“The fact that God ordains human government is no evidence that it is good for
Christians to participate in its administration; but it does indicate that it is
good for the purpose for which he ordained it, and is to be submitted to by
Christians.”

“Quiet, passive submission that involves no violation of the laws of the
spiritual kingdom is the measure and limit of their connection with them.”

“Human government is ordained of God to rule and punish those who are not
subject, to God. It is to be used and operated by them.” On the other hand there
are remarks like these from the McGarvey-Pendleton Commentary on the same
pas-sage: “As we understand it, the idea which the apostle is seeking to convey
is that duties to God and duties to the state are parallel, rather than
antagonistic. If the Christian is true to his religion, he need fear neither the
state nor God, for God rules, generally speaking, in and through the state, as
well as in his providences.” Moses E. Lard has the following to say:

“All civil governments derive their origin and au-thority from God, and when
doing right, have his sanc-tion. He therefore requires his children to be
obedient to them; and where they fail, they resist not merely the government but
him. Civil officers, too, are designed to be for good to God’s children, and not
a source of fear. Neither therefore must they be resisted.”

“The object of all civil governments is to protest their subjects in their great
natural rights of person, property and liberty, and suitably to punish
evil-doers. In regard to religion, civil authorities must leave their subjects
to do precisely what God requires of them, without the slightest interference.
So long as they confine themselves within these limits, and to these necessary
duties, they are to be scrupulously obeyed.”

“There is no legitimate or rightful authority but from God. Authority of a
different kind is never from him. He no more appoints governments to do wrong or
sanctions wrong in them, than he sanctions sin in man.” ; Though, of course, it
is outside our own literature, it may be interesting to some to hear a couple of
com-ments from Adam Clarke on this same passage: “As God is the origin of power,
and the supreme Governor of the universe, he delegates authority to whomsoever
he will; and though in many cases the governor himself may not be of God, yet
civil govern-ment is of him: for without this there could be no society, no
security, no private property; all would be confusion and anarchy, and the
habitable world would soon be depopulated.”

“For civil government is established in the order of God for the support,
defence, and happiness of society, they who transgress its laws, not only expose
them-selves to the penalties assigned by the statutes, but also to guilt in
their own consciences, because they sin against God.”

These remarks made on the Romans passage are typ-ical, I believe, of their
attitude toward the entire ques-tion of whether a Christian may take part in the
affairs of civil government These divergent views toward the Christian’s
obligation arise from two different and opposite views concerning the origin and
function of government. On the one hand we find the view that all human
government arose in rebellion to God; that originally God meant to govern
humanity directly, giving all the laws and regulations concerning the activities
of human beings. But humanity rebelled against God’s direct government and set
up governments of their own in order that they might escape being subject to
God’s government. Since they were so determined to have their own governments,
God permitted it, and to this day allows them to exist although they are in
rebellion against his government. Therefore, every human gov-ernment is evil and
is maintained in opposition to God. Since they exist and are evil God uses them,
now one and now another, to punish certain nations which have grown so grossly
evil that he cannot longer tolerate their wickedness. This view sees human and
civil governments always and everywhere as direct rebellion against. God. Since
that is the situation, obviously any Christian who participated in the affairs
of government in any degree, would be in an institution that exists in direct
rebellion against God’s beneficent rule; therefore he stands in open rebellion
against God. If we accept the major premise, that all human government is in
open rebellion against God, then we will have to accept the conclusion that a
Christian who participates in them is sinning. And that is an end of all
participation in civil government for the Christian. But is that view of civil
government warranted by what we find in the Bible? That a government here and
there was violently wicked and in open rebellion against God does not prove that
all are. If we condemn all because some were failures, then we shall have to
condemn all religion because some of its devotees have been as corrupt and
grossly wicked as any human governments have been.

It is churned by this school that Jesus’ purpose was to destroy all human
government and that in refusing to be made a king over a restored kingdom of
Israel he is teaching that none of his followers may have any part in such a
government. Jesus said “render unto Caesar the things that are Caesar's” thereby
commanding support of a human government. Then he is aiding that which he came
to destroy. He said himself that, “a kingdom divided against itself cannot
stand.” Then there must be some purpose for civil government and some duty which
a Christian must render to it. The non-participation view presents the
impossible situation of Christ’s saying support with your money that which is
evil. Even though government may be instituted to wreak wrath upon the evil
doer, when a Christian supports such a government with his taxes he is
maintaining an evil institution that good may come from it. Doing evil that good
may come is a principle most emphatically condemned by the New Testament. At
Jesus’ trial before Pilate, it was not the civil government that sought his
death. On the contrary it was Caiaphas and his henchmen who tried Jesus and
condemned him to die on the testimony of perjured witnesses, but they did not
have the authority to put him to death. They had to have the sentence passed by
the civil authority. That they wrested from Pilate, the Roman governor of the
province, by lies and false charges; Pilate trying desperately the while to
release Jesus, announcing no less than three times that he could find no fault
in him. He even tried to release him without respect to his guilt by taking
advantage of their custom of releasing one prisoner during their festival, but
Jesus' enemies cried out for the release of Barabbas instead and demanded that
Jesus be cruci-fied. It was the ecclesiastical tyranny that demanded the death
of Jesus; the religious racketeers of his own nation. Indeed, the civil governor
seems to be the only friend that Jesus had in that mad mob that day. If that is
a fair sample of what religion will do, one might very well argue, then we want
nothing at all to do with religion.

If an evil ruler now and then condemns all civil gov-ernment, then all religious
teachers and leaders are condemned by what Annas, Caiaphas and their com-pany
did that day to Jesus. We know that the wicked-ness of those envious, religious
fanatics is not at all representative of what the religion of Jehovah would have
made them has they followed his laws, and that religion is not to be condemned
in its entirety because those who delivered Jesus up in envy were failing to
follow God’s laws for them.

We may say, then, that because some governments went terribly wrong that does
not in itself condemn human government. When we read Romans 13:1-7 without any
qualifying statements or without some effort to make it fit a particular theory,
it seems most obviously to teach that God did institute government for the good
of humanity. Listen to it again:

“Let every soul be in subjection to the higher powers : for there is no power
but of God, and the powers that be are ordained of God. Therefore he that
resisteth the power withetandeth the ordinance of God and they that withstand
shall receive to themselves judg-ment. For rulers are not a terror to the good
work, but to the evil. And wouldest thou have no fear of the power? do that
which is good, and thou shalt have praise of the same: for he is a minister of
God to thee for good. But if thou do that which is evil, be afraid; for he
beareth not the sword in vain; for he is a minister of God, an avenger of wrath
to him that doeth evil.”

We are told that a Christian may not participate in the government because it is
God’s instrument for taking vengeance on evil-doers and the Christian is
com-manded not to avenge himself. Just before the passage read that is in the
twelfth chapter of Romans verse 19, it is said: “Avenge not yourselves, beloved,
but give place unto the wrath of God; for it is written, ‘Vengeance belongeth
unto me; I will recompense, saith the Lord.' ” And then in 13:4 we read of the
civil governor that “he is a minister of God, an avenger for wrath to him that
doeth evil.” And it continues, "Wherefore ye must needs be in subjection, not
only because of the wrath, but also for conscience’ sake.”

Instead of teaching that a Christian must not par-ticipate, it seems to me that
this passage teaches as clearly as it could be stated that the civil government
is approved of God and that it is his instrument for getting certain things done
that no individual should do, Christian or non-Christian. That is to say, it is
teaching clearly that government is good; that God has ordained it, and
therefore the Christian is not to take the law into his own hands, either to
avenge himself upon his enemy, or to be an insurrectionist against the
government, but he is to let the law take its course.

“Avenge not yourselves,” and if a man “smite thee on thy right cheek, turn to
him the other also,” surely forbid personal retaliation, but as the government
“is a minister of God, an avenger for wrath to him that doeth evil,” the
Christian should not shirk his responsibility as a part of the government to do
his share in its work; "therefore he must needs be in subjection, not only
because of the wrath, but also for conscience’ sake.” Jesus said “turn the other
cheek,” but he did not say turn the other man’s cheek: not to turn the cheek of
the weak and defenseless. Though a man has the right to sacrifice himself he
does not have the right to sacrifice others.

