Devoted to the Propagation and Defense of New Testament Christianity
March 16, 1961
NUMBER 44, PAGE 6-7,14b

News And Views

Charles A. Holt, 4662 University, Wichita Falls, Texas

Scripture Studies Is The Name Of A New Monthly Paper Published By The Eastside Church In Russellville, Alabama. Raymond Harvell, The Preacher, Is The Editor. It Is Designed Primarily For Members Of The Church. The First Issue Is Neat And Contains Some Good Material. I Presume That It Is Free To All Who Desire It New Address: Please Take Note Of My New Address As Above. If I Have Not Yet Notified You In A Personal Way Of This Change, Then Please Accept This As An Official Notice And Correct My Address On Your Bulletin Or Paper. Thanks Very Much In The Bulletin Of The Morgan Street Church, Martinsville, Indiana, The Preacher For That Church, Jimmy Rogers, Writes As Follows: "Brother W. L. Totty Gave Us A Wonderful Lesson Last Night On The Arguments Made By The Opponents Of Orphans " Now I Am Sure That Such Was The Case, For Totty Is Just The Man To Deal With These Imaginary "Opponents Of Orphans!" Of Course, All Honest People Know That This Is But Another "Straw Man" Erected By Totty And Rogers In Order For Totty To Have Something To "Rant And Rave" About That He Can Destroy! Try To Imagine Someone Really Being An "Opponent Of Orphans!" With Such Vicious Language As This, Is It Any Wonder That There Is So Much Prejudice Against The Truth And So Much Misunderstanding Of What It Is All About? When Is A Person Drunk? "There Is Only One Complete Solution To The Problem Of Drinking And Driving: That Every Driver And Every Pedestrian Be 100% Sober. You Cannot Take One Drink And Be 100% Sober." — Page 47, Texas Driving Handbook, By Texas Dept. Of Public Safety. I Lifted This Statement From The Bulletin Of The Church In Lancaster, Texas, Where Tom Byers Is The Preacher. The Above Is A Sober And Challenging Statement. It Should Help Answer The Quibble Of The Worldling Who Is Always Asking About When Is One Drunk And Arguing That He (Or She) Never Gets Drunk Even Though They Do Drink! According To This Authoritative Source, "You Cannot Take One Drink And Be 100% Sober." So One Drink Makes One Partially Drunk. Can Those Who Desire To Please The Lord Entertain Even The Thought That Anything Less Than Being 100% Sober Will Please Him? A Unique Experience: This Past Year I Had A Meeting Scheduled With The Church In Palmetto, Florida. It Had Been Set For About Two Years. Due To Reasons That Really Have No Bearing On The Point Of This Story, When The Time Was About Near For The Meeting, I Wrote The Elders To Confirm A Definite Date. Well, They Had Already Made Other Arrangements. In The Course Of Our Exchange About The Mix-Up, They Came To Realize That The Fault Was At Their End Of The Line; Even Though It Was Just One Of Those Things That Sometimes Happens. It Was Too Late In The Year And Too Near The Time For The Meeting For Me To Arrange For Another Meeting In Place Of This One. I Had Saved The Time For It And Was Planning On Helping In It. So I Was Just Out A Meeting. The Elders Took This Mistake To Heart In An Unusual Way. They Insisted Upon Making Some Amends To Me In A Financial Way In Order To At Least Partially Compensate For My Loss; So They Sent Me A Check For $100! I Must Freely Confess That This Is My First Experience Along This Line In Nearly Twenty Years Of Preaching. I Am Overwhelmed By The Desire To Atone For Such An Error As This. Most Elders Would Have Said Nothing Even In The Way Of An Apology, To Say Nothing Of Doing Anything About It. Such Is No Loss To Them And They Do Not Feel The Effects Of Such Things. Other Elders Would Have Perhaps Tendered Their Regrets And Apology, Which Would Have Ended The Matter. But Not These Men. They Realized That I Suffered Some Financial Loss In The Matter, To Say Nothing Of The Other Difficulties. So, They Did More Than Say That They Were Sorry. Now Can You Beat That? Have You Ever Known Of Any Like Cases? It Is A Wonderful Delight To Me To See Men Who Have Such Regard For Making Things Right, Even Though, As In This Case, It Is Not Intentional; And Who Have Some Regard For What Any Kind Of Financial Loss Means To A Preacher. If You Know Of Some Instance Of Like Nature, I Should Be Delighted To Report It Here, And Give Credit To All Such Men For Their Concern And Thoughtfulness.

Helping The Methodist

"We noticed with mixed feelings the announcement that the former preacher for a local church of Christ, now an elder there, has taken on a new responsibility besides being elder, orphan home superintendent, building contractor, etc. His new responsibility? HE IS NOW ON A COMMITTEE WORKING TO RAISE $75,000 IN AN EFFORT TO BRING A METHODIST HOME FOR THE AGED TO PORTALES!

"Certainly this should cause some raised eyebrows in some of the liberal churches. The idea of a gospel preacher working to further the cause of a denomination founded by John Wesley (which opposes the body of Christ) should be pretty hard to swallow. Surely there are some over there who cannot stomach such rank liberalism." — J. D. Tant, Portales Reflector, Portales, N. M.

