In This Issue...

• Franklin Graham Festival 2000 -- Marvin Weir p.49
• Brotherhood "Watchdogs" -- Richard Guill p.50
• Restoring The Restoration -- Jerry Brewer p.51
• 101 Questions For Cambellites, #4 -- Chuck Northrop p.52
• 2000 Lectureship Schedule -- p.55
• Mail Bag -- p.56

      One will never read a more revealing statement authorizing religious apostasy than the one given by the elders of the Broadway Church of Christ in Lubbock, Texas. The statement that follows is taken from their Volume 68, Number 3, January 30, 2000 bulletin. The statement is quoted below in its entirety.

     In the coming weeks you will hear a great deal about the upcoming Franklin Graham Festival 2000. The Festival will be coming to Lubbock in the spring of 2000, and Max Lucado will be coming this winter to "kick-off" the events that will lead up to the Festival.
     Some of our fellowship will hail this event as a powerful opportunity to have the name of Jesus held high in our community and consider it an opportunity to teach any who may seek further study. Others will not believe members should participate. In short, the Festival has the potential to be a very divisive issue.
     In the spirit of unity and in Christ's love, we, the elders of the Broadway Church of Christ, feel that the Broadway congregation cannot serve as an official sponsor of Festival 2000.
     We, as an eldership, make this request of our Broadway family. For those of you who might be uncomfortable with any participation in Festival 2000, we ask your prayers and encouragement for those of our family who may attend or work for the crusade. Their desire is that souls are saved and doors opened for the gospel of Christ. For those of you who might feel called to attend or work for Festival 2000, we ask your prayers and understanding for those who might be uncomfortable with any role in the Festival. Their desire is also that souls are saved and doors opened for the gospel of Christ.
     We know that Broadway has people wanting to attend or serve in various capacities; and, out of this same desire for unity in Christ, we want them to know that they have the blessings of the Broadway eldership. In a paraphrase of what Paul says in Romans 14...what may be wrong for one brother is not necessarily wrong for another.
     Our goal is for people to be open and receptive to the gospel of Christ, and that God receive all the glory and honor for what we do. We pray for God's blessings for our congregation as we serve this diverse family of believers. [The emphasis in bold is mine, MLW].

     Max Lucado is hailed as the one to "kick-off" the denominational campaign. No one makes mockery of the Lord's church more or embraces denominationalism more closely than Max! The Broadway elders obviously approve of Max Lucado.
     It is obvious that those who consider Festival 2000 as "an opportunity to have the name of Jesus held high in the community" are considered in "fellowship" at Broadway. But please notice the decision by the elders for Broadway not to serve as an official sponsor is in the "spirit of unity and in Christ's love."
     According to the elders, those who desire to attend and work at the crusade and those who are uncomfortable in participating have the same desire -- "for souls to be saved and doors opened for the gospel of Christ." Is there more than one Gospel to be proclaimed to a lost and dying world (Gal. 1:6-9)? I think not! Thus, if the Gospel is being taught and proclaimed, every member at Broadway and in Lubbock should support the effort. If a perversion of the Gospel is being taught and proclaimed, no member of the church of Christ should participate in the campaign. Neither Franklin Graham, nor his father Billy Graham, preaches the Gospel of Christ in its purity! They are members of a man-made denomination and believe and teach that one can be saved in a denomination.
     Now note that it is because of this "same desire for unity in Christ" that those members desiring to support Franklin Graham and Festival 2000 will have "the blessings of the Broadway elders." Never will you see more blatant hypocrisy practiced! In the "spirit of unity and in Christ's love" the elders will not allow Broadway to be a sponsoring congregation, but in the "same desire for unity in Christ" they do not hesitate to place their "blessings" on all who desire to participate in the Festival. They run to Romans 14 in an attempt to justify their sanction of those who participate, but Romans 14 is not discussing matters of doctrine or that which is sinful in and of itself.
     Denominationalism is condemned by Scripture (1 Cor. 1:10-13) and those who support and encourage it commit a grievous sin against the Lord and His church (Matt. 16:18; Eph. 1:22-23; 4:4; 1 Cor. 12:13). Jesus never spoke truer words than when He said, "Every plant which my heavenly Father planted not, shall be rooted up. Let them alone: they are blind guides. And if the blind guide the blind, both shall fall into a pit" (Matt. 15:13-14).
     Christians are to "have no fellowship with the unfruitful works of darkness, but rather even reprove them" (Eph. 5:11). Instead of attempting to act in such a way as to preserve "bodies" and "money," godly elders would not hesitate to hold "to the faithful word which is according to the teaching, that (they) may be able to exhort in the sound doctrine, and to convict the gainsayers" (Titus 1:9).
     Faithful brethren who truly love the Lord and His church will demonstrate that love by marking "them that are causing the divisions and occasions of stumbling, contrary to the doctrine which ye learned: and turn away from them. For they that are such serve not our Lord Christ, but their own belly; and by their smooth and fair speech they beguile the hearts of the innocent" (Rom. 16:17-18).
     I refuse to fellowship or follow Broadway and those like her who support denominationalism -- an enemy of the Lord's church!
          5810 Liberty Grove Rd.
          Rowlett, TX 75089