“Cut off thy hand,” and “pluck out thine eye,” are commands that we tone down as
being figurative. May not this about “turning the other cheek,” also be subject
to Such treatment? If every man would observe the directions given in Romans 13
and allow the government, God’s instrument for that purpose, to take vengeance
for him upon his oppressors, there would be an end of the evil of mob violence.
And that is the very purpose of this passage—to get the Christian to see that he
must allow the government to take over in such things as admin-istering
punishment to the wrongdoer. This has no bearing on whether a Christian may be
one of the offi-cers of that government, for when a government official
administers the laws of the land it is not himself, personally, who takes
vengeance, or administers pun-ishment to a law-breaker, but it is the law of the
land through him that is being satisfied . In his essay on capital punishment,
Alexander Campbell says:

“Civil government is itself a divine appendix to the volumes of religion and
morality. Though neither Cae-sar nor Napoleon, Nicholas nor Victoria, were, “by
the grace of God,” king, emperor or queen; still the civil throne, the civil
magistrate, and therefore, civil gov-ernment are, by the grace of God, bestowed
upon the world. Neither the church nor the world could exist without it. God
himself, therefore, benevolently or-dained magistrates and judges.”

“The Bible has sanctioned republics, and common-wealths and kingdoms, without
affixing any peculiar name to them. It prescribes no form of human gov-ernment,
because no one form would suit all the coun-tries, climes and people of the
earth. But the Bible, in the name and by the authority of its Author, demands of
all persons in authority that they protect the innocent, that they punish the
guilty, and that they dispense justice to all. It also demands of the governed
that they submit to “the powers that be,” however denominated, as an ordinance
of God; not through the fear of the sword, but for the sake of conscience. It
inhibits them also from treason, insubordination and rebellion.”

We have been discussing the viewpoint that all hu-man government originated in
rebellion against God and that God uses one to punish other wicked nations and
that, therefore, the Christian may not participate in its administration. The
other point of view concerning the origin and function of government has
necessarily been touched upon in the discussion thus far. That is, that human
government serves a vital and necessary function in the affairs of men, and that
it arose to furnish the methods and machinery for accomplishing much good and
needful work that would not be done so long as every man is a law unto himself,
or even if all men were absolutely obedient to God’s spiritual laws.

Whatever may be said of other governments, I believe that it may be stated
without the possibility of contradiction that our government in the United
States was not created in rebellion against God’s laws but to escape the
oppression that was elsewhere inflicted upon those who would not conform to
tyrannical religious regulations. It was to escape oppression and for the
express purpose of giving men an opportunity to worship God according to the
dictates of their own con-sciences that our government came into being.

Now if it is possible that government may, at least sometimes, be good; not be
in rebellion against God, then it might also be possible for a Christian to have
part in it as an official or an employee of it. However, it is argued in this
and other connections, that the New Testament gives instructions concerning
every relationship that a Christian may legitimately sustain toward others. For
example, directions are given con-cerning children’s behaviour toward their
parents, of parents toward their children, of husband to wife and wife to
husband, of a master toward his slave and the slave toward his master, and other
such relationships. But nowhere can be found instructions concerning a Christian
in a government post. From that the conclu-sion is drawn that the absence of
such instructions is tantamount to a command not to participate in such
activities.

If that is true it will cut the Christian out from a. lot of things which are
very beneficial to humanity. Where are the instructions concerning running a
college? concerning the management of a publishing house? May a Christian be a
member of a labor union? There is absolutely nothing said about labor unions in
the New Testament but thousands of Christians are faced with the problem of
participating in such organinations. Nothing1 is said about trade associations,
or labor organizations or professional societies. Shall we conclude that a
Christian may not have part in any such thing? What proves too much may prove
nothing!

What is the answer? I think that the New Testament is a much more powerful book
than even a lot of its staunchest defenders can see. It is a book that does not
pretend to give minute regulations for every activity that a Christian may
engage in, nor instructions covering every possible relationship. It gives
certain broad principles that will develop the spirit into the likeness of the
spirit of Christ when faithfully observed and then, guided by that spirit, the
Christian is to make some choices for himself concerning his work or
professsion. Inspired with the desire to serve humanity, he will seek
opportunities to be servant of the most, for “he that is greatest among you
shall be servant of all.” Now, guided by principles of honesty, sobriety,
absolute devotion to God and loyalty to his church, with a sincere desire to
serve his fellows, he vill serve them in the position and capacity where he
thinks he can be of most service in keeping with his natural inclinations and
preparation. If that place is a government office, or as an executive in
industry, or a teacher in the public schools or an administrator in a
university, wherever he will not have to sacrifice his Christian principles,
there he may or must serve or he is failing1 in some measure to use his talents.
When we discard everything that we cannot find called by name in the New
Testament we are trying to confine the teachings of the New Testament to too
narrow a channel. Though some will do that, there are others who drink deep of
the spirit of Christ and that very spirit of outgoing, sacrificial service will
cause their Christianity to burst out of the bounds set by the too legalistic,
and will overflow into all life where it has opportunity to bring its
life-giving influence. The early Christians withdrew from governmental and many
other activities! Suppose they did They expected Christ to return before that
generation died, too, but we see nineteen centuries of time gone into the past
and he still has not come. We have to revise our thinking somewhat in that
respect. May we not revise our thinking in some other respects also? Their
withdrawal from many of the normal activities of hu-man society, led soon into
the monastic view of life. We can see what a curse monasticism was to the
individuals who isolated themselves from the world and how utterly it failed to
interpret the spirit of Christ who said that “the kingdom of heaven is like unto
leaven.” To have its influence upon humanity, Christianity must be set down into
the mass of humanity; Christian service must be rendered where there are men and
women who need its savin# influence. To withdraw today from legitimate, helpful
service to humanity merely because we cannot find the particular activity
catalogued in the New Testament is to practise monasticism at least in a mild
form!

We are told to “be ready unto every good work.” Did you notice in what
connection that is found? Believe it or not, it is found in connection with this
very subject of rendering obedience to the civil authorities! Hear it, Titus 3:1
: “Put them in mind to be in subjection to rulers, to authorities, to be
obedient, to be ready unto every good work.” How can one be ready unto every
good work, if he refuses to do some good thing which his government calls or
allows him to do, just after that admonition to be obedient to authorities? Not
to allow a Christian to participate in any affairs of the government would
prevent their making much of their technical and professional skill available
for the good of their communities. A water engineer might not help to provide a
water supply for his community for most such work is directly controlled by some
unit of local government, a civil engineer could not use his skill in the
service of society for constructing roads and bridges which are vital in our
present manner of living for the smoothest on-go of society; a physician might
not place his professional knowledge at the service of his community in the
capacity of health officer. This is not a mere supposition for I have a good
friend who is county health officer of a Texas county and has rendered valuable
service to his community in his official capacity. All postal employees who are
members of the church would have to quit carrying the mail, or resign their
clerical jobs in the postal department. A few years ago all Christian railroad
men, and there are many of them, would have had to resign when the government
took over the operation of the railroads. Of course, if the teachings of the New
Testament demanded it all these would have to make such a sac-rifice if they
continued to be genuine Christians. But the view that government is bad and that
a Christian may not participate in it, may not even appeal to it for aid or
protection was certainly not held by Paul for we find him on more than one
occasion using his Roman citizenship to protect him from abuse. At one time he
accepted the freindly gesture of a military officer and actually took advantage
of a military guard to get him safely out of Jerusalem. The guard was such as
might have done honor to a great personage, made up of seventy cavalrymen and
two hundred infantrymen. It is interesting to notice, too, that the enemy which
he was thus escaping was not a wicked governmental clique, but a group of his
own countrymen who were frenzied l'eligious fanatics. Again the government was
the friend of Paul as it had been earlier the friend of Jesus.

We find Paul using the opportunity to defend himself before the court of Felix
and then before the authorized court of the land in the presence of Festus. On
the latter occasion he made his famous appeal to Caesar. When he was brought for
a third time before a governmental tribunal, to present his case to king
Agrippa, it was decided that he might have been set free had he not appealed to
Caesar. Since he had made that appeal he was sent on to Rome under the dramatic
circumstances that we are familiar with. Paul took his case to the Supreme Court
of his day!

He had good reason to know that civil government* is a good thing and to teach
clearly that Christians are to honor it, obey its laws and support its work with
their taxes, dues and customs as he wrote in the well- known thirteenth chapter
of his letter to the Romans.

Civil government is the most effective and efficient means for protecting and
ministering to society that has yet been devised. Indeed, without it chaos would
reign and many genuinely good and beneficial services could not be enjoyed that
we now take as a matter of course because we are so accustomed to them.

