Old Paths Advocate Volume 6 Number 5

5/1/1933

G. C. Brewer’s Review of “The Cup of The Lord”

Answered by J. D. Phillips - Number 4

“Continuing our review of the Phillips tract, we observe:

5. “Drink Ye All of (ek, out of) It.” Last week it was shown that the New Testament does not say that Christ gave it - the cup - to the disciples, but that He gave to them that which they were to drink. It was also shown that no one can say just how each individual received his portion - whether he took it into his mouth from a common cup or whether he first received it into his own separate cup. Even if they did all drink out of the same vessel, it no more makes that binding upon us than that fact that they reclined at the table makes it necessary for us to recline at the table when we partake of the emblems. But the author of the tract says that they all drank from, out of, the same vessel, and he bases an argument upon the preposition “of,” which is “ek” in the Greek. He says that “ek” means “out of,” and therefore they all drank out of one cup.”

It was not “shown” “last week” that “the New Testament does not say that Christ gave it - the cup - to the disciples.” You ignored the Greek idiom which requires an “it” after “He gave,” in Matthew 26:27, and you assumed that He did not give them the cup, but that He “gave to them that which they were to drink” - “the fruit of the vine.” Of course, He gave them “the fruit of the vine,” but He gave it to them in what the N. T. calls poteerion, and this word means “a cup, a drinking vessel.”

Neither was “it shown that no one can say just how each individual received his portion.” Christ gave the cup to them, saying, “You must all drink out of (ek) it” (Matthew 26:27); and “they all drank out of (ek) it” (Mark 14:23). “Ek with a genitive of the vessel out of which one drinks” (Thayer), “the vessel out of which one drinks” being poteerion, “a cup, a drinking vessel,” as he points out. Paul says so in so many words - “Let him drink (pino) out of (ek) the cup (poteerion)” (1 Corinthians 11:28).

When you prove that they “reclined at the table,” it will then be time for you to try to make an argument from it in favor of your cups law! They reclined at another supper.

“A sufficient answer to this is the fact that they all drank of that which came out of the same vessel which the Lord took up when He gave thanks. At some hotels a thousand persons each day drink soup or coffee out of the same boiler or pot, but they all use different cups in drinking.”

Yes, each disciple drank a part “of that which came out of the vessel (cup) which the Lord took up when He gave thanks.” But how did they do it? “Let him drink out of the cup” (1 Corinthians 11:28). This is part of what Paul “received from the Lord” (1 Corinthians 11:23). Here is what he received from the Lord”: “You must all drink out of it” (Matthew 26:27); and “they all drank out of it” (Mark 14:23) - “drink out of the cup” (1 Corinthians 11:28).

The “boiler or pot” from which soup or coffee is taken and poured into a bowl or cup is not “the vessel out of which one drinks” as is “poteerion, a cup, a drinking vessel.” Your “answer” is not an answer and is not “sufficient” for your cause.

“At this writing I am away from home and do not have access to any of my Greek lexicons, but, fortunately, I have a Greek Testament with me, and I can illustrate the uses of “ek.” Of course, “ek” does mean out of, from, etc., but, like all other words, it has different uses with these meanings as a basic idea. It not only signifies out of, as from the interior of a place, but it has to do with origin, cause, source, supply, etc. To eat of (ek) the bread certainly does not mean to eat out of the bread. Take the following references where the word “of” is from “ek” in the Greek and try substituting the phrase “out of” in each place, and see what nonsense you get: “I shall not drink henceforth of (ek, out of) this fruit of the vine,” etc. “But let a man prove himself, and so let him eat of (ek, out of) the bread, and drink of (ek, out of) the cup.” (1 Corinthians 11: 28.)”

Thayer answers his blundering on ek, citing the very Scriptures Bro. Brewer uses. He says, “of the supply out of (from) which a thing is taken, given, eaten, drunk, etc.” Under this he cites eating ek the loaf and drinking ek the well, etc. It is only in this sense that you and your guests drank coffee or water from the same pot or pitch.

