Truth Magazine

By Tom M. Robert

One of the wonderful things about the preaching of Jesus (in addition to its wisdom, grace, perfection and relevance) was that it was always open and aboveboard, public in nature, not hidden in back rooms and secret conclaves. Knowing that he had the “words of eternal life” (John 6:68), Jesus proclaimed the gospel of the Kingdom openly to the multitudes: “. . . I spoke openly to the world. I always taught in synagogues and in the temple, where the Jews always meet, and in secret I have said nothing” (John 18:20). In his journeys, Jesus “went through the cities and villages, teaching . . .” (Luke 18:22) in such a fashion that multitudes heard him (Mark 2:13).

From the beginning, Jesus in- tended that the message of grace be free, uninhibited, unbound, and unfettered by human authority. No man or group of men has the right to limit the spread of the gospel; it has been certified by Jesus’ authority as the son of God and com- missioned to the world (Mark 16:15-16; Matt. 28:18-20; Luke 24:44-49). It is an eternal message, to all men of every race. It cannot be fettered by creeds. Its authority cannot be diminished by synods and councils. Translation committees cannot alter the original inscriptions. Private interpretation, in which efforts to teach “another gospel” are waged, are condemned (Gal. 1:6-9). Private and secret groups which seek to subvert or change the definition of truth and who often invoke secrecy and personal privilege will be exposed. Cloaks of darkness cannot hide the light of the gospel.

The message of the cross was not given to a select few within the sanctum sanctorum, to be reserved for the “clergy” and kept from the “laity.” John related that “the common people heard him gladly” (John 12:37). Even on those occasions when Jesus taught his disciples (apostles) privately, it was to give them understanding so the mes- sage could be fully declared later. “Whatever I tell you in the dark, speak in the light; and what you hear in the ear, preach on the housetops” (Matt. 10:27). The parables, though concealing truth from prejudiced hearts, were open to those seeking to know the truth. Jesus, when asked why he used parables, explained:

Because it has been given to you to know the mysteries of the kingdom of heaven, but to them it has not been given. For whoever has, to him more will be given, and he will have abundance; but whoever does not have, even what he has will be taken away from him. Therefore I speak to them in parables, because seeing they do not see, and hearing they do not hear, nor do they understand . . . but blessed are your eyes for they see, and your ears for they hear (Matt. 13:11-16).

The apostle Paul made mention of some minds that were blinded to truth, but it was of their own doing, not the re- sult of the message: “But even if our gospel is veiled, it is veiled to those who are perishing, whose minds the god of this age has blinded, who do not believe, lest the light of the gospel of the glory of Christ, who is the image of God, should shine on them” (2 Cor. 4:3-4). In fact, it is God who “commanded light to shine out of darkness, who has shone in our hearts to give the light of the knowledge of the glory of God in the face of Jesus Christ” (v. 6). The same God who commanded physical light to spring into being (Gen. 1:3) is the same God who sheds spiritual light throughout the world by the power of his word. Without physical light, life on earth would die; without spiritual light, mankind will perish in sin. It is unthinkable that anyone would try to keep people in darkness from the light of the gospel of Christ. Yet, in reality, there are those who attempt to hinder the free knowledge of truth.

Clergy Interference

Certain religions establish a “clergy” and “laity” dis- tinction that is foreign to New Testament Christianity. “Clergy” refers to an ecclesiastical hierarchy imposed on religious bodies by which some men are elevated in rank above others. “Laity” defines the rest of people who are ranked beneath the authority of the clergymen. Not only is this system foreign to New Testament Christianity, it is antithetical to it. The New Testament teaches a brotherhood of believers in which each Christian is a holy priest (1 Pet. 2:4-10). Only Jesus is a high-priest over other priests (Heb. 7:20-27). The only structure given to the church of the Lord is that revealed in Philippians 1:2: “bishops, deacons and saints.” A “bishop” is a spiritual overseer (also called an elder, presbyter, and shepherd: 1 Tim. 3:1-7; Tit. 1:5-9; 1 Pet. 5:1-4; Acts 14:23; 20:17-38). The work of a bishop is a place of service, not an office of rank. How different is the life of Jesus Christ (who is our High Priest and Chief Shepherd) from those who wear expensive garments of silk and tapestry, with jewels on their fingers and tiaras of diamonds on their head, demanding rank, superior- ity, privilege, and prestige. In contrast, Jesus washed the feet of the disciples and taught that “those who would be greatest in the kingdom of heaven will be servant of all” (Luke 22:24-26).