Government has many functions other than that of punishing criminals and making
war. Indeed those represent the minor rather than the ma jor function of
government. Without it there would be no such thing as a stable monetary system
that even the severest religious isolationist uses quite freely, apparently
without any conscientious scruples. Of course we accept the aid of government
every day of our lives. None of us could have come here as comfortably as we did
without a government that built good roads over which we came, and regulates the
railroads over which some may have travelled. We would not even have received
the bulletins and letters concerning this lectureship without a government that
maintains an efficient post office de-partment. We would not be receiving
schooling for our children in a great system of free public schools without it.
We have deeds to our property only because a stable government stands back of
those deeds and protects each man in the ownership of his property. Our bunking
system, our interstate commerce, much of our industrial activity, the value of
our insurance policies and a thousand other things are what they are only
because they are protected, or supervised by civil government, The government
protects us through its controlling the issuance of licenses to physicians to
practise medicine; to pharmacists and in the inspection of drugs and foodstuffs;
in its setting up standard for weights and measurements and even marriage
licenses. Yes, indeed, civil government is a vast deal more than wars and
rebellion against God!

We believe that good government is good and is not at all at variance with God’s
plan for humanity. The greater number of good men, that is, Christians, who have
some part in shaping its policies, the better it will be. It is not true that
all men in public office are crooks, nor that one must lose his Christianity in
becoming a public official. That many of them do is not proof that they have to,
or that all do. Men in public office are subjected to terrific temptations, but
so are men in places of trust in business, banking and professional life. Were
there enough real Christians in the congres-sional and parliamentary assemblies
of the nominally Christian nations, they would have shaped the policies of those
governments and directed their activities so that all of the little and
oppressed nations would have had their fair opportunity to deal in and have
access to the raw materials that God has blessed the earth with; they would have
found amicable means for settling disputes, it may be, and it is quite possible
that the world would not now be aflame with World War No. 2. This war has come
about because of the selfishness of the great nations, our own not excepted. And
that condition obtains because non-Christian men were in charge, at least
dominant in the affairs of the nations. Remember that the admonition to “be
ready unto every good work,” is the concluding phrase of the sentence that
begins, “put them in mind to be in subjection to rulers, to authorities, to be
obedient.” To be sure there may be some need for choosing here. If a Christian
cannot conscientiously hold the office of sheriff, or some other place that
employs physical force, he should not accept such an office. But that does not
cut him off from doing those things wherein he can render service to humanity.
Only the most ardent advocate of non-participation would refuse the protection
of police force if he were in a position te need it to prevent physical harm to
himself or family. Paul used the military force of his government to give him
protection and seemed not to be conscientiously opposed to it.

It is one who hates his brother that is a murderer, whether he commits the overt
act, or only keeps that hatred in his heart. A judge may sentence a man to
imprisonment or to death without having the slightest hatred toward that man, as
a policeman may use physi-cal force in arresting a criminal without hating the
offender. They are merely instruments through which the government accomplishes
its purposes and in their using such force they are actually, or may actually be
doing good, to prevent further violence and to give protection to those unable
to protect themselves. Paul says that government is ordained of God for this pur
pose. To say that all human government is evil, that it originates in rebellion
against God, and then to say that God sets up some governments to punish others,
is to charge God with creating things that are evil. We cannot accept such a
charge against God.

Alexander Campbell says in his essay on capital punishment: In the name of
reason, why have a sword in the state, and worn by the civil magistrate, if it
be unlawful or unchristian to put any one to death on any account whatever? That
would be indeed to “bear the sword in vain”; a thing which the apostles
themselves would have reprobated.

“It is not the sheriff’s hand—it is not the sword of the executioner. It is the
hand of God—it is the sword of his justice that takes away that life which he
himself gave, because the criminal has murderously taken away a life which he
could not give.”

Even capital punishment is strictly in accordance with the spirit and teaching
of the New Testament, says Campbell, One serving on a jury that assesses the
penalty of death against a defendant, is in no way in-dividually responsible for
the death of that man. The man brought it on himself by violating the law that
had death as its penalty. However, if one’s conscience will not permit him to
serve on a jury in a criminal case that may involve the death sentence, our
government permits him to be excused from such a duty because of his scruples
against capital punishment.

Let us notice another objection to this position, It is quoted to us that “no
man can serve two masters.” Right! But a man can serve God only as he ministers
to humanity and he may do a great deal more effective ministering in temporal
affairs through governmental channels, that is in helping to ameliorate harmful
con-ditions such as a prevalence of gambling, selling intoxi-cants, or
oppressive labor conditions, than he could outside them or through other means.

Again, there is cited the incident of Luke 22:24-30 wherein the disciples were
contending about which of them was accounted to be the greatest and Jesus’
saying to them, “The kings of the Gentiles have lordship over them; and they
that have authority over them are called Benefactors. But ye shall not be so:
but he that is the greater among you, let him become as the younger; and he that
is chief, as he that doth serve.” What bearing has this on our problem? That
Christians are not to seek to lord it over their fellow-Ghria- tians is clear.
But does that forbid a Christian’s having any supervisory control over or
relationship toward another? Even within the church there are elders who have
some sort of supervision over others, or at least have a responsibility to see
after their welfare. But because there are to be no degrees of greatness within
the church, does it follow that a Christian may not be in a position in secular
affairs where he will have superiority over another person? If so there can be
no such thing as a Christian in business where he must employ help. For
immediately he does that, he becomes greater in a business way than the
employee. That strict view of the matter would forever prohibit there being such
a thing as a college president who is a Christian. No Christian could be an
executive in any industry. Nothing would be left to Christians but to be mere
clerks and helpers, always in the employ of others with never any supervisory
position open to them and in their own business to have nothing larger than they
could handle alone. Surely such a severe interpretation is not necessary and
cannot be accepted. What Jesus was saying here has to do with the disciples in
their relation to each other as followers of Christ and cannot apply to their
business affairs: and if not to their business affairs then not to any
government office. More Christians carrying their Christian ideals and practices
into business and professional life, will make an infinitely better world. The
kingdom of heaven is described in prophecy as one wherein its citizens will
“beat their swords into plowshares and their spears into pruning hooks," and
within the kingdom of heaven that condition must pre-vail. Christians are not
even to invoke the protection of the government against a fellow-Christian.
“Dare any of you, having a matter against his neighbor, go to law before the
unrighteous, and not before the saints? .. . But brother goeth to law with
brother, and that before unbelievers. Nay, already it is altogether a defect in
you, that ye have lawsuits one with another’- (1 Corinthians 6:1; 1 Corinthians
6:6-7). But does that forbid a Christian’s doing his share in the civil
government toward making it and his country better? God has one law * for his
kingdom, the church, but he also ordains civil government to handle matters that
do not come within the affairs or purposes of the church.

Now, let us consider the third and most perplexing problem of all in connection
with a Christian's duty toward the state; the one concerning which some have the
most difficulty in making a definite decision: the question as to whether a
Christian may participate in military service. This is not an academic question;
one that we may have to face some day far in the future. We cannot put it off
and hope that we may never have to make a decision concerning it for we are
squarely up against it iths very day. From every community some have already
gone into the army, training themselves for possible action in battle, and
others will be called every few days through the next five years. Shall we evade
it and continue to give our young men in the church no guidance or help? I wish
with all my heart that it were not necessary to make a decision, nor even to
discuss it. But it is no longer remote; it is a present and pressing question
that demands an honest and fearless dealing with. Here, as in the case of the
less severe question about holding office for the government, the conscience
must not be violated. Certainly conscience alone is not to be one’s guide for it
is a creature of education and alone is not a safe guide. God’s word must be our
guide in things spiritual. But there are those who differ even after having read
God’s word. Some say that it teaches non-participation; others equally sincere
believe that it does permit participation in governmental affairs. But some
choice must be made, there being some offices that seem to be good, while others
may not be held by a Christian. Then the individual Christian must do only as
much as his conscience, taught by God’s word, will permit. For if he does a
thing that is against his conscience he sins, for “to him who accounted anything
to be unclean, to him it is unclean” (Romans 14:14).

Similarly, with respect to military service there are many of us, perhaps the
majority, who believe that it may not at all be engaged in by Christians. A
Christian must risk death and even allow himself to be put to death before
becoming a soldier in which service he may be called upon to take the life of a
fellowman, if his conscience will not permit him to do it without believing it a
sin. If one feels that way about it, then he must have the courage to face the
issue and resolutely refuse military service, for if he goes into it against his
conscience he is certainly sinning. But there are others who read the same word
of God as does the conscientious objector, and they are just as conscientious,
but their consciences do not forbid their serving in the military forces of our
nation for a defensive war. Only the individual can answer that question for
himself before God. If one can accept the position that his service in the army
is comparable to service in the courts of the land, or jury service, or on the
police force, and believes that in acting as a soldier he is merely part of a
larger police force, then no one should condemn him merely because he sees it
that way.

