Truth Magazine

By H. E. Phillips

The Roman Empire fell because of internal problems rather than from outside forces. Some of the internal influences that brought Rome down are portrayed by the terms, ungodliness and worldly lusts. Some of these tragic sins were: divorce and remarriage, stealing, lying, brutal murders, fornication, nudity, immoral dress, social drinking (alcohol and drugs), gambling, greed, abortion, abuse of children, dancing, profanity and vulgarity, witchcraft, idolatry, corruption in government and business. These same conditions exist today in America to an alarming degree.

A casual survey of the social problems in society today as compared with 50 years ago will establish the cancer of immorality in America and the rest of the world. Even 20 years ago we did not have the waves of juvenile brutal crimes that we have today. The sadistic treatment of wives by husbands; the savage assault on the elderly for no reason; the barbaric attacks upon strangers for money and hate all indicate the immoral condition of this generation.

Morality: (1) “The quality of being in accord with standards of right or good conduct. (2) A system of ideas of right and wrong conduct: religious morality; Christian morality. (3) Virtuous conduct. (4) A rule or lessons in moral conduct” (The American Heritage Dictionary). The only true standard of right and wrong is the New Testament of Jesus Christ. All of these sins are covered by the terms “ungodliness” and “worldly lusts.”

Ungodliness and Worldly Lusts

“For the grace of God that bringeth salvation hath appeared to all men, teaching us that, denying ungodliness and worldly lusts, we should live soberly, righteously, and godly, in this present world” (Tit. 2:11,12). Three words must be understood to appreciate this statement:

1. Denying: “(d) to abrogate, forsake, to renounce a thing, whether evil, Tit. 2:12, or good, 1 Tim. 5:8…. (Expository Dictionary of New Testament Words, W.E. Vine.) It means to totally renounce; it is a definite act of rejecting some-thing.

2. Ungodliness: General impiety (Rom.1:18; 11:26; 2 Tim.2:16). The lack of piety or reverence toward God. “Such ungodliness is idolatry plus immorality, both terms taken in their most comprehensive meaning” (New Testament Commentary, 1-11 Timothy – Titus, William Hendriksen, 371).

Ungodliness indicates complete contempt for God and religion, with evil purpose and evil motive. It covers all religious mockery and profanity of all kinds. Every thought, word, or deed that is without piety and reverence toward God is “ungodliness” and will bring the wrath of God upon the guilty.

3. Worldly lusts: “pertaining to this world, is used …(b) in Tit. 2:12, ethically, of `worldly lusts,’ or desires” (Expository Dictionary of New Testament Words, W. E. Vine).

Worldly lusts include the sinful, inordinate craving for satisfaction of physical appetites; excessive food and drink; inordinate sexual desires, rape, multiple marriages; live-ins; prostitution, homosexual and lesbian activity of all kinds and pornography.

Worldly lusts also include the sinful craving for a dominate position, which results in quarreling, envy, division, strife, hate, and murder. Please read 1 John 2:15, 16 which well describes the basis of worldly lusts.

Worldly lusts also include the uncontrolled yearning for material possessions and the glory that goes with them (1 Tim. 6:9). It includes inordinate longing for lustful power to possess and control (1 John 2:16; Tit. 3:3).

We are to “deny” ungodliness and worldly lusts and we must live soberly, godly and righteously in this present world. “Ungodliness” and “worldly lusts” include some of the most atrocious and destructive sins characterizing our present generation. I do not have space to discuss these sins as I would like to do. I shall mention a few of them and make brief comments. Some of these sins are:

Divorce and Remarriage

Nearly half of all marriages are broken by divorce and most of them leave children to suffer life long scars. Remarriage two or three times is common. Children are born out of wedlock or aborted before birth at an alarming rate, even to an immoral nation. Divorce for any cause except for fornication, and remarriage is sinful. The Bible says so (Matt. 5:32; 19:9; Mark 10:11,12; Luke 16:18). The divorce rate has steadily increased over the past 50 years until about half of all marriages end in divorce. The law of God on marriage for all is for as long as both shall live (Rom. 7:2-3; 1 Cor. 7:39), with only one exception  fornication (Matt. 5:32; 19:9).