But the greater danger lies not in the elevation of men to superior rank in religion; these clergymen demand the right to interpret scripture for the lesser laity, “let’s just keep this among us boys!” Declaring that they stand between God and the lower laity, the clergy claim the right to give or withhold Scripture as part of the sacerdotal system of exclusive priesthood. Note this excerpt from an address by the cardinals of Rome to Pope Pius III, which is preserved in the National Library of Paris, folio No. 1068, Vol. 2, 650-651 (via The Sower, Vol. 5, No. 1, Yuma, AZ):

Of all the advice that we can offer your holiness we must open your eyes well and use all possible force in the mat- ter, namely, to permit the reading of the gospel as little as possible in all the countries under your jurisdiction. Let the very little part of the gospel suffice which is usually read in mass, and let no one be permitted to read more. So long as people will be content with the small amount, your interest will prosper; but as soon as the people want to read more, your interest will fail. The Bible is the book, which more than any other, has raised against us the tumults and tempests by which we have almost perished. In fact, if one compares the teaching of the Bible with what takes place in our churches, he will soon find discord, and will realize that our teachings are often different from the Bible, and oftener still, contrary to it.

Not only do they lay claim to control the Scriptures, but they also lay claim to the right to dispense grace as representatives of Christ. Thus, “sacraments” are given or restricted, depending on the decision of the clergy, “the good ol’ boys.” By this sacerdotal system, millions are held in spiritual bondage for fear of losing “grace” through displeasing the clergy who stand between them and God.

Protestant Creeds

Not to allow Catholics to get one step ahead of them, Protestant churches likewise use the “just among us boys” error in its creedal systems. No denomination can exist without a creed. Thus, denominations form synods, coun- cils, committees, and conferences which formulate the creeds distinctive to that particular religious body. Creeds form barriers from one denomination to another and to be a part of a specific denomination, one must accept the authority of the creed which denominates that body. The Methodist Discipline makes Methodists, not Baptists; the Lutheran Catechism makes Lutherans, not Catholics; the writings of Mary Baker Eddy make Christian Scientists, not Unitarians; the Watch Tower Society makes Jehovah’s Witnesses, not Episcopalians; the Book of Mormon (and other writings of Joseph Smith, et al.) makes Mormons, not Sabbatarians, etc.

Jesus condemned human creeds: “Hypocrites! Well did Isaiah prophesy about you, saying: ‘These people draw near to me with their mouth, and honor me with their lips, but their heart is far from me, and in vain they worship me, teaching as doctrines the commandments of men’” (Matt. 15:8-9).

The apostle Paul condemned division (“denominational- ism” means “division”) when he said, “Now I plead with you, brethren, by the name of our Lord Jesus Christ, that you all speak the same thing, and that there be no divisions among you, but that you be perfectly joined together in the same mind and in the same judgment” (1 Cor. 1:10). He further rebuked that church for allowing division based upon following certain men: “For it has been declared to me concerning you, my brethren, by those of Chloe’s household, that there are contentions among you. Now I say that, that each of you says, ‘I am of Paul,’ or ‘I am of Apollos,’ or ‘I am of Cephas,’ or ‘I am of Christ.’ Is Christ divided? Was Paul crucified for you? Or were you baptized in the name of Paul?” (vv. 11-13).

How long will it take us to learn that “just among us boys” is an attitude that violates the will of Christ, causes division, permits creeds to multiply and destroys the unity of believers. What right does any man or group of men have to decide among themselves what doc- trines to bind upon others?