We should be profoundly thankful that our government has made ample provision
for the conscientious objector. If one cannot conscientiously participate in
combatant service, he will be assigned to some non-combatant branch of the
service. If he cannot do even that conscientiously, he will be assigned to some
branch of industry under the supervision of civilians. The armed forces of the
nation are in many ways comparable to our police forces. I’ve never heard
any-one object to having policemen to maintain order in our local communities
and even use force if necessary to quell a marauder to protect the peaceful
citizens of a community. Nearly all of us, I dare say. are willing to see a
strong enough police force in any city or town to take care of the gangsters who
may be on the loose in those places. Now when gangsterism grows into
international proportions, why should not those nations which love peace and
order and freedom use a national or international, police force to resist those
gangsters?

If our worship were disturbed by a gang of racketeers we would welcome the
police arriving and forcibly restraining those outlaws from interfering with our
peaceful worship. If the criminals should try to make us leave off worshipping,
or worship only as they chose to direct it, we should not at all object to
police power restoring our religious freedom to us. Why, then, should we object
to having force used in resisting the international racketeers who threaten to
deprive us of our religious and civic freedom.

Again, I say, if there are those who have that view-point and can
conscientiously become part of that police power that does try to maintain our
freedom, why should those who cannot see it that way condemn those who do?
Perhaps we do not, but we are likely to consider them as not Christians and may
even be tempted to think of them as violent breakers of God's law, merely
because they do not see it as we do who will not under any circumstances use
physical-force to oppose an enemy.

Perhaps it might be more in the spirit of the Master not to demand peace at any
price, but to seek righteous-ness at any cost!

We do not see alike on many other subjects. On very few questions could one find
a hundred or more brethren who see eye to eye. Take a dozen eontroversial
subjects and very few would agree exactly on all that dozen items. Mind you, I'm
not talking about the first principles upon which we do agree, but about such
subjects as a Christian’s obligation to the state.

We need a great deal of charily in thinking about each other and in dealing with
one another. Never should we allow any hatred or ill-feeling to spring up in our
hearts toward our brethren. Every one should examine these questions for himself
as taught in the Bible, then make up his own mind as to what God would have him
do and be. Once he has determined for himself what the Bible teaches, he should
have the courage to live true to his convictions but not condemn others who may
not have the same set of convictions that he himself cherishes. With such love
toward each other and a sincere desire to be helpful to all, we will possibly
agree on more things and can at least love and help those who disagree with us.


========================================================================
  CHAPTER 13: LOYALTY TO THE KING AND THE KINGDOM
========================================================================

Loyalty to the King and the Kingdom LOYALTY TO THE KING AND THE KINGDOM By Paul
Southern

Twenty-three years ago I stood in a city on the Atlantic seaboard and for more
than an hour watched American soldiers as they marched by on dress parade. All
activities of the city were temporarily suspended, hats were removed and
tear-climmed eyes tried to smile through that terrible experience which the
United States was having at that time. Thousands of persons lined the streets
and stood at rapt attention as the flag went by.

Hats off! The flag is passing by! Along the street there comes A blare of
bugles, a ruffle of drums. A flash of color beneath the sky: Hats off!

Truly, that was a demonstration of loyalty to the American union.

Yesterday afternoon at 3:30 o’clock I stood in the office of Hendrick Memorial
Hospital here in Abilene and talked to Brother Don Morris by telephone. He said,
“I want you to speak tomorrow morning at 11 o’clock on the Abilene Christian
College Lectureship,” The first question I asked was, “What is the subject?”
Brother Morris said, “Loyalty to the King and the Kingdom.” The first thought
that ran through my mind was that picture of thousands of civilians standing at
attention in Newport News, Virginia, twenty- three years ago while that army of
soldiers passed. I said to myself, “Wouldn’t it be fine if all the Christiana in
the army of the Lord were just as loyal to the King of kings as we were at that
time to the Red, White, and Blue?” As I talked to Brother Morris this second
thought and picture of loyalty came to me. A father and son were driving by
night through the tall pines of East Texas. By mutual agreement with his
parents, the son was leaving home for the first time to go out in search of
life, fortune and happiness. As we journeyed from home to a little town in East
Texas, the moon with its mellow beams was playing a silent symphony upon those
tall pines, while Father played a spiritual symphony upon my heart. At the
railroad station he took my ambitious, vibrating body into his arms and placed a
kiss upon my brow. As I hoarded the train, he said to me: “Son, be faithful to
the Lord.” Here we have another picture of loyalty,

Today we are here to talk to you about "Loyalty to the King and the Kingdom.”
There is something about the word loyalty that is attractive to me. I like to
think about it. It suggests permanence, constancy, inflexi-bility. The word
loyalty means that spirit of faith and devotion which causes one to remain true
to a sover-eign, to a superior, an ideal or an institution. The word denotes
allegiance to someone in authority. It is that in human conduct which causes man
to hold tenaciously to the thing which he believes to be right. When we speak of
the King, we are talking about Jesus Christ, our Lord, who became King when he
sat down at the right hand of the Father and sent forth the Holy Spirit to guide
the apostles into all truth. On the first Pentecost after the ascension of
Christ, Peter said: “Let all the house of Israel therefore know assuredly, that
God hath made him both Lord and Christ, this Jesus whom ye crucified” (Acta
2:36). Since that time I believe Jesus has been the King, upon the throne of
David, upon his Father’s throne, and upon his own throne. God “put all things in
subjection under his feet, and gave him to be head over all things to the
church, which is his body, the fulness of him that filleth all in all”
(Ephesians 1:22-23). This King who is the captain of our salvation is the one we
have in mind in this address.

WTien we talk about being loyal to the kingdom, we are thinking of the church,
that blood-bought institution which came into existence on the first Pentecost
after the resurrection of Christ. Peter referred to that event as “the
beginning” (Acts 11:15). Since that time the kingdom of the King of kings has
con-tinued to function, and I am persuaded that it will continue to function
throughout time. When eternity’s morn has dawned, the saints of all ages will
sit down in the very presence of that King to live forever and forever more. The
importance of being loyal to the King and the kingdom cannot be stressed too
much. The tragedy of all tragedies, it seems to me, is a broken faith. Young
people meet at the altar and pledge their troth one to the other for life. Some
of them, and one would be too many, go out the next day and break faith with
that one to whom they pledged their life, their love, and their all. Business
men, perhaps members of the church of the Lord, operating businesses on opposite
sides of the street, will enter a verbal agreement to sell products for a
certain price, and the next day one of them breaks faith by cutting prices. In
this audience there are hundreds of persons who have bowed at the altar of the
Lord and pledged their obedience to the King. I wonder if we have kept the
faith. That loyalty to the King is important is a point that need not be argued.
Jesus said: “No man can serve two masters: for either he will hate the one, and
love the other; or else he will hold to one, and despise the other. Ye cannot
serve God and mammon” (Matthew 6:24). Then he said: “But seek ye first his
kingdom, and his righteousness; and all these things shall be added unto you”
(Matthew 6:33). Those 3,000 souls bap-tized on Pentecost had this idea of
loyalty, for we read that “they continued stedfastly in the apostles' teaching
and fellowship, in the breaking of bread and the prayers" (Acts 2:42).

Notwithstanding the fact that it is important to be loyal, I think some persons
today are just scared to death for fear the church is going to be destroyed
before this generation comes to a close. Ladies and gentlemen, I do not share
the opinion of some that the church today is headed for swift destruction. We
concede that there are some departures, but these have been with us since the
birth of the church, I have enough confidence in what Jesus said when he
promised to build the church to believe that he will fulfill that promise
through his word. “Upon this rock I will build my church; and the gates of hades
shall not prevail against it” (Matt'. 16:18). There is not enough power on earth
to thwart the progress of the church of Jesus Christ. Oh, yes, we are going
through a crisis, but there never was a time in the history of the church when
God’s people were not going through a crisis. There will always be a crisis as
long as there is sin. The King of kings will continue to lead his army against
the hosts of error. But I am persuaded that the church will come out more than
conqueror and leave this world in a blaze of glory. In this matter of loyalty,
of course, I am interested in others. I want the church to wield the greatest
influence possible. Still I must say that loyalty on my part has a supremely
selfish angle. The church can get along without me and my loyalty; do not forget
that. But I cannot get along without being loyal to the church and its King.
Certainly there are others entrusted to our care and for them we ought to be
loyal. As Daniel of old said: “And they that are wise shall shine as the
brightness of the firmament; and they that turn many to righteousness as the
stars for ever and ever” (Daniel 12:3). But after all, loyalty to the King and
the kingdom is a thing that I ought to be interested in for my own sake.