Table of Contents

    In a certain neighborhood, crime was really bad, particularly burglaries. One homeowner decided to buy a watch dog to warn him if someone came around. The "crooks" didn't like the watchdog one bit. They didn't want any one or any thing exposing them for what they were. But there was another problem as well. Some of the neighbors, who were not crooks themselves, did not like it when the watchdog barked his warning, particularly in the middle of the night. Thus they complained about the neighborhood "watchdog."
     The brotherhood of Christ is being decimated and destroyed by false prophets in sheep's clothing (Matt. 7:15). There are many who have posted a watch for such wolves and will "bark" (sound the alarm) to warn others of the danger. Now these false teachers don't like for anyone to warn others about them and their works. They try to intimidate and discourage such by calling them "brotherhood watchdogs" or "brotherhood policemen." It is not surprising to hear such. However, many others don't want the tranquility of their peaceful slumber disturbed by those who would sound an alarm. They had much rather sleep peacefully while the destruction and plunder goes on all around them. So they also complain about "brotherhood watchdogs" and ask the question, "Who made you a brother-hood watchdog?" One brother in a recent article sneeringly referred to those who sound such warnings as the "Soundhedrin Council."
     What about the question, "Who made you a brotherhood watchdog?" Are they so deficient in knowledge that they do not know? I think not. That is done to try to stop the mouths of those who would warn others about them and expose their evil deeds.
     My friends, God has appointed "watchmen" for that very purpose. Note this idea from both the Old and New Testaments.
     God appointed prophets as watchmen over the house of Israel. They were to watch for any danger that would bring destruction to the people of God. That included false prophets and ungodly living. They were to sound the warning when such was seen. If they did not, God would require the blood of the violator at their hand. "Son of man, I have made thee a watchman unto the house of Israel: therefore hear the word at my mouth, and give them warning from me. When I say unto the wicked, Thou shalt surely die; and thou givest him not warning, nor speakest to warn the wicked from his wicked way, to save his life; the same wicked man shall die in his iniquity; but his blood will I require at thine hand. Yet if thou warn the wicked, and he turn not from his wickedness, nor from his wicked way, he shall die in his iniquity; but thou hast delivered thy soul. Again, when a righteous man doth turn from his righteousness, and commit iniquity, and I lay a stumblingblock before him, he shall die: because thou hast not given him warning, he shall die in his sin, and his righteousness which he hath done shall not be remembered; but his blood will I require at thine hand. Nevertheless if thou warn the righteous man, that the righteous sin not, and he doth not sin, he shall surely live, because he is warned; also thou hast delivered thy soul" (Ezek. 3:17-21).
     There were other watchmen for the nation of Israel, but they would not do their job. Isaiah described them and their failure, "His watchmen are blind: they are all ignorant, they are all dumb dogs, they cannot bark; sleeping, lying down, loving to slumber" (Isa. 56:10).
     The principle of a watchman was recognized by the apostle Paul. When he addressed the Ephesian elders in the meeting at Miletus, he told them, "Wherefore I take you to record this day, that I am pure from the blood of all men. For I have not shunned to declare unto you all the counsel of God. ... Therefore watch, and remember, that by the space of three years I ceased not to warn every one night and day with tears" (Acts 20:26,27,31). In view of that, he warned the elders of grievous wolves who would not spare the flock and laid upon them the responsibility to "watch." A major part of the responsibility of the elders is to watch for the souls of them who are under their shepherding (Heb. 13:17). Do you suppose that elders who do not warn their flock of false teachers can rightly claim to have their hands clean of the blood of those who follow such teachers and their doctrines and are lost? If Paul could not, how could they?
     Another whom God has appointed as a "watchman" is the evangelist, the preacher of the Gospel. When Paul wrote to his son in the faith, Timothy, a Gospel preacher, he stressed that he must watch and warn. He was to "charge some that they teach no other doctrine" (1 Tim. 1:13). Do you suppose they accused him of being a watchdog?
     He was also to rebuke elders that sinned (1 Tim. 5:19-20) and withdraw himself from any man who would "teach otherwise and consent not unto wholesome words, even the words of our Lord Jesus Christ" (1 Tim. 6:3-5). He was to "turn away from" those who only had a form of godliness, but denied the power thereof (2 Tim. 3:1-5).
     God has also made every Christian a watchman. Elders and preachers must help watch and warn us, but we also have a responsibility to watch for those who would lead God's people astray, warn about them, and avoid them. Romans 16:17 says, "Now I beseech you, brethren, that ye mark them which cause divisions and offenses contrary to the doctrine which ye have learned; and avoid them." Note, this is to "brethren." If a brother is teaching that which will bring division to the body of Christ and destruction to the souls who follow him, I must avoid him myself, but I must also identify him and warn others of the danger. Let him complain and charge me with being a "brotherhood watchdog," it will not silence me since God has appointed me to be such. I do not want the blood of those who are lost, without my warning, to be upon my hands.
     Why is it that otherwise faithful brethren do not like "watchdogs" that bark when they see danger? I do not know all the reasons, but one has to be that they have a perverted view of what "love" and "peace" really mean. They consider any warning as an evidence of a lack of love and that such as warn others are guilty of disturbing the peace, even as Ahab charged Elijah (1 Kings 18:17).
     If you are a faithful Christian, God has made you a "watchdog." You're not going to be one of those dumb dogs that cannot bark, are you?
          7725 State Route 121 N
          Murray, KY 42071