Yes, ek may denote “from the inside to the outside,” i.e., “out of.” It may also denote source, origin, supply, etc. Hence, we eat of the loaf (ek, with supply, Thayer, p. 191), not “out of” as an ignoramus might say. And the disciples drank ek, out of, the cup (Mark 14:23 and 1 Corinthians 11:28), it being “the vessel out of which one drinks” (Thayer, p. 510).

He admits that poteerion does mean “a cup, a drinking vessel.” A “pot”, a “pitcher,” or a “boiler,” does not mean “a drinking vessel,” and hence he is throwing dust when he seeks to confuse his readers by using them. He betrays his ignorance of language, that’s all. It must make Calhoun, Baxter, Hardeman, Boles, et al, smile (or frown) to read his review. Better put him in the Grammar School.

“Suppose we take the title of our author’s tract and put “out of” for “of”: “The cup of the Lord” - “the cup out of the Lord.” Does the quibble on “ek” need any further attention?”

This is the worst blunder I have ever seen from any one. And it came from a big man - from G. C. Brewer! You better read that Greek Testament of yours. There is no ek in “The cup of the Lord.” Here is a transliteration of the Greek: poteerion Kuriou - “the cup of the Lord.” No ek there, my brother! You make more antics on ek than any sectarian ever made on eis (ice). And down you go!

When we drive the sprinkler from his hiding place and expose his every effort to sustain it by the Bible, he throws up his hands and exclaims, “Oh, it is a non-essential, anyway: baptism never saves anybody!” But I expected better things of my brother. He has “thrown up the sponge,” for he says, “Even if they did all drink out of the same vessel, it no more makes that binding upon us than the fact that they reclined at the table makes it necessary for us” to do so.

The brethren are on the job with their substituting, just like the Catholics did. Bro. Boles says in the Gospel Advocate of September 15, that the fact that the disciples used “unleavened bread” does not bind us to the same practice. Some say blackberry juice or watermelon juice will answer the purpose of “the fruit of the (grape) vine.” And it may not be “many moons” until meeting “on the first day of the week to break bread” (Acts 20:7) will be only an “incidental.” Some of the music brethren have already reached this conclusion. The Romanist says we can commune in one element - the loaf, only. And a pedo-Baptist excuses his sprinkling, thus: “As to the giving of the bread only to the laity, they may think that, in what is merely ritual, deviations from the primitive mode may be admitted on the ground of convenience, and I think they are as well warranted to make this alteration as we are to substitute sprinkling in the room of the ancient baptism.” Extremes meet. Will “many cups” finally lead the brethren to no cup, as is the case with the Catholic laity? Brethren, whither are we tending?

J. D. Phillips
(Continued)

Special Interest

Notice!

Since the first article in reply to G. C. Brewer appeared in the O. P. A., several brethren wrote me requesting me to put this out in tract form, after it has appeared in the paper. There seems to be a strong demand for this, and as the first edition of “The Cup of the Lord” will soon be exhausted, there being about seventy copies left, I would like, very much, to put out a tract in reply to Brewer. But I have not yet recovered, financially, from the effects of publishing the tract reviewed by Brewer. For this Reasoner, I cannot possibly put out another one now. But if any brother, or a number of brethren, wish, to put the reply to Brewer in tract, I shall be glad to write an introductory article and give the MSS. free, and assist in circulating it. This would be a good work, as the Gospel Advocate refuses to let me reply to Brewer in its columns - they will not so much as publish a reply to Brewer’s misrepresentations!

J. D. Phillips

Chism-Phillips Debate

The brethren with whom I fellowship, in Lorenzo, Texas, and the brethren with whom Bro, J. W. Chism fellowships at a nearby place, have arranged with us to investigate two questions at Lorenzo sometime this year. Bro. Chism affirms:

“The Scriptures teach, that, When the church comes together to teach the Bible, that, the assembly may be divided into classes, and that women may teach some or all of these classes.”