Among Churches of Christ

Are those of us who are members of the church of Christ immune from this syndrome that seems so much a part of human practice? By no means! Just as the apostles themselves had bad attitudes about themselves and about their superiority, we can fall prey to the “good ol’ boy” system of thinking. “Just among us boys” describes an attitude of heart that elevates a few above others, that expects privacy and privilege to excuse their error, that extends special treatment to those “within the club” and expects reciprocation. Those as- sociated with Truth Magazine are not beyond this failing if we fail to watch ourselves. If we become so enamored of ourselves that we expect anyone to accept what we say simply because we say it, we have been bitten with the “bug.” If we should come to believe that we speak for the brotherhood, or a segment thereof (which we do not, nor do we seek to do so; each writer speaks only for him or herself), we have the “virus” of spiritual elitism that leads to denominationalism. If we should come to expect prefer- ential treatment from others so that we are above criticism or biblical review, we have fallen ill to the syndrome. If we think we are the “inner circle” of the sanctum sanctorum, expecting privacy to cover our error, we are as guilty as the Pope of Rome, the Lutheran Synod or the Baptist General Convention of promoting denominationalism. Let there be no mistake: “just among us boys” is another word or phrase that denotes an attitude that compromises truth, seeks to cover sinful beliefs and doctrines, and expels from the “in- ner circle” of religious superiority those who disagree.

“Just among us boys” describes those who whisper and gossip among themselves about those who oppose them but who will refuse like cowards to discuss and debate like concerned brethren. “The boys” have been known to whisper around and get gospel meetings canceled, seek to stop a church from hiring a certain preacher with whom they disagree, and tear down a reputation of a fellow Christian without once discussing an issue or meeting face to face with the brother in question.

“The boys” will demand their right to teach error pub- licly and then hide behind Matthew 18 if one does not come to them personally before exposing their sin. Of course, they expect the privilege to expose individuals with whom they disagree without going to them (those in the institutional churches, Christian Churches, denominational bodies, etc.).

“The boys” will expect the right to go across the coun- try and around the world teaching error but will criticize those who oppose them as self-seeking opportunists who are trying to make a name for themselves, who are jealous, who do not respect congregational autonomy and who lack brotherly love.

“The boys” demand the right to teach error and remain in fellowship with brethren everywhere. The “brothers” of “the boys” are willing to extend fellowship to those who teach error in direct contradiction of Scriptures: 2 John 9-11; Romans 16:17; Galatians 1:6-9, etc. You see, it is not enough to avoid evil practices (Rom. 1:18-31). The Scripture also condemns those who “approve of those who practice them” (v. 32). Yet there are those “among the boys” who teach egregious error about adulterous marriages and their “brothers” are willing to associate with them, use them in gospel meetings, support them, and condemn those who oppose their error.

“The boys” have an attitude that they can spread error across the Internet among discussion groups yet plead special privilege or “privacy” and demand that no one be allowed to review their error. After being chastised by one brother quite severely for “violating his privacy” by quoting from his material in a discussion group on the Internet, I was vindicated after the fact by that entire discussion being sold publicly on a CD in a bookstore. It is a strange definition of “privacy” to discuss issues among hundreds and claim immunity as a private discussion. As a child, most of us played a game of “Tag” and would say, “King’s X” if we wanted to be immune from being “tagged.” “The boys” want to use “King’s X” after teaching error because they don’t want to be tagged! Others of this mind-set will teach a group of young men or a Bible class in a home and urge them to “keep our discussions private.” They especially don’t like tape recorders. Tape recorders have an uncanny way of being exact about what has been taught!

“The boys” want to be treated with dignity, love, and gentleness. They decry the spirit by which one brother reviews another’s error. But their desire to be treated with dignity, love, and gentleness (which is usually afforded them) is returned by caustic criticism toward “journal- istic jingoism,” “watchdogs,” “buzzards,” brotherhood supervisors,” etc. One thing is clear: let a brother teach that an adulterous marriage is okay and he will be treated with dignity, love, and gentleness by his “brothers.” But let someone expose the error of adulterous marriages and those who are willing to fellowship that error and he will be boiled in oil!