Table of Contents

     In the shibboleths of the modern language of Ashdod, the intellectually elite among churches of Christ refer to the church as "our fellowship," or "our restoration heritage." Their language betrays more devotion to the historicity of the Stone-Campbell movement than to the church for which Jesus died. It was that very thing against which Earl Irvin West warned. Noting that Alexander Campbell was held in high esteem by "all adherents to restoration principles," West offers the following caveat: "While such veneration is commendable, yet it has its dangers, for too frequently there is a temptation to ascribe to Campbell a greatness of which he was not worthy. Indeed, it is the danger of the study of the whole restoration movement, for with many there seems to be a fundamental interest in restoring the restoration rather than the New Testament church. In the restoration movement no authority of any kind is to be found. No man is qualified to intelligently approach the study unless he recognizes that those who played the important roles were just men and liable to errors. We lose nothing in admitting that at times they were wrong, for there is only one authority -- the New Testament Scriptures. This study of the restoration movement is approached, not with the idea of attempting to fit any pioneer leader into a mold, but to study as objectively as possible what they did teach. Where they were wrong, we shall frankly state it; where they were right, we shall gladly uphold it." (West, The Search For The Ancient Order, Volume One, Gospel Advocate Co., Nashville, 1964, p.181).
     West referred to Campbell's support of the American Christian Society, one of the factors that gave rise to the apostate Disciples of Christ and the Independent Christian Church. That those who now propose to change the church into a denomination venerate Stone and Campbell should surprise no one. Devoted to a "new hermeneutic," they would have us loose from the ancient verities circumscribing the work and worship of the church and embrace the restoration movement rather than the church which has been restored. Change agents in the church well understand the truth of West's observation that, "In the restoration movement no authority of any kind is to be found." That explains their devotion to the "Stone-Campbell heritage." "Nine ministers and church historians met June 25 [1999] in Cincinnati in the interest of restoring dialogue among all three segments of the Stone-Campbell heritage. "The meeting was an ad hoc gathering, with no official sponsorship. Its purpose was to discuss ways to lessen the impact of division between the Disciples of Christ, non-instrumental Churches of Christ, and Independent Christian Churches/Churches of Christ." (Christian Chronicle, October, 1999).
     The stated purpose of this meeting -- to "lessen the impact of division" between these three "segments of the Stone-Campbell heritage" -- ignores the division and its cause. The "impact" of the division can be completely negated by submission to God's authority expressed in the Scriptures. Had the Disciples of Christ respected the authority of God a century ago, no division would have occurred. Restoring the restoration among these "segments of the Stone-Campbell heritage" is a rejection of God's authority and reduces the bride of Christ to a denominational harlot among all the others.
     Stone and Campbell were great men, but they were only men. Why not seek unity upon the New Testament, rather than "union" in a "movement" of men on the spiritual Plains of Ono? The church for which Jesus died and which exists on the North American continent today is not a "movement." It is the eternal kingdom purposed from eternity, promised to the patriarchs of old, prophesied in the Old Testament, prepared by John, and established by Jesus Christ.
          308 South Oklahoma
          Elk City, Oklahoma 73644