We have several kinds of loyalty in the brotherhood, various grades and shades
of it. We have hard preach-ing and soft preaching, yellow preaching and red
preaching. In some places they have done a complete black-out. It just depends
on where you are when you talk about this thing called loyalty, in whose camp
you happen to be found- For instance, I sometimes have occasion to talk to some
of my brethren who do not believe in Bible classes on Lord’s day morning. They
declare to me that they are the only loyal people today. Then I come along and
find some other brethren who believe, they say, in having supervised Bible study
on the Lord’s day or any other day. These declare unto me that they are the only
loyal brethren, that the others are asleep on the job, simply playing at the
game of saving souls. However, I think the first group is more loyal to its
views than the latter group. They say they do not believe in having organized
classes, and they stick to it. They simply do not have them. At the North Side
church of Christ in Abilene, Texas, we have four hundred and fifty members, with
an average attendance of one hundred and seventy-five on Lord’s day morning for
the Bible classes. Which one is more loyal to its views?

Yes, there are grades and shades of loyalty. We have the Bible college group and
the anti-Bible college group, and in some places they will not speak to one
another. You are loyal, depending on where you are. In fact, my friends, it
sometimes resolves itself to this: You are not loyal unless you skin them the
way I do! Sometimes I get to thinking that I am about the best preacher there
is, and unless Homer Hailey over there skins them just as I do, in the same
terminology, he is not loyal. John O’Dowd comes along and preaches the same
doctrine, and he may class me and Brother So-and-So somewhere else. And we are
not dealing in personalities; we are simply illustrating a point.

You know, we sometimes become so self-centered and cocksure in our own judgment
that we are the only loyal ones, and that everybody else has lost the faith. I
saw Charlie Chaplin in “Shoulder Arms.” He stopped the commanding officer and
said: “Say, Buddy, everybody in this division is out of step except me.” Chaplin
could not realize that he was the only one out of step. Sometimes I think that
the whole brotherhood is out of step, when all that I need is a good night's
rest and a dose of Alka Seltzer. You know, I do not like the idea of having some
man force his rubber stamp upon me and my preaching to make me loyal. And you
tell me the same thing, for that is right. Any time a preacher of the gospel or
an institution or a congregation thinks that he or it must place a rubber stamp
upon me and my preaching to make me loyal, And you tell me the same thing, for
that is right. Any time a preacher of the gospel or an institution or a
congregation thinks that he or it must place a rubber stamp of approval upon all
others before they can be certified to preach or set up a congregation, right
then and there he becomes a pope, whether he wears that name and the pope’s
clothing or not.

Some want to test your loyalty on only one item of faith and practice. Some
years ago I was invited to a city to “try out" for the church work there. They
called a meeting of the elders and deacons that afternoon, and put me on the
carpet. One man in that group gave me a rather severe grilling to determine my
loyalty. It was akin to the “third degree.” But there was only one point in
which he was interested, and that point was premillennialism, I said: "Certainly
the doctrine is wrong, and I preach against it every time it is necessary.” I am
willing to affirm any time that the doctrine of premillennialism is false, but I
refuse to be fitted into that one mold. I refuse to be judged for loyalty on
that one point alone. Now you may misunderstand me, but I am determined not to
be misunderstood. As I indicated at the outset of this lecture, I believe the
kingdom and the period of regeneration began when Jesus Christ sat down at the
right hand of the Father and sent forth the Holy Spirit. Otherwise, I could not
believe the New Testament. I am definitely opposed to this damnable heresy
called pre-millennialism. But I think some people have gone to another extreme
in trying to measure loyalty by that one point alone. That is the thing I am
stressing. Needless to say, my job with the church referred to above went “with
the wind.”

Others make the “restoration movement” a test of loyalty. And that takes me
across the country to another city where I was being considered for some church
work. The “presiding elder” did not ask if I believed in Jesus Christ as the Son
of God. He did not ask if I was interested in building up the church in that
growing and wicked city. He did not ask if I believed in the Bible as the word
of God, an all-sufficient guide in this life and to mansions in the sky. No, he
wanted to know where I stood on the “restoration movement.” I said it is no
wonder that the Baptists and Methodsits write books criticising us and Alexander
Campbell and Saying that we have a human creed. If we make that movement the
only test of loyalty, then the movement itself becomes a sectarian institution.
Please do not misunderstand me. I rejoice in all the great works that were done
by Alexander Campbell, Barton W. Stone, “Raccoon” John Smith and other pioneers.
But if I should do on this platform this morning some of the things which they
did in the meetings they held, many of the persons in this audience would say,
“He is not loyal.”

Sometimes loyalty to Christ is gauged by the religious journal one reads. Not
long ago a man asked me: “Do you get the Bible Bugle? (purely fictitious
names—P. S.) the Flimsy Foundation? the Gospel Clarion? the Keyhole Gazette?”
Yes, I read all of them, and like them fine. I like John O’Dowd's paper; I like
Foy Wallace’s paper; I like Brother McQuiddy's paper; I like Brother Showalter’s
paper. Why I have a fine treat sometimes with these papers. I take an afternoon
off and spread all the papers out before ma and just watch those writers as they
spar back and forth. And, of course, they always wind up in a good humor by
patting one another on the back and saying, “Kitty, kitty, kitty!” Please
understand that I am not opposed to the papers; I am for them. But any time a
man tries to circumscribe me by any one paper I am going to jump the fence. Any
time one paper sets itself up as the only standard of loyalty it thereby
be-comes a sectarian organization and institution. Chris-tianity is bigger than
any one religious paper. In other places loyalty is judged by selfish
Congrega-tionalism. I have preached in cities where there were several
congregations, and I declare unto you that some of the leaders were interested
in preaching the gospel only to the people within the four walls of one church
house. Some were jealous and envious of other con-gregations just as loyal to
the truth as they were. Why some would not even attend a gospel meeting over at
the other place. Is that the test of loyalty to the King and his kingdom in
which we are interested?

We have known of cases where loyalty was deter-mined by the preacher one liked.
I went to a place to preach once. After being there for some time, I began to
wonder where the other three hundred members were. We could have a big crowd
every time, perhaps a building full, and still never see about half of the
members. Then I got to calling around to see about the other “nine.” One man who
was not coming spoke right out, and I appreciated his frankness. He said:
“Nobody can preach like Brother So-and-So, and if you want me to come you will
have to bring him back as the preacher.” That man thought he was loyal to the
King. You know, sometimes we preachers get more additions than the Lord does. It
sounds good in the religious papers to report big numbers. Besides, it helps us
to get other meetings* But is that loyalty to Christ? We have had some preacher
rings just as political as Chicago’s politics. Haven’t you heard them talk?
“This is a good thing,” they say. “You pitch me a meeting and I’ll pitch you
one.” Is that the test of loyalty which will build a world brighter than this
one?

We come now to ask this question: Just what is the meaning of loyalty as applied
to the King and his king-dom? The word loyalty involves obedience to
consti-tuted authority. It comes to us through the Latin “lex,” meaning law.
There can be no loyalty apart from law. Then who is the lawgiver? Is it Paul
Southern? O. M. Reynolds? C. A. Buchanan? R. C. Bell? No. Neither is it Moses,
nor Abraham, nor John the Baptist. “For the law was given through Moses; grace
and truth came through Jesus Christ” (John 1:17). Paul said the law was a “tutor
to bring us unto Christ, that we might be justified by faith” (Galatians 3:24).
That law has been taken out of the way and nailed to the cross (Colossians
2:14). Christ is now the spokesman in religious matters. “All authority hath
been given unto me in heaver and on earth,” Jesus said (Matthew 28:18). God
speaks today through his Son (Hebrews 1:1-2). “Whosoever goeth onward and
abideth not in the teaching of Christ, hath not God: he that abideth in the
teaching, the same hath both the F ather and the Son” (2 John 1:9). In the
kingdom of God, I bend my knee to one only, the Lord Jesus Christ, and I refuse
to be tested for loyalty upon any other ground. He alone is my Master, and the
gospel is God’s power to save (Romans 1:16). Jesus is the captain of our
salvation (Hebrews 2:10). All spiritual blessings are in him, “in whom we have
our redemption through his blood, the forgiveness of our trespasses, according
to the riches of his grace” (Ephesians 1:3; Ephesians 1:7).

Loyalty to Christ involves a number of things, first of which is purity of
doctrine. There can be no other loyalty unless the doctrine is pure. That is why
I said at the outset that we ought to continue “stedfastly in the apostles’
teaching and fellowship, in the breaking of bread and the prayers” (Acts 2:42).
But some of the “loyal” congregations over the country have a peculiar idea of
loyalty to that doctrine. For instance, in a town where I held a meeting last
summer one of the ciders wanted to dismiss services on Sunday night and go over
and help a denomination close a meeting. He even thought it would be all right
for our people to sing in the choir. In another town they wanted to dismiss on
Sunday night and join up with the denominations in a big rally to wind up a Boy
Scout week. Is this purity of doctrine? There is no reason for the church to
exist if we join hands with all the denominations. Christ did not build
sectarian denominations, and to unite with them is to become a rebel in his
sight.