“The boys” like to “toss out an idea” and be seen as “original thinkers” who are tired of the old “church of Christ traditions” and want to introduce something new. It is often heard, when these “new ideas” are being explored that we are just “thinking out loud to see where this will go” and asking for input from other original thinkers as “iron sharpens iron” (Prov. 27:17). Of course, when they meet a fellow with a “forehead like adamant” (Ezek. 3:9), they become mighty unhappy!

“The boys” want to spread their doctrine of fellowship with error, compromise and unity in diversity in every way possible: a network of religious papers, college campuses, gospel meetings, private discussion groups, via the Inter- net, and house to house. But they don’t want to extend the same privilege to those who oppose them. Those who oppose them have bad attitudes, ulterior motives, are dis- honest, are not trustworthy, have a network, and do all this without love. Yet I have noticed that any amount of love, however great and real, is never enough for the man who is determined to teach error. Love him as you will. When you oppose him, you don’t love him, in his estimation. Isn’t is exceedingly strange that false teachers are always so full of love, and those who oppose false teachers are so full of hate? Did you notice this oddity? Folks, it is not a lack of love that is our problem. Did Paul not love the brother in Corinth that was to be disciplined? Did Paul not love Peter when he withstood him to the face? Did Jesus not love the apostles when he rebuked them for wanting special seats in the kingdom? One of the biggest lies ever told by the Devil (and used by false teachers) is that it is a lack of love that motivates every person that opposes error! But one thing is sure: I love my brethren too much to keep my mouth shut and let them teach error without hearing about it. I love truth too much to keep silent. I love the church too much to allow it to be led into digression without some effort on my part.

In short, “the boys” don’t like to be questioned, chal- lenged, put to the test. They want the right to go about “hither, thither and yon” teaching what they like to whom- ever they like without having to face the consequence of their actions. The Pope would like to spread Catholicism without examination, too. But with dignity, love, and gentleness, we will oppose him.

The right attitude to be found in gospel preaching is that demonstrated by Jesus. Teach the truth plainly. Put it on the housetops. Spread it to the world. Yes, preach the gospel from a heart full of love, but don’t be more dignified that the Savior. Don’t be more timid than the inspired writers. “Walk in wisdom toward those who are outside, redeeming the time. Let your speech always be with grace, seasoned with salt, that you may know how you ought to answer each one” (Col. 4:5-6).

By Bobby L. Graham

This question often comes from honest people, wondering why some of us do not use mechanical instruments in the worship of the Lord. It is a fair question that demands a fair answer.

All worship of God is limited by whatever divine instruc- tions have been given for our guidance. God has always prescribed what constitutes acceptable worship of him under every dispensation that he has made with mankind. We must conform our efforts to his will and seek never to impose our own wills upon his. A lesson learned from the very first instance of worship recorded in the Old Testament — that of Cain and Abel in Genesis 4 — is that we must act by faith in God, based on what he has spoken, if our wor- ship is to please him (Heb. 11:4). The same lesson can be learned from the Mosaic dispensation, in the case of Nadab and Abihu offering strange fire to the Lord in Leviticus 10. Whatever God has not sanctified as acceptable to him in worship is unauthorized and constitutes will worship.

We also learn from the New Testament that worship can be will worship — worship established by one’s own will (self-directed worship). Paul spoke about this in Colossians 2:23. The Lord himself declared that worship based upon the doctrines and commandments of men is offered in vain (Matt. 15:8-9). Because no instruction from God under the New Testament shows the use of any music besides sing- ing to be acceptable in worship, a person adding any other kind of music is doing so on the basis of human desires and pleasure, not the expressed will of God. Will worship fails to meet God’s approval, as seen in Colossians 2:23.