Table of Contents

    54. "What Prophet in the Old Testament prophesied of BAPTISM?"
     There are many things about the church that are revealed in the Old Testament through prophecy. However, there are some specifics that are not. For example, where in the Old Testament is the collection prophesied or the Lord's supper. Both are seen in types or shadows, but neither are specifically prophesied. The same is true concerning baptism. Naaman was told by Elisha to dip in the Jordan seven times to be cleansed of his leprosy, and when he did, Naaman's skin was like that of a little child (1 Kings 5). Paul also showed the shadow through Moses and the children of Israel as they left the land of bondage saying, they "were all baptized unto Moses in the cloud and in the sea" (1 Cor. 10:1,2). Before baptism, they were in bondage, after baptism, they were made free. Further, Peter showed the figure through Noah in 1 Peter 3:20,21. Concerning the ark, Peter said, "eight souls were saved by water." Interestingly, the same water that destroyed the old world saved Noah and his family. Again, water was God's dividing line. It separated the new world from the old and the saved from the lost. "The like figure whereunto even baptism doth also now save us..."
     55. "Did Peter preach to Cornelius that all the prophets bore witness to the fact that whosoever believeth in Him shall receive remission of sin? Acts 10:43. Do you believe what Peter said?"
     A most basic rule of interpretation concerns context. "A text out of context is a pretext to religious error." Many Baptists stop with Acts 10:43, but just four verses later, Peter asked, "Can any man forbid water, that these should not be baptized, which have received the Holy Ghost as well as we? And he commanded them to be baptized in the name of the Lord" (Acts 10:47,48). If baptism was unnecessary, then why did he command it? The command shows the necessity of the act. The act of baptism, as well as repentance and confession, is included in the word "believeth" when it is taken in its context. James proves this when he said "ye see then how that by works a man is justified, and not by faith only" (James 2:24).
     56. "If Peter preached Baptism, FOR or IN ORDER TO REMISSION OF SINS in Acts 2:38, why did he not preach the same thing to Cornelius in Acts 10:42,43?"
     Peter did preach the necessity of baptism! The belief or faith Peter preached included obedience which in turn included baptism as clearly revealed in verses 47 and 48 of Acts 10.
     57. "In your sugar text which you yourself do not understand (Acts 2:38) how many words BETWEEN the word BAPTISM and the word REMISSION? You will have to cut 11 words out of your text before you can JOIN BAPTISM TO REMISSION OF SIN. What means these 11 words -- which you and your brethren always avoid?"
     Does the number of words between two concepts necessarily mean the two concepts are not connected? What kind of reasoning is that? In question 12 (p.36), Baptist Davis pointed out a person is redeemed by the precious blood of Christ (1 Peter 1:18,19). Did you know there are twenty words between "redeemed" and "precious?" Does that mean redemption is not through the precious blood of Christ? Of course not!
     What about Acts 2:38? "Then Peter said unto them, Repent, and be baptized every one of you in the name of Jesus Christ for the remission of sins, and ye shall receive the gift of the Holy Ghost." From this verse, there are a number of things we learn about baptism. First, a person must repent before he or she is baptized. Second, baptism is commanded of "every one of you" referring to those who heard the word preached in the sermon which prompted their question, "what shall we do?" Third, baptism is to be "in the name of Jesus Christ" which means by His authority. And finally, baptism is "for the remission of sins" or more literally "into deliverance of sins." Those four points cover the eleven words between "baptism" and "remission."
     58. "What is the Greek Word translated or rather Anglicized into the word Christ in Acts 2:38? Why don't you put the exact Greek word in the text and then read Acts 2:38 to your people and quit making a childish play on the preposition FOR? When you do this you find complete harmony with Acts 10:43 and John 3:16. -Just a little kink right here give the people the original there- you won't have to notice the preposition so technically."
     This question is absurd! I honestly do not know how to put it any other way. If the Greek word is Anglicized, then how can anyone read it without the "exact Greek word?" This question implies that to emphasize a preposition is to make a childish play. In the first place, God inspired Luke to write the preposition just as much as He inspired him to write the word "Christ." No one has the right to take away the preposition (Rev. 22:18,19). Also, consider this: Jesus said, "If ye love me, keep my commandments" (John 14:15). Because of our love for "Christ,"we strive to do exactly what He commanded. To do all that He said even to the smallest preposition is to show true love for the Savior. To squirm around such clear God-given commandments such as baptism is to show the lack of one's love. Finally, consider this question: Why does Baptist Davis want this inspired preposition "for" minimized? Is it not because it disagrees with his doctrine of "faith only?"