Loyalty to the King involves purity of worship. Many persons want Mark 16:16 and
Acts 2:38 preached, but they do not want anything said about disorderly worship.
“That is not the gospel,” they say, “We know our duty about such things. Why
don’t you preach the gospel?” One man said concerning one of my sermon? along
this line, “We have heard that for 40 years.” We have also heard Acts 2:38 since
Pentecost, but we still like to put it upon our tongues as a morsel of sweet
bread. Some people worship in vain, according to our King, because of their
behavior around the Lord’s table. I don’t think I am loyal to the King who gave
his life’s blood for me if I sit around the Lord’s table and talk and laugh as I
would at a football game. Loyalty to Christ includes being loyal to the worship
set up by the apostles of Christ in the long ago. If we add to it or take away
from it, we come under the condemnation of Christ who said: “This people
honoreth me with their lips; But their heart is far from me. But in vain do they
worship me, Teaching as their doctrines the precepts of men” (Matthew 15:8-9).

Neither can a Christian be loyal to Christ without purity of life. I am thinking
now of a certain church member who, in his day, could defeat any denomina-tional
preacher in the matter of proving sound doctrine. No enemy of the cross could
emerge victorious when that church member crossed swords with him.

He knew the plan of salvation, when and where the church was established, what
constitutes scriptural baptism, when we should observe the Lord’s supper, and
that the Bible is our only authority in religion. But this champion of the truth
was often removed in a drunken stupor from the gutter. If my loyalty does not
carry over into the busy mart of life, then I am a slacker and a rebel. “Pure
religion and undefiled before our God and Father is this, to visit the
fatherless and widows in their afflictions, and to keep oneself un-spotted from
the world” (James 1:27). “Come ye out from among them, and be ye separate, saith
the Lord, And touch no unclean thing; And I will receive you, And will be to you
a Father, and ye shall be to me sons and daughters” (2 Corinthians 6:17-18).
“Set your mind on things that are above, not on the tilings that are upon the
earth” (Colossians 3:2). “And they that are of Christ Jesus have crucified the
flesh with the passions and the lusts thereof” (Galatians 5:24). Any time I go
before the world as a Christian parading the banner of Prince Emmanuel and
dragging it in the dust by immorality, I am not loyal to the King—it matters not
how strong I am on baptism, or against premillennlal- ism or anything else.

Loyalty to the King certainly would include purity of stewardship, in the matter
of money, time, talent, influence, yea, life itself. By way of illustration, the
average member of the church gives twenty cents a week to the church. I have
observed this summer after summer where I have held meetings. Simply divide the
amount given by the number in each congregation and the result is about twenty
cents each. That means about $10.00 a year. The average “smoking member” of the
church of the Lord if that’s permissible terminology, spends $50.00 a year for
tobacco. Is this loyalty to the King? In a certain Texas town last summer I
heard a man talking about his loyalty. “Why I read the Bible through twice a
year,” he said, “and I am going to read it through three times this year.” Then
some church leaders told me about a business meeting which the man attended.
They were discussing church finance. Our “loyal” church member stood up and
said: “I just don’t understand how some people can get along without giving. My
wife and I just can’t stand to give less than $1.00 per month.” And they told me
that the man and his wife attended the movies every time the show changed. Still
he insists that he is loyal to the King. I know a sister who looks like a
Broadway fashion plate every time she steps out to services, and she gives the
church a dime just as regularly as the Lord’s day rolls around. What good does
it do for one to sing: “Take my silver and my gold, not a mite would I
withhold.” unless he gives as the Lord has prospered him? In the matter of
church attendance I believe loyalty plays a part. Christians have some definite
appointments with the Lord which must be kept. Yet some assume that they may
skip the worship on the slightest provocation* or the most trivial excuse. I
called on an old gentleman once to find out why he was not attending the
worship. As soon as I entered his home, he began to tell me why he could not
come. “I am old, and almost blind,” he said. “My hair is gray, and my body is
withering with the weight of years. But my spirit is with you every time the
church meets on the first day of the week. I am too old and frail to go to the
services any more.” I noticed on the lapel of his coat a badge of some kind and
asked him about it. It must have pleased him, for his face lighted up with a
smile as he told me about it. It was a long story about his work in a certain
lodge, Just a few night3 before, he had gone down to the lodge hall—in fact, he
“let the cat out of the bag” by telling me that he went every week. But on this
un-forgettable night, the lodge members had a kind of celebration in his honor.
They presented the badge to him as a token of appreciation for his long and
faithful service. The badge showed that he had a perfect record of service and
attendance for twenty-fivThen there is the matter of mission work. It has been
called to our attention during this lectureship that we ought to lift up our
eyes and look on the fields that are white unto harvest. Jesus commanded that we
go into all the world with the gospel. The church is the pillar and the ground
of the truth (1 Timothy 3:15). We are in the world with a book in our hands, for
we “have this treasure in earthen vessels" (2 Corinthians 4:7). Christ has no
other means of saving the world except through the gospel. We have pledged our
allegiance to the King, who has commissioned us to carry the message to every
creature. Are we going to carry this message? If not, can we truthfully say we
are loyal to the King?

Loyalty to the King involves being faithful in all cir-cumstances, under ah
difficulties: in peace and prosperity, in health and happiness, in sickness and
death, in perils and persecutions. Some people give up when the way is hard, but
you know the Lord never guaran-teed that it would be downhill and shady all the
way. “Take up your cross and follow me,” he said. Truly, some days must be dark
and dreary, into each life some rain must fall. But “blessed are ye when men
shall reproach you, and persecute you, and say all manner of evii against you
falsely, for my sake,” Jesus said (Matthew 5:11-12). “Rejoice, and be exceeding
glad: for great is your reward in heaven.” “If a man suffer as a Christian, let
him not be ashamed; but let him glorify God in this name” (1 Peter 4:16). Our
loyalty should be like that of Stephen, who was willing to die for his faith in
Christ. Even in death he could pray for his persecutors, ‘'Lord, lay not this
sin to their charge” {Acts 7:60). Let us be as faithful as those disciples who
met around the cross that eventful day when Jesus said: “My God, my God, why
hast thou forsaken me?” (Matt. 27:46). Think of that mother who camped at the
foot of the cross to see her own son crucified for the sins of the world. Let us
be as loyal to the King as she was to that Son and as he was to her. Certainly,
no human love is more profound than a mother’s love. When everyone else ceases
to think of you, your mother ceases to think of everyone, else. Let us be as
loyal today as Paul was when he came to the end of the journey. He said: “I have
fought a good fight, I have finished the course, I have kept the faith” (2 Tim.
4:7).

Let me give you a word picture of loyalty. In 79 A.D. Mount Vesuvius was in
eruption. Because of his interest in science and education, there was a man
standing just as close to that volcano as possible. He had devoted his life to
scientific research, and wanted to remain true to his obligation. That man was
Pliny. His loyalty to his work in the great phenomena of nature caused him to
get too close to that burning inferno, and he lost his life in the interest of
posterity. There were some soldiers standing guard that day in Pompeii, which
was buried by the eruption of Vesuvius. Pick and spade have revealed to us that
some of those who might have run for their lives and safety stood there on duty
to be incased by the molten lava which flowed down the hillside. They were loyal
to their responsibility, stood guard to the last. All of which reminds us of
Paul’s letter to the Ephesians. “Take up the whole armor of God,” he said, “that
ye may be able to withstand in the evil day, and, having done all, to stand”
(Eph, 6:13). On the eve of the Battle of Waterloo, someone asked the “Iron” Duke
of Wellington, “What are your orders for tomorrow in case you are killed?” He
said, “Stand and die to the last man.” The next day they stood, and some of them
died, but when the noise of battle had cleared away the history of civilization
had been changed and Napoleon had gone down in defeat. Down here in San Antonio
a few years ago a little group of men loyal to their country bared their breasts
to that oncoming horde of Mexicans and defended their flag to the last man.
During the Battle of Gettysburg in the Civil War, the flag bearer was injured
and fell upon the ground. His buddies rushed to his side and said, “You are
wounded, aren’t you?” He said: “Yes, I am more than wounded; I am dying. But
look! The old flag has not touched the ground yet.” With one hand he was still
holding the flag afloat upon the breeze. The bearer went down in death, but the
standard of the party still waved.