New Testament regulations for worship are those that apply to God’s people under the new covenant of Jesus Christ (Col. 3:17). Old Testament regulations like those during David’s day have no relevance or application to people in the Lord’s church. To use the Old Testament is to burden oneself with the entire Mosaic Law, according to Galatians 5:1-4, including its insistence upon animal sacrifices and the Levitical priesthood. To accept part of the Old Testament practices but refuse others, in the absence of any such direction from the Lord to do so, is to make one’s own thinking superior to God’s thinking and to fall from divine grace.

In spite of David’s use of the instrument or the encour- agement to use such, as in Psalm 150, the New Testament instructs the Christian to sing and make melody in his heart to the Lord. The heart of the worshiper is the instrument that is employed in acceptable worship, and its melody is the only melody that the Lord stresses (Eph. 5:19; Col. 3:16).

In view of biblical teaching along the lines discussed in this study, it is important to ask for New Testament teach- ing that authorizes the use of the mechanical instrument of music in worship to God. Anyone using such ought to be willing to provide New Testament justification for its use. Where is that teaching found in the New Testament? If it can be produced, then we should all practice it. If it cannot be found, then all should omit its use in order to please the Lord, which is the very essence of worship.

By Donnie V. Rader

Is marriage important? How you answer that question has everything to do with how you approach marriage, commitment to it and even di- vorce. In that marriage is a divine institution, it goes without saying that it is important. Another obvious fact is that the world’s view of marriage continues to decline.

The Sunday Tennessean (June 6, 1999) had an article on the front page entitled, “Importance of marriage declines.” The article stated:

Divorce has become so common in Tennessee that almost two-thirds of all new marriages involve either a divorced bride or groom, and 38% of weddings are between two divorced persons, a new study shows.

The report released by the conservative Tennessee Family Institute, is based on marriage data from the past 20 years.

Research analyst Roger Abramson, who wrote the report, said the numbers reflect a societal shift toward placing less importance on the institution of marriage.

“The institution of marriage generally is in a weaker state now than it was (20 years ago) because people don’t view marriage as the commitment they once did,” Abramson said. “We now have a state with a significant group of people where families are torn apart for no other reason than they just want to.”

. . . But information from the National Center for Health Statistics has for years been used to predict that about half of new marriages will end in divorce.

Tennessee’s divorce rate of 6.3 per 1,000 people is the eighth-highest rate in the country, according to an NCHS study, and state statistics show a growing number of Tennesseans are getting married for their fifth and sixth time.

The attitudes reflected in these studies affect God’s people too. We live in a world that shapes and molds the weaker ones to be like it (Rom. 12:1-3). Thus, it behooves us to teach continually about the importance of marriage.

Marriage Was Created By God

Marriage is not a creation of mankind, but of God him- self. In the very beginning God saw that it was not good that man should be alone and he thus said, “I will make him a helper comparable to him” (Gen. 2:18). So, God created Eve from his rib and said, “Therefore a man shall leave his father and mother and be joined to his wife, and they shall become one flesh” (v. 24). This principle, stated in the garden, was quoted by Paul (Eph. 5:31) and Jesus himself (Matt. 19:4-6) when teaching on marriage.

This institution, called marriage, was planned and de- signed by God. Being the author of it, God set the laws that are to govern this relationship (Gen. 2:24; Rom. 7:2-3).

The Purpose of Marriage

The importance of marriage is clearly seen when we understand why God created it. What is the purpose of marriage?

1. Companionship. When God saw that it was not good that man should be alone, he made a wife for him (Gen. 2:18-24).

2. Legitimately bearing children. It is possible to have children without the honor of marriage. However, to do so involves sin. When God created marriage in the beginning he said,  “So God created man in His own image; in the image of God He created him; male and female He created them. Then God blessed them, and God said to them, ‘Be fruitful and multiply . . .’” (Gen. 1:27-28).

Paul said, “Therefore I desire that the younger widows marry, bear children, manage the house, give no opportunity to the adversary to speak reproachfully” (1 Tim. 5:14).