I deny this, and affirm this one:

“The Scriptures teach, that, When the church comes together to teach the Bible, that the assembly must be taught in one group (i.e., without dividing into classes) by men teachers only, one speaking at a time.”

He, of course, denies.

He also affirms that two or more cups or drinking vessels may be used in the communion.

I deny this and affirm that we are limited to the use of one cup.

The brethren at and near Lorenzo will arrange the time. If interested, write: E. H. Cavin, Lorenzo, Texas.

J. D. Phillips

Articles

Church Discipline

Without church discipline it is impossible to have a pure church. “Evil companionships corrupt good morals,” and “a little leaven leaveneth the whole lump.” In other words, when a little wickedness is allowed, soon the whole church will be corrupt.

Without church discipline it is impossible to push onward and outward conquering the foe as God has commanded. Even with a peerless leader like Joshua, the children of Israel were repulsed at Ai, because of sin in the camp Joshua 7:12. And when we behold a congregation of the Lord that is not conquering the enemy, we must conclude that there is disobedience somewhere within. Either a presumptuous sin has nullified all effort, or else lack of faith (which is sin in itself) has stifled the labors or dwarfed the efforts of the righteous servants of God.

But when there is sin in the church the congregation as a whole becomes responsible for its existence. To the church at Thyatira Jesus said, “But I have this against thee, that thou sufferest the woman Jezebel, who calleth herself a prophetess, and seduceth my servants to commit fornication, and to eat things sacrificed to idols.” Revelation 2:18-29. Because that church in its congregational capacity “suffered” or fellowshipped that evil woman, the Lord Jesus held it against them.

Therefore, in order for us to be right before God and to obtain his blessings, it is necessary that we assume our individual and congregational responsibilities and put into practice the discipline which God has ordained for his church. If we fail in this respect, the entire assembly of the Lord will soon become so contaminated with sin and cursed with shame, that our candlestick (influence) will be removed, and the Lord will spew us out of his mouth. (cf. Revelation 2:5 and Revelation 3:16).

If the necessity for discipline be realized let us next consider the divine method of putting it into practice.

1. The first move is by an individual and that action consists of prayer. “If any man see his brother sinning a sin not unto death, he shall ask and God will give him life for them that sin not unto death; John 5:16 (cf. James 5:16) In view of this scripture it is necessary for anyone who has knowledge regarding a sin committed by a brother, or a sister in the church to pray for such. We are not authorized to pray that they may be saved in their sins, but that they may turn from their sins. Think of the influence of a righteous prayer! Abraham’s petition for Sodom would have saved the entire wicked city, had ten righteous been found therein. See also James 5:16-18. Surely there is enough righteousness in the average brother or sister in Christ to obtain favor with God for their salvation! If there were no forgiveness with God, who would or could repent, and if the Lord were to mark iniquities who could stand? Psalm 130:4. Too often the tendency is to despise the fallen one, and instead of helping him or her out of their unfortunate condition, such are kicked and tramped further into the mire. When those conditions obtain, we need to change our viewpoint. Jesus said, “why beholdest thou the mote that is in thy brother’s eye, but considerest not the beam (of light) that is in thine own eye?” Matthew 7:3. That beam of light is nothing less than a wrong point of view. So long as we have a wrong viewpoint, we cannot see clearly to cast out even a mote (a small speck of dust). In administering justice, we need first of all to clean up our own back yard, then shall we see clearly to help the brother remove the dust from his.

Many times, the foregoing puts a quietus upon every effort for discipline. But why should we stop because we must begin at home? Having a clear conscience and a proper point of view, let us not stop but press on to accomplish the will of God.

When we have cast out the beam and become right before God individually, let us consider the other fellow’s plight. In sin, he or she is lost eternally. Remember - “he who converted a sinner from the error of his way, shall save a soul from death.” James 5:20. Like our Father in heaven we must desire the salvation of the sinning soul. That zealous apostle Paul said, “Brethren, even if a man be overtaken in any trespass, ye who are spiritual restore such a one in a spirit of gentleness, looking to thyself lest thou also be tempted.” Galatians 6:1. Our object in enacting discipline should be to save the sinner as well as to preserve the purity of the church.