     59. "Does the word WATER as used in John 3:5 mean Baptism? Why didn't Christ say what he meant to say? If he really meant Baptism -when he said water- by the same reasoning - He evidently meant Baptism in the next Chapter (John 4:7-15). Read again the story of the Woman at the well -substitute the word Baptism for Water everywhere it is found in the story exactly as you substitute the word Baptism for water in John 3:5- see what a story you make. False Doctrines always lead to muddy water. Where the Bible speaks we speak."
     Another grasping at straw! Where does he get these ideas? Does he believe he has some official book on the doctrine of the Campbellites? Surely, no one really believes this stuff. Every time the word "water" is used in Scripture does not necessarily refer to baptism. No accountable person could be so foolish as to believe such. However, this does not mean it can never refer to baptism? It would be just as foolish to believe this, but that is the implication of this question.
     In John 3:5, Jesus said, "Verily, verily, I say unto thee, Except a man be born of water and of the Spirit, he cannot enter into the kingdom of God." In explanation to Nicodemus, Jesus was speaking of the new birth. The new birth consists of both water and Spirit. What birth in the New Testament consists of these two elements? Baptism! Baptism is a birth from which one is raised to walk a newness of life (Rom. 6:4). Baptism is to be done in water for the eunuch said, "See, here is water; what doth hinder me to be baptized" (Acts 8:36)? And, baptism is connected with the Spirit for Paul wrote, "For by one Spirit are we all baptized into one body..." (1 Cor. 12:13). John 3:3-5 is about baptism -- not because the word water is used, but because the concepts of the new birth, water, and Spirit are used to refer to a single act.
     60. "The sermon to Nicodemus was BEFORE Pentecost - Did Christ jump the gun by preaching to him when Pentecost had not come."
     Hebrews 9:17 says, "For a testament is of force after men are dead: otherwise it is of no strength at all while the testator liveth." When is a testament written? After men are dead or while the testator liveth? Jesus revealed His Will while He was alive, and the Holy Spirit brought "all things" to the apostles' remembrance after Jesus' death (John 14:26). Thus, Jesus was teaching Nicodemus His Testament which would go into effect on the day of Pentecost. As previously noted, Jesus both taught and practiced water baptism for the remission of sins throughout His personal ministry on earth (see John 4:1; also see question 15, p.36).
     61. "Is the term 'CHURCH OF GOD' a Scriptural term?"
     Yes. Speaking to the elders at Ephesus, Paul said, "Take heed therefore unto yourselves, and to all the flock, over the which the Holy Ghost hath made you overseers, to feed the church of God, which he hath purchased with his own blood" (Acts 20:28; see also 1 Cor. 1:2; 10:32; 11:22; 15:9; 2 Cor. 1:1; Gal. 1:13; 1 Tim. 3:5).
     62. "Do you recognize people who call themselves CHURCH OF GOD?"
     Absolutely. We recognize the church of God at Ephesus from which the elders came to Miletus to speak with Paul. We also recognize the churches of God at Corinth and in Galatia. However, we do not have fellowship with the charismatic "Church of God" today -- not because of their name, but because of their so-called miracles and tongues as well as their human origin and organization.
     63. "Does wearing a Scriptural NAME alone mean that BODY is a Scriptural Body? Upon that grounds do you refuse to recognize the Holiness people who call themselves by the name CHURCH OF GOD?"
     Wearing a Scriptural name alone does not mean a congregation or group of congregations is in fact the Lord's church. We apply the same principle to counterfeiters. A counterfeiter may wear my name, but he is not me. Paul said Satan appears as an angel of light (2 Cor. 11:14), but he certainly is not an angel of light. The application Paul makes is this, "Therefore it is no great thing if his ministers also be transformed as the ministers of righteousness; whose end shall be according to their works" (2 Cor. 11:15). Therefore, it takes more to be the Lord's church than to wear a Scriptural name. Consider now another application that ought to be made. If today a person was searching for the church we read about in the New Testament, he or she might begin by looking for churches which are called by a Scriptural name such as "the church of Christ" or "the church of God." Any others could be quickly eliminated; and, that certainly includes the Baptist Church!
     64. "If those people are going to Hell in spite of their name (According to your doctrine they are all lost), Then it will take MORE THAN A BIBLE name to save them -will it not?"
     It is foolish to think only wearing a name can mean anything. A name must be supported by one's actions, but wearing the wrong name is also wrong. If a counterfeit wears the wrong name, all will recognize him as being wrong. Family names have reputations -- some good and some bad. A son may wear a good family name, but unless his actions are good, he does not hold up the family name. Churches may wear the name of Christ, but that alone does not mean they are the church of Christ. However, if a church does not wear the name of Christ, it is certainly not a church of Christ.
     65. "If it takes more than a BIBLE NAME to save the Holiness, this they will admit: Will it take more than a Bible name to save you? Will you admit it?"