These stories of loyal patriotism are impressive, but I am talking to you about
loyalty to a flag, a King and a kingdom that mean infinitely more than political
and military kingdoms. Polycarp, a disciple of John, seems to have caught this
spirit of loyalty. When he was arraigned for trial, the proconsul said,
“Renounce Christ and I will release you.” Polycarp, looking upward toward
heaven, said: “Eighty and six years have I served him, and he hath never wronged
me, and how can I blaspheme my King who hath saved me?” “I have wild beasts,”
the proconsul threatened, “and I will expose you to them unless you recant.”
With a stedfast loyalty Polycarp said, “Call them.” “I will tame your spirit by
fire,” said the Roman. “You threat-en me,” said Polycarp, “with the fire which
burns only for a moment, and are yourself ignorant of the fire of eternal
punishment reserved for the ungodly.” Within a short while Polycarp was bound on
the burning stake, where he thanked God for the honor of a martyr’s fate. He was
loyal to his convictions, even unto death, I suggest to you that we should be
just as loyal to the King and his kingdom. “Be ye stedfast, uninova- ble, always
abounding in the work of the Lord, forasmuch as ye know that your labor is not
in vain in the Lord" (1 Cor. 15:58). Ihe blessings of heaven are for those who
are faithful in God’s service to the end. “Be thou faithful unto death, and I
will give thee the crown of life” (Rev. 2:10). Just as my father said to me when
I was leaving home, “Son, stand up for Jesus, beloyal to the King,” so I am
appealing to us to maintain that same loyalty. Back yonder somewhere the most of
us met Christ at the altar of obedience and pledged him our life, our love, our
all. Have we kept the faith ? "Blessed are those servants, whom the Lord when he
cometh shall find watching” (Luke 12:37).


========================================================================
  CHAPTER 14: THE POSSIBILITIES OF CHRISTIANITY IN AUSTRALIA
========================================================================

The Possibilities of Christianity in Australia THE POSSIBILITIES OF CHRISTIANITY
IN AUSTRALIA By Colin Smith This year college debate teams throughout this
coun-try will be debating the advisability and possibility of this nation’s
pursuing a policy of strict economic and military isolation from a great portion
of the world. I am not here to discuss that question from the economic or civil
standpoint; but from the religious standpoint I have no hesitation in assuming
that the churches of this land have no intention of adopting such a policy. My
experience among you has shown me that you realize that the church has a
world-wide mission. Every nation is included in the Great Commission, and the
kingdom of God can become nationalized only at the peril of its own existence.
For us, national barriers have ceased to exist. My presence here on this program
is proof of that. The church throughout the world is one, and an opening in any
country is a challenge to all Christians in every other country.

I believe that in Australia there is an open door of opportunity, and, of
course, many adversaries. The latter I do not believe are unconquerable if a
deliberate and determined attempt to overcome them is made. My faith in the
power of the simple New Testament gospel has been greatly increased as a result
of my visit to this country, and particularly to this college. I came here
expecting to find a few small groups of Christians scattered over the land,
struggling for an existence as are all religious bodies in Australia. I did not
dream that you could have succeeded in establishing New Testament churches to
the extent that you have. Like David you have routed the giant Goliaths of
erroneous ideas and unscriptural practices, and all that remains is to possess
the land. In Australia we have not yet found the sling, nor even learned to
recognize the giant when we see him.

Nearly a century ago the movement to restore primitive Christianity sprang up in
my country, but early in our history visitors from this country, coming to us as
wolves in sheep’s clothing, began gradually and cunningly to lead away the flock
of God. Admittedly the infant church in the far away land should have been
watching, but it thought that this country was the center of our present
civilization; it thought that American people were so much like Australian
people, that anything coming from the restoration movement in this country would
be beneficial in Australia.

First, the young church, before it was old enough to form properly its own
ideas, was told that effective evangelistic, educational and social work could
be done only when the churches were acting as a unit. I believe that the church
must be united; a house divided against itself must fall sooner or later. But
under the influence of visiting teachers, the small churches were led to believe
that united efforts could be made only through conferences and the committees
and societies that result from conferences. As a result of that idea a system of
district and state conferences grew rapidly, and usurped the responsibility that
God had placed on the local congregation. At least they aimed at doing that, but
succeeded only in crippling the individual initiative of the churches, and
stifling any progress that might have been made. The barrier having been broken
by the introduction of conferences, other innovations followed, until today
practically every congregation uses instrumental music in the worship. Of
course, that all happened before my time, and the voices of protest became lower
and lower until today they are almost inaudible. If one dares to protest against
unscriptural innovations he is silenced with the argument that in this country
the non-progressives are rapidly dying out, while the progressive or liberal
element of the restoration movement is growing by leaps and bounds. That was the
opinion I had, in com-mon with others, until Brother John Allen Hudson visited
oui shores about two and a half years ago. Then I began to see that his reports
could not be harmonized with the impressions left by other visitors. I thought,
the conservative section was composed of a few ignorant and bigotted people who
were rapidly dying out; but even with such a misconception many of us were
dissatisfied with conditions in the churches of Christ in Australia. We could
see that no progress was being made, and we began to blame the system under
which we were working. The coming of Brother Hudson served to stimulate our
thinking and confirmed us in the belief that such things as conferences were
introduced without Scriptural authority. Today, many in Australia, though not
separated from the digressive element, are beginning to realize that there has
been something of a departure from the restoration plea, which of course means a
departure from the New Tes-tament as an all sufficient guide able to completely
fur-nish us for every good work. Our task is to stimulate that line of thought,
and save something from the whole body in Australia. Let me add that I know none
in Australia who would endorse all of the practices of the First Christian
Church in this country. All are much more conservative than that, and believe
that they are working toward the restoration of Christianity as taught and
practiced in the first century by the apostles. Inside congregations that have
introduced unscriptural innovations there are numbers who are opposed to those
things. Because religious prejudice is not so marked in that country as it is
here, we have an opportunity to reach those people.

There are some groups that have remained loyal, or as we say in Australia, “in
the old paths.” In these groups there would not be a total of more than 100
disciples. Most of them are in the vicinity of Sydney, a city with a population
of almost a million and a half people. Some of these small loyal churches are
meeting in homes; some of them have their own church houses; none of them has
ever used instrumental music in the worship, nor have they been connected with
conference organizations. Sydney, then, becomes our logical center from which to
work. There we would have access to the pulpits of the more liberal churches,
and for at least a few years there would be no clear line of demarkation between
the “Old Paths” churches and the digressive churches. The division would most
likely come along later when the “Old Path” section gained strength and became
worthy of attention. However, considering that the Australian people fear
division more than they fear innovation, I do not think there would ever be the
prejudice and bitterness that unfortunately exists in this country.

Besides the opportunity that exists for teaching inside the liberal churches,
there are, I believe, remarkable opportunities in other fields. Our state
educational regulations give recognized religious teachers the right to enter
all the schools for the purpose of giving religious instruction. Naturally there
are some requirements that have to be met, lest children receive instruction
from incompetent teachers, or against the will of their parents. But the people
are so indifferent to religion that practically every child in the public
elementary and high schools could be reached once a week, if we had sufficient
workers. Our educational system presents an open door that is being neglected by
every religious group in Australia. About a month ago I received a letter from a
teacher whom I have never met. He deplored the fact that no religious
instruction was being given in the schools of Tasmania despite the provision
made in the laws of the land. Naturally we cannot expect the state to give
education in religious subjects, but Christians should be alive to their
opportunities and obligations. Religious instruction is particularly necessary
for the schools of Australia because of the absence of religious colleges. Some
day we may be able to remedy that lack, but at present will have to plan on
reaching the students in the high schools. Much also could be dune in the
primary grades, but without a whole army of workers I think it will be more
profitable to work with the high school boys and girls. In the Universities,
too, much could be done if we had the workers, but I have referred to the high
schools because 1 believe the students there are much more impressionable than
college students. To supplement the work in the schools and churches, we also
have an opportunity to teach by means of radio. Our radio system in Australia is
similar to that here. No religious body is at present using the radio to any
extent. I do not at present know whether we can at-tempt anything along that
line, or whether it will prove too expensive. In this country much of your
success has been due to the printing press. You are fortunate in having men who
are prepared to publish literature and periodicals devoted to the preaching and
defense of the gospel. In Australia the Austral Publishing Company publishes a
weekly paper, “The Australian Christian,” representing the churches of Christ.
This paper, however, does not represent our ideas, and will be of no use to us.
I hope that we can soon arrange for the publication of another paper. Until
about nine years ago, “The Restorationist” was published monthly, but the
publisher dropped it. Whether or not he can and will recommence publication, I
do not know. Whether or not he does, we can use large quantities of literature
from the churches here in America. However, literature published there would
possess advantages that are obvious. Supplemented with tracts and periodicals
from here, mimeographed matter could also be used to good advantage. Perhaps,
too. we could do something with a library of good doctrinal books to circulate
among the churches.