When any of us have been wronged, we (the wronged) must ask for the wrong to be righted, before God will accept of OUR worship and service to him. Matthew 18:15. The same principle holds with regard to the one in the wrong. Matthew 5:23-32, cf. 1 Thessalonians 5:14-17. Therefore, it is imperative that both parties be reconciled or he who is in the wrong and will not repent must be disfellowshipped by the church. Let us always approach our brethren in a spirit of gentleness and meekness, “for a brother offended is harder to be won than a strong city, and such contentions are like the bars of a castle.” Proverbs 18:19. Nevertheless we will remember that, “the soul that sinneth, it shall die,” and “he who converted a sinner from the error of his way shall save a soul from death.”

2. “And if thy brother sin against thee, go show him his fault between thee and him alone; if he hear thee thou hast gained thy brother.” Matthew 18:15. If a brother has sinned against the whole church, has he sinned against thee? Why not? Thou art a part of the church. And if he repent when thou hast shown him his fault, unless it were a public sin, why need the matter go any further? If he turn and repent we should cheerfully forgive. Romans 12:8 and Matthew 18:21-35. Public sin requires public reproof or rebuke (cf. 1 Timothy 5:2), but—will the righteous desire to make a public example? or will they do so unless absolutely necessary? (cf. Matthew 1:19 and Proverbs 25:9-10.)

3. Perchance the erring one will not hear thee alone: then proceed with the next step. “But if he hear thee not, take with thee one or two more, that at the mouth of two or three witnesses every word may be established.” Matthew 18:16. Witnesses are necessary for proof. Under the old law two or three witnesses were essential before a man could be stoned to death physically. Under the new law, two or three witnesses are essential before one may be separated from the church (or stoned to death spiritually). (cf. 1 Timothy 5:19). In the presence of these witnesses, there is hope that the brother may be won, and if he is, why need the matter be made known to anyone else? When he repents, let us cheerfully forgive.

4. But - “if he refuse to hear them, tell it unto the church.” This is the final effort before withdrawing from the disorderly. Surely, he will hear the whole church!

5. But “if he refuses to hear the church let him be unto thee as the Gentile and the Publican. Verily I say unto you, whatsoever things ye shall loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven.” Matthew 18:18. When justice has been done, that sentence of separation from God and his people becomes bound in heaven. In other words, were the disfellowshipped member to die in that state he would perish eternally. The consequences are awful to contemplate, but where one is impenitent, “Thine eye shall not pity.” God’s will must be done.

6. At this stage again, prayer is authorized, with a promise that it will be answered. Matthew 18:19-20. We must not pray that God should save any in their sins, but rather that the fallen might come to repentance and live. And let us restore such in a spirit of gentleness and meekness. 2 Corinthians 7:8-16, 2 Corinthians 2:5-11, and Galatians 6:12.

7. How often shall we forgive after repentance? Verily, as often as one repents, let us forgive from the heart, and receive him into full fellowship again. Why not? How can we say we have forgiven from the heart, if we do not receive into full fellowship and companionship and love again, the one who has repented? Woe unto the unforgiving! Matthew 18:21-35. “Blessed are the merciful for they shall obtain mercy. Matthew 5:7. Beloved, let us be long-suffering toward all.

On the other hand, the impenitent shall not be forgiven, no not so much as to eat with them. 2 Thessalonians 3:6, 2 Thessalonians 3:14, and 1 Corinthians 5:11. “And it shall be, that every soul that shall not hearken to that prophet, shall be utterly destroyed from among the people.” Acts 3:23. God’s word teaches that physical death and eternal destruction will be the eventual punishment of the incorrigible. May the Lord help us to do His will, diligently, humbly, meekly, prayerfully and lovingly.