3. For sexual relations — to avoid fornication. Lest man behave as an animal and seek to fulfill his desire with any who would be willing, he designed marriage for the lawful sexual union. Paul wrote to the Corinthians,

Nevertheless, because of sexual immorality, let each man have his own wife, and let each woman have her own hus- band. Let the husband render to his wife the affection due her, and likewise also the wife to her husband. The wife does not have authority over her own body, but the husband does. And likewise the husband does not have authority over his own body, but the wife does (1 Cor. 7:2-4).

The same apostle wrote to the Hebrews saying, “Mar- riage is honorable among all, and the bed undefiled; but fornicators and adulterers God will judge” (Heb. 13:4).

Marriage Is Not Important If . . .

There are several ways that one may not honor marriage as God intended. Marriage is not important if . . .

1. There is sex before marriage. Premarital sex is not uncommon. Earlier in this decade the Tennessean reported that 63% of today’s teenagers see nothing morally wrong with sexual relations before marriage. That’s scary! That means that 63% of the people our teenagers associate with see nothing wrong with sex before marriage.

The Hebrew writer said that the marriage bed (sexual relations in marriage) is undefiled. However, the fornica- tor (pre-marital) and the adulterer (extra-marital) God will condemn (Heb. 13:4). Those who commit fornication, not only violate an emphatic prohibition, but have no respect for marriage.

2. Adultery is committed. When a married person goes outside the realm of marriage for sexual relations, his mar- riage is not important to him at all. We have already noted that Hebrews 13:4 says God will condemn such a person. Jesus taught that this unfaithful act gives the innocent party the right to put his mate away and remarry another (Matt. 5:32; 19:9).

3. One divorces without a scriptural right. When asked if a man could divorce his wife without a cause, Jesus re- sponded with four reasons why the answer was “no” (Matt. 19:3-6). Paul taught the same in 1 Corinthians 7:10-13. Jesus gave only one scriptural cause for divorce: fornication (Matt. 5:32; 19:9). When a person divorces for any other cause, they do not honor marriage or God’s law.

4. One remarries without a scriptural right. Jesus said, “And I say unto you, Whosoever shall put away his wife, except it be for fornication, and shall marry another, com- mitteth adultery: and whoso marrieth her which is put away doth commit adultery” (Matt. 19:9). The only one who has a right to remarry (in the case of divorce) is one who has put his mate away for the cause of fornication. All others commit adultery when they remarry.

The strictness of God’s law tells us that he views mar- riage as important. If his law would allow divorce for any cause, or remarriage in any divorce, it would indicate a lesser view of marriage. The very article we cited above suggests that frivolous divorce and remarriage is a sign that marriage is not important.

5. You are not the mate you ought to be. It is not only those who commit fornication or divorce who view mar- riage unimportant. Those who stay together and are never unfaithful to their mate could be guilty too. Those who do not work at making their marriage the best it can be, do not think marriage is important. If it is, they would change!

Husbands who view marriage as important seek to love their wives as themselves (Eph. 5:22-28), be understanding, honor their wives and treat them as the weaker vessel (1 Pet. 3:7). Wives who think marriage is important strive to love their husbands (Tit. 2:5), be submissive (1 Pet. 3:1-6), and have reverence for their husbands (Eph. 5:33).

We know marriage is important to God. We know that marriage is not important to the world. How do you view marriage?

By Mike Willis

In May 1967, I began preaching on a full-time basis just a few months before my 20th birthday. I lived near my oldest brother, Cecil Willis, who had distinguished himself as a gospel preacher. Under his tutelage, I developed as a gospel preacher. One of the best things that he did for me was to guide my studies by directing me to preach the first principles of the oracles of God during that first year of preaching. I preached many sermons on conversion and the church.

In guiding my studies, Cecil loaned me his copy of Conversion by B.F. Manire. I found this to be an excellent tool for this study. Using the text of Scripture and the studies presented in this book, Sermons by J.W. McGarvey, The Gospel Plan of Salvation by T.W. Brents, and Gospel Preacher, Volumes 1-2, by Benjamin Franklin, I methodically preached on every case of New Testament conversion during that year. Years later, I found a copy of Manire’s book in a used book sale and added it to my collection. It is by far, the best study of the various cases of conversion presently in print.