Stealing and Lying

Stealing is wrong. We are admonished to work for our needs rather than steal (Eph. 4:28). “Lie not one to another” (Col. 3:9). Many Americans admit to lying about many things. Stealing from neighbors, employers, relatives, markets, and from strangers is far more common today than it was 30 years ago. People today will lie about anything.

Prostitution and Sexual Sin

Before 1930 it was rare that one would read of a child born out of wedlock. Today nearly half of all children conceived are killed by abortion or born out of marriage. There is a tremendous increase of immoral sexual activity since 1930, including children. The rapid decline of the morality of children and young people sound the alarm for the moral bankruptcy of this nation.

Immoral Dress

The seductive and immoral woman dresses in the “attire of an harlot.” Obviously, the attire of an harlot is that manner of dress (or lack of dress) which communicates the message of sexual interest and availability. The word “harlot” here describes a woman who is willing to engage in fornication with someone to whom she is not married.

The “attire of a harlot” may come in many styles: sexy dresses with no underclothes, very short and tight shorts, modern swim wear, bikinis, miniskirts, very tight-fitting skirts and pants, and sometimes no clothes at all. She is advertising for fornication. Godly people do not dress in such a manner (1 Pet. 3:1-4; Prov. 7:10). Christians are to dress in modest apparel, decently and with respect. The principle applies to both men and women. If a man “looketh on a woman to lust after her,” he commits a sin (Matt. 5:27-28). But how can a woman be guiltless if she dresses in such a way that invites that kind of look?

Social Drinking: Alcohol and Drugs

The abuse of alcohol and drugs is one of the most prevalent sins in America. Most people consume alcohol in some measure. Drunkenness is one of our major social problems, and one of the most expensive in America. The Bible condemns both drunkenness and social drinking (Prov. 20:1;23:29-32; Gal. 5:21; Eph. 5:18; 1 Pet. 3:3-4).

Filthy Vulgar Literature

No one can read filthy and vulgar literature and think on the virtuous qualities named by Paul in Philippians 4:8. Pornography is based on lust, which is licentiousness, and “they which do such things shall not inherit the kingdom of God” (Gal. 5:19-21). Jesus warns us of this sin in Matthew 5:28, “But I say unto you, That whosoever looketh on a woman to lust after her hath committed adultery with her already in his heart.” Please read Job 31:1, 9-12.

Profanity and Vulgarity

Vulgarity and profanity have invaded and permeated nearly every area of society. Since World War H the decency of language has been discarded in favor of the filth and profanity used today. Even primary and junior high schools allow cursing, vulgarity, and profanity.

What Christians Can Do About Morality

 “Love not the world” (1 John 2:15; James 1:27; 4:4).

 “Be not conformed to the world” (Rom. 12:2).

 “Have no fellowship with the unfruitful works of darkness, but rather reprove them” (Eph. 5:11).

 “Abstain from all appearance of evil” (1 Thess. 5:22; 4:11; 1 Pet. 2:11).

 “Flee from all evil” (2 Tim. 2:22; 1 Tim. 6:11; 1 Cor. 6:18).

 “Put off the old man of sin” (Eph. 4:22, 24).

 “Put on the new man, which after God is created in righteousness and true holiness” (Eph. 4:24).

 “Mortify the sins of the flesh” (Col. 3:5; Rom. 6).

 “Deny ungodliness and worldly lusts” (Tit. 2:12).

 “Dress modestly and so teach” (1 Tim. 2:9).

 “Speak the truth and lie not” (Eph. 4:25).

 “Let no corrupt communication proceed out of your mouth, but that which is good to the use of edifying, that it may minister grace unto the hearers” (Eph. 4:29).

 “Study to shew thyself approved unto God, a workman that needeth not to be ashamed, rightly dividing the word of truth” (2 Tim. 2:15).

 And be careful to teach and heed the command in Ephesians 6:1-4.