8. If there be none to watch over the flock and to give their lives to prayer and the ministry of the word, (cf. Acts 6:2 and 1 Timothy 4:13-16), how can the church prosper or spread the knowledge of God abroad in the whole earth? Truly, some must watch on behalf of the souls, else many will be lost. Hebrews 13:17; Jesus, the model shepherd, lost but one.

L. L. McGill

The King James Version

Lest there be a misunderstanding in the minds of the uneducated, I will say a few things in behalf of the King James Version of the Holy Scriptures.

This version, though imperfect, is considered the standard among English-speaking people. We accept this standard and all of our preachers use it; while some of them, in their writings and debates, refer to the errors in it and appeal direct to the Hebrew and Greek, the languages of inspiration. This is legitimate and right. We cannot make any version an absolute standard because there are mistakes and imperfections in all of them. Our appeal, then, should be to the original languages, used by the Prophets and Apostles, - the Hebrew and Greek.

That there are many spurious words and statements in the King James Version will be denied by no well-informed man. Yet, in the happy providence of God, it is a well-known fact that these spurious words do not effect nor change the plan of salvation. So, as far as the plan of salvation is concerned, these spurious readings are unimportant. Translators may becloud and obscure that plan, but God has not allowed it to be destroyed.

If the scholars that made the King James Version had translated the word - BAPTIZO - used by the apostles, all the controversy over the action of baptism would have been avoided. In that case, we, perhaps, would never have heard of sprinkling for baptism outside the ranks of Catholicism. This is not the only error in the version that is partially responsible for erroneous doctrines and practices in religion.

So, my brethren, don’t get excited and conclude that a preacher is an infidel because he appeals direct to the languages of inspiration - Hebrew and Greek - to clarify a passage obscured by the translators. Instead of such being a sign of infidelity, it is a sign of fidelity to God and His blessed word.

We ought to rejoice when an appeal is made direct to the language used by the apostles - the Greek - after learning that Christ and the apostles taught in that language. From now on, I propose to study the Scriptures in the inspired Greek tongue.

W. T. Taylor

Cessation of Miracles

As to the time when the miraculous dispensation ceased, we can only remark that the power of working miracles, which belonged preeminently to Christ and His apostles, and, in inferior degrees, to many other Christians in the Apostolic age, subsided gradually. After the great object of supernatural works was accomplished in the establishment of the Christian religion, with all its sacred truths, and its divinely appointed institutions, during the life of Christ and His apostles, there appears to have been no further occasion for miracles, and no satisfactory evidence that they actually occurred.

Professor Wood
Andover Theological Seminary

“I have read the Bible morning, noon and night, and have ever since been the happier and better man for such reading.”

Edmund Burk

“What Meaneth This?”

Acts 2:12

This question was propounded on the day of Pentecost by those who seemed not to understand what they had seen and heard, hence, they asked, “What meaneth this?”

Thus, it is right to inquire into things spiritually. That is, “Seek and search and find out wisdom.” Ecclesiastes 1:13.

It is quite a common thing for brethren in preaching, writing, and reports to use the expressions, “We worship according to the primitive order;” “New Testament order;” “Ancient order of things;” “According to the Bible;” “According to the Book;” etc.

The above phrases have and are being used by denominational preachers (Sectarian), as well as by preachers and other members of the Body of Christ. Therefore, it is high time to begin to inquire, “What meaneth this?” Or, “What meaneth then this bleating of the sheep in mine ears?” 1 Samuel 15:14.

King Saul had the impiety to say (as many do now), “I have performed the commandment of Jehovah.” 1 Samuel 15:13. As far as I am aware, all religious people, as King Saul did, allege that they have and are, “Performing the commandments of Jehovah.” Hence, we are confronted by the above question, “What meaneth this?”

Do the utterances, “We worship according to the primitive order,” and “We worship according to the New Testament order” mean the same order? Do the assertions, “We worship according to the ancient order of things.” and “We worship according to the Bible,” “According to the Book,” etc., mean the same order? Or, “What meaneth this?”