     A Bible name alone will not save anyone, and I personally do not know any Gospel preacher or any other member of the church of Christ who would say such a foolish thing. To wear the name "Christian" does not mean you are one; and, it takes more to be a Christian than wearing the name.
     66. "Were the Converts and Disciples called CHRISTIANS on the Day of Pentecost? Were they saved? The Antioch Believers (Acts 11:26) were first to be called CHRISTIANS (10 years after Pentecost). Were the Antioch Believers any more saved than the Pentecost Believers? Did they call THEMSELVES Christians -- or were they CALLED CHRISTIANS?"
     Although those who obeyed the Gospel on Pentecost were not called Christians until later, that does not in any way mean they were not Christians. The term "Christian" simply refers to one who is a follower of Christ, and those who obeyed Christ on Pentecost were followers of Christ. They were Christians though not called Christians. Therefore to be a Christian is equivalent to being saved. Christians in Antioch did the same thing those in Jerusalem did to be saved or to become Christians.
     As to whether they called themselves Christians, or were called Christians, the text says, "And the disciples were called Christians first in Antioch." The word "called" means divinely called and is a fulfillment of Isaiah 62:2. God, through Paul and Barnabas, called them Christians. If God calls one a Christian, then it is only fitting for Christians to call themselves Christians.
     67. Did Jesus or His Apostles anywhere in the 4 Gospels use the word Christians? Did Jesus know what to call his Followers? If it is of Divine Origin -- why did not the name Originate with Jesus the True Authority in matters of religion?
     Jesus and the apostles, during the Lord's ministry, did not use the name "Christian." Why did God choose not to call His disciples Christians until Acts 11:26? God simply does not reveal why. "The secret things belong unto the LORD our God: but those things which are revealed belong unto us and to our children for ever, that we may do all the words of this law" (Deut. 29:29). All we can say is it was according to God's plan -- plain and simple.
     68. "Did Jesus say to Nicodemus 'Ye Must be born again' or did He say 'Ye must be Baptized and wear the name Christian,' Which?"
     As we have previously noted, to be born again is the same as being baptized. Baptism is the new birth. Romans 6:3-18 makes this clear. One dies (to sin), is buried (in water), and is raised up out of the water to live a new life. One cannot walk a new life without it (v.4). When a person obeys the Gospel and is baptized, he or she is born again and is saved. Upon being saved, God adds him or her to the church (Acts 2:47). When one is added to the church, he or she is wearing the name of Christ because the church God adds the saved to is the church of Christ. Therefore, they are wearing the name of Christ both collectively as the church of Christ and individually as Christians.
     69. "Were the members of 'Church of God at Corinth' LOST because Paul failed to call them CHURCH OF CHRIST?"
     In the Bible, the church of God is the church of Christ. They are one and the same. Listen again to Acts 20:28, "...the Holy Ghost hath made you overseers, to feed the church of God, which he hath purchased with his own blood." With whose own blood? This text says God's own blood. But, wasn't it Christ's blood? Yes. Then how can it say, God's? Because Jesus is God. Therefore, the church of God is the church of Christ.
     70. "Is it possible for anyone to be a Believer who is a member of a church not called the CHURCH OF CHRIST?"
     Yes, the church at Corinth and Galatia were called the church of God. Is it scriptural for a Christian to be a member of a church with an unscriptural name? No. God does not add a person to a man-made church. He adds them to His church which is "the church of Christ," "the church of God," "the church of the living God" (1 Tim. 3:15), and "church of the firstborn" (Heb. 12:23). The Baptist Church cannot be found in the Scriptures, and it has an unscriptural name.
     71. "Were these people lost who were members of the Church of God at Corinth?"
     Absolutely not! God added them to His church, and those who remained faithful until death are enjoying paradise. However, the church of God in Corinth is not the holiness "Church of God" denomination of today.
     72. Were there any Churches in the New Testament -not called by the name-CHURCH OF CHRIST? Were their members saved or lost?"
     Yes, we have pointed out the church is called, "the church" (Acts 2:47), "the church of Christ," "the church of God," "the church of the living God" (1 Tim. 3:15), and "church of the firstborn" (Heb. 12:23). Since God does the adding, and they were added to the church, then they were saved.
     73. "Is the term THE CHURCH OF CHRIST found as a title to any one CHURCH in the Bible anywhere? Give CASE AND NUMBER OF ROM. 16:16."
     The case of the word "churches" in Romans 16:16 is nominative which means it is the subject of the sentence, and the number is plural. What does that prove? Nothing? If the churches were collectively called "churches of Christ," then it must be each individual congregation was known as a church of Christ. To say otherwise would be foolish.
          RR 4 Box 4412
          Cleveland, OK 74020