The only remedy for the gross ungodliness and worldly lusts that exists in the world today is to return to plain, forceful Bible teaching. Please read what inspiration commands in 2 Timothy 4:1-5.

Some elders, preachers and Bible teachers are too timid, or lack conviction, to speak plainly against the sins of society that are destroying us. The way to avoid worldly lusts is to walk in the Spirit (Gal. 5:16, 24). Read also 2 Peter 2:10, 18; Jude 16 and 18.

Guardian of Truth XLI: 1 p. 22-23
January 2, 1997

By Connie W. Adams

When Truth Magazine began in the fall of 1956, the sponsoring church issue had been brewing since shortly after the end of World War II. As American servicemen came home from Europe and the Pacific with images of the horrors of war stamped in their minds, a new wave of evangelistic fervor surged through the hearts of many brethren. This admirable zeal was tainted by a failure to keep in focus what the New Testament taught about the work and organization of the church. That the local church was obligated to preach the gospel at home and abroad to the limit of its ability was not in doubt. But the limitations upon the oversight of local church elders was not so clearly perceived. This zeal without knowledge gave rise to the sponsoring church.

Just What Is a Sponsoring Church?

A sponsoring church is one that assumes a program of work, accepts responsibility for funding it and then solicits other congregations to pro-vide the money. The elders of that sponsoring church agree to oversee the work, guarantee the expense, provide what funding they are able and then rely on other congregations to send them the funds to accomplish the work. In this arrangement, a local church eldership assumes a work which it alone is not able to do, a work to which all congregations sustain the same relationship.

In the early part of this century, the church at Henderson, Tennessee began such a work. Under the elders there, evangelists were to be sent out into western Tennessee and Kentucky, northern Mississippi, northeastern Arkansas, and southeastern Missouri. The Henderson elders offered them-selves to choose the men, send them out and see to the work, and asked other congregations to provide the funding. David Lipscomb was still editor of the Gospel Advocate and opened fire on the plan with heavy artillery. He saw it as a died-in-the-wool missionary society which was made no better for being under the elders of the Henderson church. Under such fire, the plan withered and died.

Revised Versions

After World War II, the sponsoring church was reborn. The Union Avenue church in Memphis, Tennessee decided to become a sponsoring church for the work in Japan. The church in Brownsville, Texas sponsored the work in Italy and the Broadway church in Lubbock, Texas became sponsor for the work in Germany. After the first wave of excitement and enthusiasm had faded somewhat, opposition was raised to such plans. Articles began to appear in the Gospel Guardian and this opened a loud controversy taken up by the Gospel Advocate. Numerous articles began to appear on the subject of church cooperation. Those opposed to the sponsoring church arrangement were soon dubbed “anti-cooperation.” The Preceptor which began in 1951, also took aim on this subject and opposed the sponsoring church. It became commonplace for men who wanted to go overseas to preach, to find a sponsoring church. That practice persists to the present hour.

The signature sponsoring church effort began in 1951 when two young preachers, James Walter Nichols and James D. Willeford, brought a plan which they had used on a more limited scale in the Midwest, to the elders of the Fifth and Highland church in Abilene, Texas. It was a plan for a nationwide network radio program. The elders agreed to accept the sponsorship of this program. I heard the first broadcast in the home of one of the elders of the West End church in Atlanta, Georgia. As the program expanded to television and monetary demands became greater, the solicitations became more fervent. Soon one of the elders devoted full time to traveling the country seeking funding for the work. Area representatives were chosen over the nation.

Truth Magazine and the Controversy

When Truth Magazine began, it was nearly a year be-fore direct reference was made to a sponsoring church and even longer before Herald of Truth was singled out. Early issues of the paper carried articles on a variety of subjects, many of them aimed at modernism which was a real threat in the Chicago area where the paper was born. But there were early articles on Bible authority and on controversy and attitudes which ought to prevail in the wake of it. In December 1956 there was a reprint of an article on “Church Cooperation” by H. Leo Boles which appeared in the Gospel Advocate in 1932. Ray Ferris followed with an article in February 1957 on “What Is Autonomy?” In March 1957, Bryan Vinson, Jr. had an editorial on “Our Level of Discussion” in which he mentioned that Herald of Truth (and some other subjects) were being defended on an emotional level rather than a studied scriptural investigation. In 1958 various articles appeared which mentioned the sponsoring church along with church supported benevolent institutions.