There seems to be as many so-called orders (ways) of worship among the disciples of Christ as there are names for the worship. Most congregations worship according to custom or customs, then call it “Primitive order,” “New Testament order,” “The ancient order of things,” “The Bible Order,” “The Book order,” etc. All declare, as King Saul did, “I have performed the commandment (or commandments) of Jehovah.”

When preachers and others announce that their congregations worship “According to the New Testament order,” “Primitive order,” “Ancient order of things,” “Bible order,” “The Book order,” etc., we should insist on those who thus assert to tell how they worship and what they do. Just to say, “We worship according to the primitive order,” “New Testament order,” “Ancient order of things,” and so on, and not tell what “The New Testament order” is, and how it is to be done, is misleading for the very reason that those congregations that use breads, cups, and have the preacher or preachers take all of the time in the worship, prayer or prayers before “The teaching, fellowship, and breaking of bread (loaf)” and other customs they practice, also affirm that they “Worship according to the New Testament order,” etc.

Moreover, denominational churches (Sectarian) claim they “Worship according to the New Testament order.” Therefore, it is important when churches hold that they “Worship according to the New Testament order” that they state how they worship and what they do in the worship.

Some imagine just so they use one cup that this will atone for all the rest of their unscriptural teaching and practice.

Yours for “The Old Paths”
No more - No less
Joseph Miller

Where Christ Has Not Gone

(Matthew 28:19-20)

“Go ye therefore, teach all nations.”

I. Our Christian duty: It is our Christian duty to see that the rest of the world receive the benefit of the light which shines to us through the Book of God. Christ commands us to “Go (ye) into all the world and preach the gospel to the whole creation.” (Mark 16:15-16) And Paul’s aim was to preach the gospel where Christ was not already named. (Romans 15:20-21) The Godless world needs those who will show it the living Christ, the Christ who died on the cross, “the Lamb of God that taketh away the sins of the world” to save humanity. (John 1:29).

Enlarging mission work: - To enlarge mission work, whether it be at home or abroad, we must do and practice certain things.

1. Pray - Luke 2:10.
2. Preach; declare the whole counsel of God. (Mark 16:16).
3. Encourage missionaries with good, newsy letters.
4. Read at least one missionary book. (Life of Livingston).
5. Keep in touch with others striving to enlarge the work.
6. Circulate one or more missionary volumes.
7. Show the missionary teaching of the New Testament.
8. Show the practice of the first Church of Christ, etc.

II. Whether or not you have read Bro. B. D. Morehead’s booklets on “Where Christ has not gone,” the citing of facts in Christless lands, from - which source I base this writing, you should have some knowledge concerning these people.

We in America do not realize how much we owe God for all our blessings. Even in these times of travail we are far better off than these people. The authorities from whom Bro. Morehead, missionary of Japan, quoted, make it very plain concerning conditions where the light has not as yet shone.

Is it any wonder, then, why they are so dark? Once the true light has shone within their souls, their every being responds to it, but not until then. And we find that the backward places are those that are dark. You can read of conditions in these lands in several books.

To me the world, religiously speaking, is divided into two main parts; the one - Christian: bright, progressive, looking forward, lending a helping hand; the other, dark, reserved, living in the long ago, refusing to go forward. The Lord sent Philip to preach in the desert, when he might have been preaching to large crowds in Samaria or Jerusalem. He was sent of God. The church’s responsibility does not end at home. There is work to be done abroad where Christ has not gone.

Philip was sent where he was needed most. Quoting from a missionary in far-off China, as quoted by Bro. Morehead, we have this:

“Every field has its advantages and disadvantages. We have not found, after some experiences in interior work, that the people look down upon us or our Message because we do not understand all of their language or customs.

“There is practically no such thing in China as a sparsely populated district, although one can walk miles without seeing a house. When one looms in sight, it isn’t just a house, it is a whole village of them. Farming is carried on, yes, but the farmer goes out in the daytime and gets back to his village by night. This is because of the dangers from roving bands of robbers.