Table of Contents

"We were saddened to hear about sister Wanda Lancaster. We are sending this contribution in her memory, please use it any way you see fit. We really felt very close to her since she was so concerned for our staying firm in the truth, and so kind to us. We were strengthened by her sending the tapes of brother Garland's sermons. We will remember her each Lord's day when we listen to them" ...Helen Robertson, Barbara Farley, Lu Ella Fallier, Arkansas City, KS. "A friend of mine recently gave me a copy of Seek the Old Paths. It is really refreshing to find someone speaking out against liberalism in the church. The issue I have dealt with Fred McClure in the Birmingham area. As I live in a suburb I was quite familiar with this error. Thank you for exposing it" ...W. W. Hayes, Tarrant, AL. "Keep up the good work" ...Susie Hall, White Oak, TX. "Keep up the great work of exposing the ones in the brotherhood who are teaching error. Our prayers continue for your good work" ...Myron Morris, Elba, Al. "I would like to receive your publication Seek the Old Paths. I read a recent issue and I enjoyed the material in it" ...Frank R. Harris, Clarksville, IN. "We are sending a small check to help with your expense of sending the paper to us. We enjoy reading it and we learn from it. Best wishes!" ...Joe & Alene Britt, Baxter, TN. "You certainly have some good writers in S.T.O.P. I look forward to each issue. Thank you and the other elders for the work of the church that you are doing" ...James Fisher, Franklin, LA. "Thank you so much! You all are going a wonderful job! I have enjoyed your web site a great deal. I know you will be blessed for this maintaining a hold to the righteousness God has given us" ...Debra A. Reitz, Newport, KY. "Thank you so very much for sending us your most welcome publication. Hopefully, we won't miss an issue. Our prayers are with you and we ask the same for us" ...Delsie & Bob Zimmerlee, Kingman, AZ. "Continue publishing this great paper. Look forward to each issue" ...Name withheld. "Thank you very much for your stand for the truth. Your publications and others have been a source of comfort to us" ...Steve Daugherty, Valdosta, GA. "A friend of mine receives Seek the Old Paths and I enjoy reading it. I find it to be a sound publication, unlike many of the others" ...D. Cliff Goggans, Siloam Springs, AR. "Thank you for continuing to remain grounded in the Truth. It is sad to see so many people who once were faithful to the Word, now leave it and no longer "Seek the Old Paths" ...Oluf L. Pyle, La Feria, TX. "I want to thank you for the great work that is being done at your congregation. As we all know so many congregations are allowing liberalism to creep in. It is so very wonderful to know that there are still sound congregations left. I also receive STOP and look forward to each issue" ...Jason White, Milliken, CO. "I really enjoy the paper very much. Keep up the good work" ...Lizzie Payne, Indianapolis, IN. "I have just finished reading the March issue. The Sermon of Sorrow I find it very good and inspiring. The way some of the churches are going is a disaster. Thank God for the ones that are holding up the Faith. I'll pray for your good work" ...Edith Henderson, Flint, MI. "About a year ago, a brother from our church gave me a copy of Seek the Old Paths to read. I enjoyed it so very much and passed it on to a sister of mine to read. She has enjoyed them very much also. We've all enjoyed many articles in it as I've taken it to our ladies' Bible class and several of the sisters have passed it around for others to read and enjoy" ...Wilma Watson, Port St. Lucie, FL. "We have been receiving your excellent publication, S.T.O.P. for quite sometime and enjoy each and every issue. Your staff presents very good and much needed material that should be widely read. Thank you for your dedication to truth. Keep up the good work" ...Hugh Word, Russellville, AR. "Please note my change of address. I wouldn't want to miss a single issue of S.T.O.P. Thank you for the great work you are doing. God bless you all" ...Bill Freeman, Beeville, TX. "I appreciate the work you are doing in the publication Seek the Old Paths. May the Lord continue to bless your efforts in this work" ...Bill Beckham, Texarkana, TX. "Your paper Seek the Old Paths is great and helping a lot of people see what is going on and all the false teaching going on. Some have said in the past to me, that can't happen to the Lord's church, well it has. All the false teaching going on by once faithful Christians, what a shame for the Lord's church" ...Name Withheld. "I enjoy the paper. You stand for the truth" ...Kathryn McCrackin, Pocahontas, AR. "I'm writing you this letter to tell you to take me off your mailing list for the paper called Seek the Old Paths and also drop the ten papers you send here for the Williamson Area Church of Christ. Just stop all papers being mailed to my address and take my name and address off of your mailing list" ...James R. Williams, Stone, KY. "I have been receiving STOP for some time and really enjoy the fine paper. I appreciate your stand for the truth. Keep up the good work" ...Gary Rayborn, Camden, AR. "I enjoy reading Seek the Old Paths" ...Dorothy Lefevers, Naples, FL. "We really enjoy the paper. Keep up the good work" ...Bill Manuel, Shady Valley, TN. "Would you please send me the Seek the Old Paths? I read the one sent to my brother here. I really enjoyed it" ...Mae Smith, Holiday, FL. "I receive the Seek the Old Paths paper and enjoy it so much. Glad someone points out error in the church" ...Elsie Luttrell, Franklin, NC. "I have recently read Seek the Old Paths and loved it, and agree whole heartily with what you say. We must stay with what the Bible teaches, not what society says. It is wonderful to read things that should be said (or thought) in our churches of Christ today. It is sad where we live the church is too liberal. We choose the one that seems to be most like the Bible teaches. Thank you so much, me and my family are so happy to know others read and believe the way we were taught growing up. Everything from no pianos, to you don't need to go to college to know the Bible and how to preach. Thank you" ...Name withheld. "Continue the good work you do" ...Lamar Johnson, Athens, GA.