Thus you can see, we have three great open doors of opportunity at Sydney. Every
school door is open in-vitingly. Work done in the schools would bear fruit in
later years. Further, the name of one speaking to thek students in the high
schools would become known, by name at least, to the parents and friends of the
boys and girls. Boys and girls there are the same as boys and girls here, and
would talk to their mothers and dads ibout the preacher whose coming brought a
welcome respite from the monotony of regular lessons. That is casting no
reflection upon the school teachers, but may be assuming that the preacher has
something to say, and can say it in an interesting manner. Thus we can build up
easily a potential radio audience. Then with the parents and children interested
in the preacher, some of them would read tracts and other literature, The
opportunity is there, but the work is not going to be easy or rapid. With forty
years of digressive teaching, error is firmly entrenched. The Australian people
are conservative, and largely indifferent to religious matters. An estimate made
last year showed that only about 7% of the people attended religious services.
We will have to start with the rising generation, and educate them spiritually.
Naturally results will not be seen immediately. Here a preacher has a large body
of Christian school teachers who have been educated in this and similar
colleges. They can influence the boys and girls in the schools. In Australia
most teachers are religiously nothing, and are a hin-drance, rather than a help
to our cause. Ultimately we may be able to establish some religious colleges in
that country, but for the present perhaps we had better aim at having some of
our young men attend this and similar colleges in America. Probably we should
arrange to have someone come here from the churches in Australia and major in
music, so that he can return to Australia and help with the singing. However, i
have been treated so well here, that I would be compelled to advise a
restrictive clause placed in his passport so that he would have to return to
Australia rather than settling down here where it is much easier to do religious
work, amongst so mi&ny Christian associates.

I have been talking about the opportunity at Sydney because that is our largest
city; but similar opportunities exist in many other cities. Australia is
approximately the same size as the United States. It does not have any cities as
large as New York, but it has several states larger than Texas, Not one of all
our states has in it a single preacher devoting his time to the preaching of the
New Testament gospel, and opposing the introduction of unscriptural innovations.
As you cast your eyes on the map of the world, you can visualize a whole
continent populated by a people who are speaking your language and enjoying the
same standard of living that you enjoy ,* many of them worship the same God, and
have been baptized with the same baptism, but have been led astray by men
pre-tending to represent the churches of Christ in this country. A whole
continent without a single preacher devoting his time to the work of extending
the borders of God’s kingdom and fighting against errors from within. A nation
that has taken the cross as its symbol because every night the Southern Cross
shines over it, and yet a nation led away from the simplicity that is in the
Cross of Calvary. I look forward to the time when the cross that has been placed
in our sky and in our flag will be a symbol of the cross that has won our
hearts.

I have taken the time to tell you about the opportuni-ties at Sydney because I
am planning to make that the center from which we will work. Melbourne is almost
as large as Sydney; it is the religious center of Australia, and its inhabitants
have a greater interest in religion than do those of Sydney. But it has been the
center from which the seeds of digression have been sown. Tares there are
getting so thick that the wheat has been choked out. As far as I know, there is
not a single “Old Path” congregation in Victoria, the state of which Melbourne
is the capital.

Tasmania is my own state, and like the others pre-sents pienty of opportunities.
I would like to work from there as a center, but that state is not centrally
situated geographically, as you will see if you look at the map we have here.
The history of the restoration movement there has been glorious in the past, but
with a departure from the Bible as an absolute authority in faith and practice,
a decline followed, and over the doors of many of the buildings could be written
“Ichabod,” for the glory has departed.

However, Tasmania is not so far from Sydney that it could not be visited
sometimes. In the state there are two or three small groups that are loyal. Two
of these are in country districts; the other is in a city about the size of
Abilene. Like Elijah of old, they are beginning to think that they are the only
ones left. If only through the years we had been making some contacts with the
great body of Christians here, we would have felt less discouraged; but we
believed that here, too, the people with instrumental music and conferences were
making all the progress, and that the conservative section was doomed to almost
certain extinction within a generation or so. A message from here occasionally
would afford great encouragement, and would show them that God has reserved for
himself a great host of people who have not bowed the knee to Baal. I know those
people; I believe I know every family in every church in Tasmania, whether they
are "Old Path” brethren or not. I know that many who have in the past year or
two occupied positions of distinction in various conferences and committees, are
beginning to see that such aids are a failure. And they are a failure. If better
work could be done by means of conferences, etc., God would have included them
in his plan. Like David's new cart, that he made to carry the ark, they shift
the load from the Levites to the oxen, but sooner or later the oxen stumble.
Then there are plenty of men like Uzzah who are ready to steady the ark. Uzzah
tried to help with his hands; the modern method is to add a few more conference
committees to help preach the gospel, and a few mechanical instruments to aid
with the singing. So effectively do such things aid the church in her work and
worship, that groups of Christians once welded together by the faithful
preaching of some good man, have nothing for which to live, and we see the
spectacle of churches closing their doors!

I could relate similar facts about each of our six states, for the experience in
all has been the same. New Zealand, too, is in a similar plight. A few small
churches struggling against almost overwhelming odds, and discouraged bj all
sorts of inaccurate reports from this land! Why it is that the church of the
Lord Jesus Christ, purchased by his own blood, and established in all whiteness
and purity to be his bride, should be the victim of erroneous teaching from
within similar groups in other lands, I do not know. I am not going to assert
that the church of the Lord in Australia and New Zealand was free from error
before the advent of teachers from this country. From the vary first the
influence of Christians there was handicapped by their failure to see the need
and script uralness of supporting their evangelists. Believing in the British
“Mutual Ministry” system, they considered that preaching and teaching was the
work of the elders. I would be the last to assert that elders are absolved from
that work even when they engage the services of an evangelist or preacher.
However the experience in Australia has shown that a preacher is terribly
handicapped when forced to earn his living at secular work, while trying to
prepare sermons for the Lord’s Day. Perhaps if we bad given some men an
opportunity to study as well as to preach, innovations would have been more
difficult to introduce. In fact, such things gained an ingress because the
preachers sent from this country were more highly educated than the unpaid
preachers in the Australian churches. Then realizing the influence that educated
and trained preachers could have, many promising young men were brought over to
attend such colleges as Bethany, and Butler, and T. C. U. These men on their
return to Australia naturally became leaders in the movement, and for forty
years have watched their ideas take root and grow. Truth and error cannot exist
together, and the growth of one results in the suppression of the other.

We need now a succession of men who will work to uproot the errors that have got
a foothold in, and ulti-mately taken control of the church in Australia. I said
we needed men because all of God’s movements to save men and women have been
conditioned upon human cooperation. In his conflict with Baal in Old Testament
times, God used Elijah; after Christ finished his part of the atoning work he
used Peter to preach the first gospel sermon; when he wanted to get the message
to the Ethiopian eunuch, he took Philip away from a successful meeting in
Samaria because without the help of some man the Ethiopian did not understand
what he was reading. Jesus went back to the Father in heaven, where he will
remain until the times of restitution of all things whereof God spake by the
mouths of the prophets, but the work of human redemption was not finished, and
will not be finished until the gospel has been taken to every creature in every
land and country. This part of the task was left to the church. If we fail, then
Jesus fails because he has made no other provision for the extension of his
kingdom and the salvation of men. In one generation the message of
reconciliation was preached in all the known world, and the apostle could go to
the martyr's grave saying, “For I am now ready to be offered, and the time of my
departure is at hand. I have fought a good fight, I have finished my course, I
have kept the faith: henceforth there is laid up for me a crown of
righteousness, which the Lord, the righteous judge, shall give me at that day:
and not to me only, but to all them also that love his appearing.”

Surely those who love his appearing are those who are busy doing his will,
preaching the gospel either per-sonally or by means of their wealth and
influence, throughout the whole world.

I can think of no field that presents greater possi-bilities than does
Australia. Occupying the position it does, it is the key to the myriad islands
of the Pacific Ocean: it is the key to India with its countless multi-tudes of
men and women made in the image of God, and ignorantly bowing down to idols of
brass and wood and stone, vainly groping after something they cannot define. It
is the key to Papua with its millions of can-nibals who can be helped only by
the gospel of Jesus, But the task in Australia is not going to be easy in
Australia. Before us we have a long and tedious job, but we know that the gospel
is the power of God, and what has been accomplished here in America can be
accomplished among people of the same blood in Australia. Over there, the
church, the pillar and ground of the truth, is weak and sickly because it was
led astray while it was yet a little child. Starved, or fed on adulterated food
when it should have been getting the sincere milk of the word, it is looking to
its older brother in America, and with a voice already feeble, is pleading,
"Come over to Australia and help us.”


========================================================================
Source: https://sermonindex.net/books/abilene1941-lectures/
========================================================================