News And Views
News From Here And There
As perhaps you have noticed this column is now coming out twice each month. We hope that it is read and that only good will be done by the things herein reported or written. Let it be fully understood that ONLY the writer of this column is responsible for the things that appear herein. He is solely to blame for any blunders, mistakes or charges made. Do not blame Bro. Tant — he probably hasn't even read the column! It certainly is not the intention of this writer to print anything that is not true nor to make any blunders or mistakes This writer may not be as wise as YOU are in HOW to handle every matter with which he deals; but he can only do AS and WHAT HE ALONE THINKS IS RIGHT AND PROPER. Your criticisms and comments are solicited. Send them to me. In this column, which Bro Tant has granted me to write without any "strings attached" (that is, within reason), I give vent to my own views of various matters I am not interested in taking advantage of this space to make any PERSONAL attack on anyone. The TRUTH is the supreme end that we seek in all things ... Dorris V. Rader is now working with the Chapel Hill; Tennessee church ... Jerry Ray has moved from Bellville, Texas to work with the Westside church in Irving, Texas ... R. Ervin Driskill has moved from Meridian, Mississippi to labor with the church in Gladewater, Texas . . . Have you read about the so-called "Challenge of The Century"? Well, if you have not been exposed to the propaganda of this drive by the elders of the Highland church in Abilene, it is simply because they do not have your name and address or else they do not want you to know about it. They have sent out reams of paper and bundles of advertising to solicit and drum up more money for their gigantic project, The Herald Of Truth. I would guess that they have spent enough money in advertising and ballyhoo to support two or three preachers for a whole year. They certainly do not get that kind of stuff done for nothing. And I would also suggest that the two or three preachers which they could support with just this money used for getting more money, could do more real good in preaching the gospel and saving souls than The HOT will do! Of course, the HOT keeps them in the limelight and they have the pleasure of thinking that they are doing something BIG for the Lord (?)! Brethren are sold on BIG things in our day — and there is nothing wrong with a project solely because it might be BIG; unless it calls for some BIGGER ORGANIZATION or some OTHER ORGANIZATION than that which is prescribed in the New Testament. That the HOT is condemned on both counts is easily recognized when one studies the New Testament and respects its limitations . . . ATTENTION CHURCHES: It is not my purpose to run a preacher advertising agency or to become a "placement agency" for preachers But I am very glad to help faithful preachers and faithful churches in any way that I can. As a result of information I have from one source or the other, I pretty well always know of some good, sound preachers who are interested in making a change. Also, I now and then know of some church wanting such a man. A few such churches and a number of such preachers write me for such information one way or the other. I know of several good men now who are interested in making a change. I would be happy to tell any church desiring such a man about these men and help make such contact for you. If I can be of any assistance along this line to either churches or preachers, please feel free to call upon me . . . Tom Byers has moved from Poughkeepsie, New York to Abilene, Texas ... Gene Lyles is now with the church in Poughkeepsie... Gentry M. Stults has moved to Lakeland, Florida from Winter Haven . . . Roy S. Fudge has moved from Hendersonville, North Carolina to Athens, Alabama . . . A. L. Jennings has moved to work with the church in Goliad, Texas, coming from Refugio, Texas . . . Gilbert Copeland has moved from Malvern, Arkansas to Beaumont, Texas where he will work with the Rosedale church ... Frank L, Smith moved from Lancaster, Texas to Birmingham, Alabama, where he will labor with the Huffman church ... Jere Frost will leave the work in Newbern, Tennessee around the first of November to move to Birmingham, where he will work with the 77th St. church . . . Jesse Jenkins has moved from Irving, Texas to Ft. Worth where he will work with the Calmont church . . . My good friend, Earl Dale is the editor of a new paper — THE WATCHMAN, which has just gotten underway. The first issue is excellent and it bids fair to take its place among like worthy efforts to teach the truth and oppose error. With Dale at the helm and backed by such staff writers as Don Atherson, Kenneth Fielder, Wayne Partain and Glenn Rogers, the paper can not but be a powerful medium for truth and a mighty opponent of error. I see no subscription price given so I suppose it is sent free to all who want it. However, it would certainly be in order to send some financial help if you can. YOU need the paper. Address the editor, P. O. Box 1244, Harlingen, Texas. I take this means of wishing the paper well and commend it to your reading ... From the Kilgore Courier, edited by George T. Jones, I lift the following quote: "It is better to debate a question without settling it, than to settle a question without debating it." Read that again — it is really food for thought.
Helping The Mote Hunters
The mugwump editor of the FIRM FOUNDATION writes an editorial under the above caption in the August 18th issue of that paper. It is not certain (and how can anyone be certain about anything Lemmons writes?) whether he is trying to be funny, beg for sympathy, find an easy way to pass off all criticisms of his writings, or if he is really serious in what he wrote. I can not accept the last conclusion in view of too many other facts in the case. It appears to me to be cheap and childish way of
"running himself down" in an effort to beg sympathy and to excuse himself from dealing with the just criticisms that have been brought against him! In the article he offers to help the "mote hunters" — whoever they are! They have been after him and sorta giving him a hard way to go. Of course, anyone who may write some objection to Lemmons' editorials or expose the errors he presents is automatically a "mote hunter". Seeing so many criticisms of himself and his writings (and of course, he says that all such are "unkind, unchristian and untruthful") he was in a real dilemma as to what course to pursue. It seems that many of his friends thought that he should reply to some of the critics. Well, he decided NOT "to go after our critic, and drive a few log wagons through the holes in his arguments" (which probably was not hard to decide since it not likely that he could have done this anyway!). He finally hit upon this idea. "Shucks, we (and who else this "we" includes I do not know. He is always using the plural and so maybe it includes his wife!) can do a much better job criticizing our own efforts than he can. And then we started writing." Doesn't that sound like a spoiled child who has been scolded by mother? Such baby-action ill behooves the editor of such a paper. He may fool the gullible with this grandstand play but not the thinking people who read his paper. Those who THINK know he is "caught" and will be able to see through this veneer of humility.