“The mud houses of the villages are so arranged that it is hard for one unfamiliar with them to find the way in uninstructed. In size their farms are nothing to compare with ours in America. If a man has half an acre, he has a farm. The larger towns are market towns, or one might call it the business section, for in the market towns all commercial business is carried on. Each market town has outlying villages which are the residential sections. There are no stores in the villages, there are no houses of ill fame, no saloons or gambling houses. All such are located in the market town. Every third day is market day when the farmers from the villages bring their wares to town, sell and buy, dissipate and gamble. It is impossible to know just how many people live in these places, no one knows. Some will set the figure at ten thousand, and that varies up to fifty thousand or more, - each individual’s idea about it.

“The majority of the market towns are walled cities, but most of them have outgrown their walls. It is said that in the old days of the kings, walls were necessary for protection because of numerous wars, which reminds one greatly of Bible times. It would seem to us that the walls need enlarging if wars have anything to do with it. But since those days, methods of warfare have, changed in China, too, as well as in the rest of the world.”

III. Those who go - missionaries: Many are the reports concerning these lands, and they come from good sources. Who are better fitted to carry the gospel than they who have given up father and mother, sister and brother, yes, their very homes? They must blaze the trail “Where Christ has not gone.”

Are they to be forgotten, they who support the Word of God “through thick and thin,” who oftentimes die on the field of Christianity for its sake; they who forsake their own nets to be fishers of men? They should never be sent, if such an attitude is to be taken! Christ’s words concerning their going forth would never have been uttered if they were not to be fulfilled and in the way He planned. Need I say that they would rather live and die there, where they have done the most good, where their tears are the bitterest, where their children’s children are born? From the “four winds” they go; to darkest Africa and the beat of the tom-toms; to China; to Japan and the cherry blossoms; to India, to Latin America they go. God’s adventures, arm in arm, and as sure as God watches them from on high, they are bound to succeed.

IV. As a final thought, let us think on these things and look forward to the results that shall come if we send workers into the vineyard of our Lord. Let us look “on the other side of the fence” and learn “how the other half lives.” These people are in darkness of sin and ignorance, in a deep sleep and must be awakened by the message of the gospel of Christ, and “after Christ’s coming, they shall be gathered from the four winds - from one end of Heaven to the other.”

We do not know when He cometh, for he says, “In an hour that ye think not the Son of Man cometh” (Matthew 24:44). Those who have been perseverant unto the end, who remembered his neighbor in time of hunger or thirst, in time of sickness and despair, whether he be white, red, yellow, or black, shall be gathered into the fold of God. Those who did not remember his neighbor, even with a silent prayer, shall be cast out into the outer darkness. God will surely remember us if we remember others in their time of need.

By a native of Brazil,
Alfonso Bueno

Clippings and Comments

The Spirit of Christ

The Spirit of Christ calls things by the right name whether it is liked or not. Christ called the Pharisees “hypocrites” because they were. As a result, they persecuted Him. The Spirit in the apostles was to “convict the world of sin.” The Spirit in the apostles never failed to condemn and to convict the sinner. Those today who would be such diplomats as to side-step an issue and say nothing that would cut the errorist to the heart cannot claim the Spirit of Christ. Contrast the preachers in New Testament times with the preachers of today. Must one be passive, affable, agreeable, non-combative, a pacifist, to have the Spirit of Christ? Certainly not. Jesus cleaned the temple twice. He said, “My house is a house of prayer, but you have made it a den of thieves.” When the disciples heard it, they remembered that it was written, “The zeal of thine house hath eaten me up.” Had Jesus left error alone, he would have lived. But the Spirit of Christ cannot leave error alone. Perhaps present-day preachers are afraid they will be “eaten up” if they oppose all error! [No, brother, they fear the collection plate will return empty.] Jude said, “Contend earnestly for the faith which was once for all delivered unto the saints.” This verse exhorts us to contend earnestly for what is taught. The Spirit of Christ never contends for anything not taught, but uncompromisingly contends for things that are taught