This series on conversion has been printed on several occasions. The twelve sermons on Conversion were first published sometime before 1875  in the Southern Christian Weekly of Alabama, which was owned and edited by J.M. Pickens. In 1881, they were rewritten for the Apos- tolic Church, a monthly magazine which was published by W.L. Butler of Mayfield, Kentucky. They were followed in that periodical by three parts of the sermon on Baptism. In 1890 and ’91, these were all revised again, and published in the Church Register of Plattsburg, Missouri, of which James C. Creel was the editor and proprietor.

Some of the materials in this book were first published in the book, although most of it appeared in the various series mentioned before. The sermon on “What Must I Do To Be Saved?” was written first in 1856 when Manire was in the fourth year of his ministry, and was published by Dr. John T. Walsh in the American Christian Preacher of Kinston, North Carolina. Some years afterward it was published in the Gospel Advocate of Nashville, Tennessee, and soon after the war in the Ameri- can Christian Review of Cincinnati, Ohio. It was rewritten for each of these and brought to its present form. In 1871, it was published in the Christian Unitist of Jackson, Mississippi, and a thousand copies were struck off in tract form, all of which were soon sold. In 1890, it was again published in the Church Regis- ter, and a thousand copies issued in pamphlet form, all of which were sold within a year. The author commented, “It has been the most fruitful of all the sermons I have ever preached, and is included in this volume by the request of many brethren.” The author continued,

The Book as a whole is the result of more than forty years of study and labor. In most of the protracted meetings which I have held within the past thirty years, these Sermons have been preached, at least in substance, and they have been blessed to the conversion of many souls. I also have reason to think that in their publication at various times they have been a help to many inquiring hearts.

As a “renaissance of our distinctive teaching” of the first principles of the gospel of Christ, has been called for by the Christian Standard, and heartily seconded by many thoughtful brethren, I deem it a favorable time to throw this book upon the patronage of the brethren. I do not know of any volume of sermons that treats so fully of the first great lesson of the gospel — the way of the sinner’s return to God under the mediation of Jesus.

In the preparation of these sermons, both for pulpit use and for publication, I have from the first had in view mainly the wants of the “common people,” such as those who heard Jesus so gladly. I have always taken it for granted that if the common people could understand me, the uncommon people, those who are learned and critical, could also, if they wanted to; and I would much rather help the great number who need help and want help, than the few who can get along without any help.

I hope and pray then that this little book may to some extent meet the want that is beginning to be felt as never before — the want of the gospel of Christ in all its simplicity, purity, and power; that it may lead many souls to Christ; that it may be a help to young preachers; and that it may continue to preach Christ and Him crucified long after the “lisping stammering tongue” that preached these sermons, and the trembling hand that pens these lines have moldered back to dust (“Preface”).

As with any uninspired book, there are some things with which one will disagree, such as Manire’s belief that the 120 were baptized with the Holy Spirit in Acts 2 (59, 70), the personal indwelling of the Holy Spirit (68, 81), and his conjecture that Cornelius might have been saved had he died before hearing the gospel (90). There may be other things that one will notice as he reads the book, but generally he will be impressed, not with those areas of disagreement, but with how well he has presented the case for how conversion occurs.

There is an urgent need for brethren to get back to the basics in their preaching. We are hearing many “be good — feel good” sermons that invite a person to “come to Jesus,” but have little to say about how one is to come to Jesus and obey the gospel. This series of gospel sermons on conversion calls men back to what the Bible text teaches that men had to do to be saved by the shed blood of Christ Jesus.

This book will make an excellent gift to anyone who preaches or wishes to preach. It is an excellent study of con- version for any man, Christian or non-Christian. It would make a good gift for one who is not a Christian but wishes to learn how to become one. The book is well-written; it is a good study of the subject of Bible   conversion.

The Guardian of Truth Foundation is delighted to add this volume to our catalog of publications and commend it to our readers. We hope you will enjoy it and benefit from it as much as I did.