Well, Lemmons tells us that when he finished telling on himself in the article he wrote criticizing his own efforts "it wasn't fit to run in the Firm Foundation." Wonder why? In this vain display of humility and self-examination, Lemmons really said more than he meant to say. Yes, far more! It might be good for the readers of the Firm Foundation to see just what the editor of that paper would say about himself in criticizing his own efforts. In fact, the implications of what he wrote would seem to indicate that in all fairness and honor he should reveal to his readers just what kind of man he really is. He says: "We never cease to be thankful for the fact that our critics do not know as much about us as we do. If they did they would have a field day." Now that sounds like he is a pretty bad fellow. It certainly leaves a big question mark over him to say the least of it. Just what things so terrible and wicked has he done that if his critics knew about they would have a "field day?" Maybe someone should have a "field day" with a fellow like that. Is he guilty of theft — stealing from the readers or the company? Is he guilty of lying? Fornication? Drunkeness? Hatred? Or, other works of the flesh? Well, one is made to wonder. Listen to this further testimony from this expert on himself: "But we will guarantee that it is the juiciest, cuttingest, most sarcastic piece of criticism you ever laid your longing eyes on! This one was written by one who knows; all the rest have been written by those who don't. This is the unabridged edition!" He affirms that what he wrote is certainly true for it was written by "one who knows" and therefore must deal with things that are actually true. Think of all the implications of his statements. Perhaps his wife should check up on him! Elders of the churches using a man like this should desire to know just what "skeletons" hang in his closet; just what kind of man he really is for it seems that no one but himself really knows him! All the other Critics were merely "mote hunters"; but Lemmons evidently wrote about the "beams"!
Lemmons tells us that all his critics and all the criticisms have never even begun to tell the whole story! He says. "We have included so many things the other critics have left out that instead of being angry with them we are sympathetic, and have nothing but pity for their puny little efforts." Now remember that what Lemmons wrote about himself is true and written by "one who knows!"
Lemmons tells us that after reading "the thing, we decided it wasn't fit to run in the Firm Foundation." So he would have us believe that "We considered sending it to one of the criticizing papers, and decided that would be useless. They wouldn't run it. You see, they print both sides, and all this is on the same side. Not a chance!" Now this contains several deceptions. First, if he did actually write such an article, and he ought to be ashamed if he did, no one is so foolish as to believe that he ever "considered" sending it to one of "the criticizing papers." He says: "They wouldn't print it." How does he know? Why did he not try them and see? The way he has talked about these papers printing such things one would think that they would gladly print it. He either made false charges against these "criticizing papers" that they are anxious to print such or else he did not believe his own statement when he said "they wouldn't run it." There is hypocrisy here somewhere.
Moreover, Lemmons implies that he thinks the article should be printed and would effect to bemoan the fact that it "probably will never see the light of print." Now he is the one who wrote the article and he says himself that it was written by "one who knows." Maybe it should be printed and Lemmons' sincerity can well be tested by this matter. If he is the kind of man that his article implies that he is, then by all means such should be made known, even if it has to be done by one of "the criticizing papers!"
Lemmons ought to be downright ashamed of this article — if the implications are not true. If they are true, then by all means to prove his sincerity and for the information of the readers of the Firm Foundation, he should print the article and make proper correction of all the "many things" that are deserving of even his own criticism. If he did not mean what his article implies, then he should confess his deceit to God and make full apology to his readers. This is one of the most ridiculous articles I have ever read from any man; whether it is true or false. If it is not true, then Lemmons stands guilty of his own charge hurled at other of his critics, that what he wrote of himself is "unkind, unchristian and untruthful." What a mess! What a man!
Keeping The Record Straight
Under the above heading the editor of the Gospel Advocate recently set forth his pontifical anathemas upon James P. Miller, Florida Christian College, Yater Tant, the GOSPEL GUARDIAN and me. I intend to reply in detail to the article and expose the downright falsehoods and vicious insinuations thereof. Space forbids starting on such this time.
Will A Man Rob God?
Will a man rob God?
"No, never!" man cries.
"Oh, but you have,"
God sadly replies.
"You've robbed me in dollars;
You've given me cents,
Then ask what, the spread
Of the gospel, prevents.
"You've robbed me in time For pleasures of the day.
You rarely even take thought
To kneel down and pray.
"You've robbed me in service
You're too busy' you say.
Do you think I'll forget
In the great judgment day?
"You've robbed my position
In matters divine
As you say, 'I will follow My own pattern this time.
Will a man rob God
Of His just due?
Each one must answer;
How about you?
Donald P. Ames — The Teacher