I Believe In Big Churches

For some reason or another, people have never wanted to be thought "odd," or in a class by themselves. Rather, they want to be "one of the crowd." It would seem that some who are aware of this are trying to win people to the Lord by letting them know that "we" (the church of Christ) are not just a "few" who are "by themselves," but that there are many of us; we are the "fastest growing group 'in the USA." It seems there is a desire to impress people with the fact that we are "BIG" in numbers. But I want to go on record as saying that I believe in BIG churches!

It is my firm conviction that churches ought to be BIG! But I do not mean BIG in numbers, but in the following ways:

Churches ought to be BIG enough to want ALL the TRUTH!

Churches ought to be BIG enough to preach against sin in every form, both in the church and out — just wherever it happens to be found.

Churches ought to be BIG enough to speak against error. Yes, even if some brethren should be found guilty of error, BIG churches will be found exposing it. It will not matter to a BIG church whether the ones guilty of error are men in high places; e.g. editors of papers, or even college presidents!

Churches ought to be BIG enough to withdraw from any member who is guilty of ungodliness and will not repent of it.

Church members ought to be BIG enough to give to the church's work all that the Lord requires of them. This includes money, time, as well as ability.

Yes, I believe in BIG churches. As a matter of fact, I doubt if a church is pleasing to God if it not a BIG church in the sense that the word has been used here. Of course, a church can be BIG, even though it has only two members.

How about the church of Christ of which you are a member? How BIG is it? — via The Bessemer Reminder, Bessemer, Alabama.

The Preacher Hasn't Been To See Me!

Some members of the church are sometimes heard making the above statement. Of course, there are some conditions under which the preacher ought to visit some. If people are in need of instruction then the preacher needs to "go see" them. That is his work as a preacher — to preach or teach. If you needed some instruction and he refused to come when you sought his help, then he was negligent.

However, generally when this statement is made, something else is meant. It is usually meant that the preacher did not stop by for a social visit. While preachers ought to be sociable, that is not their work as preachers. If preachers tried to make the rounds of all the members once a month, he would consume the larger portion of his time making social calls and would have to sacrifice time needed in calling on those who are in need of teaching, and in making preparation for the various lessons to be presented each week, to say nothing of the need to study the Bible for his own good. When people make such a statement, it might be interesting to ask them this question: Have you been to see the preacher? Why should you think it anymore his duty to visit you socially than it is your duty to visit him?

Sometimes a member of the congregation will get sick. The preacher will not know of it, and then later that person will report, "I was sick and you know that preacher never came to see me." In the first place, the preacher ought to visit sick folks, but NOT BECAUSE HE IS A PREACHER. He ought to visit them because he is a Christian, and every Christian has the same responsibility in that respect the preacher does. We have often asked those who chide us about being sick and not receiving a visit from us, "Did the doctor come?" "Yes." "How did he know you were sick?" Answer: "I called and told him." Question: "How did you expect me to know you were sick?" Really, do you suppose folks think preachers have some magic way of automatically knowing such things?

— Connie Adams But Still They Smoke Them!

A UPI release a few days ago reported that the American Cancer Society estimated that THIRTY SEVEN THOUSAND (37,000) Americans will die of lung cancer in 1961, and that CIGARETTE SMOKING WAS "THE MAJOR CAUSE."

Their booklet "1961 Cancer Facts and Figures" renewed the charge of the AMERICAN CANCER SOCIETY that: "beyond reasonable doubt.... cigarette smoking is the MAJOR CAUSE of the unprecedented increase in lung cancer."

If the present trend continues, ONE MILLION children now in school will die of cancer BEFORE THEY REACH THE AGE OF 70. Elimination of the cigarette habit would reduce that approximately ONE-FOURTH.

In spite of the fact that. LUNG CANCER has shown the most rapid rise EVER REPORTED for a non-infectious disease (it is SIX TIMES what it was 20 years ago) — and in spite of the "connection" now proven beyond reasonable doubt, PEOPLE CONTINUE TO SMOKE CIGARETTES.

Brethren, I can more nearly understand those who are "outside the church" — those who "live dangerously" by ignoring their responsibility to God — if THEY persist in such habits. BUT IT IS BECOMING INCREASINGLY DIFFICULT FOR ME TO UNDERSTAND HOW THOSE CLAIMING TO BE CHRISTIANS CAN CONTINUE SUCH HABITS.

We could consider the matter from the standpoint of influence; we could think of it as it pertains to our being ENSLAVED by it (wrong for any Christian!) or we can stick with its hurt to our physical bodies (and it does because you will never talk to a smoker who QUITS WHO DOES NOT FEEL BETTER — after he has recovered from the agony of breaking the habit, anyway).

ANY WAY YOU LOOK AT IT — THE CHURCH MEMBER COULD NEVER DEFEND THE PRACTICE. But still "they" smoke them. OR WILL YOU? Many others have quit — and greatly rejoice that they did. YOU CAN, TOO! How about it?