Table of Contents

15th Annual
Seek The Old Paths Lectureship
July 23-27, 2000
Always the 4th Sunday in July

Theme:
DANGERS FACING THE CHURCH -- CHANGING VIEWS

SUNDAY, JULY 23

MONDAY, JULY 24

TUESDAY, JULY 25

WEDNESDAY, JULY 26

THURSDAY, JULY 27

East Corinth Church of Christ
1801 Cruise St., Corinth, MS 38834
Voice (662) 286-2040 or 286-6575

Fax (662) 286-2040
Contact Us

VIDEO TAPE INFORMATION: Complete set of video tapes, $40 postage paid Jim Green 2711 Spring Meade Blvd. Columbia, TN 38401 Phone: 931-486-1365 / Email: jgreen@edge.net

CASSETTE TAPE INFORMATION : Audio cassette tapes are being offered free by the church. Donations to help defray their cost are welcome. Order cassette tapes from the church.  East Corinth church of Christ, 1801 Cruise St., Corinth, MS 38834

BOOK INFORMATION $5 pre-publication price if postmarked by July 31, 2000. $6.50 beginning August 1, 2000. Please include postage and handling: 1 book $1.75; add 50cents for each additional book. Makes checks to Old Paths Publishing and mail to: P.O. Box 97, Nettleton, MS 38858. These books are not sold by the church.

MOTELS: Be sure to tell them you are here for the lectureship!

       Comfort Inn -- (800) 22-5150, $48 and up, plus tax, Continental breakfast.

     Hampton Inn -- (800) 426-7866, $61 and up, plus tax, Complimentary deluxe breakfast.

     Holiday Inn Express-- (800) 465-4329, $65 and up, Continental breakfast