In April 1959, Morris W.R. Bailey of Canada, wrote on “When Is a Practice Unscriptural?” In it he dealt with the sponsoring church and the Herald of Truth in particular. In October 1959, Harry Pickup, Jr. wrote on “The Oversight of Elders.” In 1959-60 Cecil Willis wrote a series on “All-Sufficiency” which dealt with this subject. During these years there were reports of several debates among brethren on this subject. These included both of the Cogdill-Woods debates (Birmingham, Alabama and Newbern, Tennessee), the Flannery-Inman debate in Columbus, Ohio, and the Grider-Woods debate in Louisville, Kentucky.

Perhaps the best article of all to that time, was the one by Bryan Vinson, Sr. in November 1961 (“Some Basic Facts Considered”) in which he cited arguments made against the sponsoring church by Foy E. Wallace, Jr. Among them, Wallace had argued that the sponsoring church violated the scriptural limitations placed on elders in 1 Peter 5:2 where they are charged to oversee “the flock among you.” He charged that the sponsoring church created an inequality among churches, sort of a system of religious feudalism. He said it made brotherhood elders of these men and argued that was a step in the direction of Rome. He further argued that this practice created an interdependence of churches without scriptural warrant.

In June 1963, editor Cecil Willis unleased heavy bombardment on the practice with an article on “Brotherhood Elders.” In 1966 Cecil Willis debated Clifton Inman at Parkersburg, West Virginia and thoroughly exploded the argument usually made for the Herald of Truth that it was an “expedient” way to preach the gospel. Willis showed not only that the practice violated scriptural teaching on the work and oversight of elders, but he produced several charts showing from financial reports from the Highland church that it was costing huge sums of money just to “grease the machinery.” He showed how many gospel preachers could be supported at current levels by the funds used to solicit more support. He further questioned the expediency of any-thing which had produced so much tension and division among brethren.

Effectiveness

There can be no doubt that the material published in the paper had a telling effect in helping to salvage scores of congregations and hundreds of brethren, particularly in the Ohio Valley and Upper Midwest who otherwise would have followed the multitude to do evil. The influence of Cecil Willis, Earl Robertson, William Wallace, James P. Needham, and the earlier work of Bryan Vinson, Jr. and Sr., Leslie Diestelkamp, Gordon Pennock, Ray Ferris, and others, made a great difference. There are many faithful churches now in these areas where men are laboring today due to the hard work and unrelenting teaching of these good men and those who assisted them. When the history of the work is written, if it is accurately done, the effect this paper and its writers had on the study and thinking of brethren during these turbulent years will be profound. The abuse they suffered in the process was beyond imagination for those who did not experience it.

Guardian of Truth XLI: 1 p. 3-4
January 2, 1997

By Connie W. Adams

When Truth Magazine began in the fall of 1956, the sponsoring church issue had been brewing since shortly after the end of World War II. As American servicemen came home from Europe and the Pacific with images of the horrors of war stamped in their minds, a new wave of evangelistic fervor surged through the hearts of many brethren. This admirable zeal was tainted by a failure to keep in focus what the New Testament taught about the work and organization of the church. That the local church was obligated to preach the gospel at home and abroad to the limit of its ability was not in doubt. But the limitations upon the oversight of local church elders was not so clearly perceived. This zeal without knowledge gave rise to the sponsoring church.

Just What Is a Sponsoring Church?

A sponsoring church is one that assumes a program of work, accepts responsibility for funding it and then solicits other congregations to pro-vide the money. The elders of that sponsoring church agree to oversee the work, guarantee the expense, provide what funding they are able and then rely on other congregations to send them the funds to accomplish the work. In this arrangement, a local church eldership assumes a work which it alone is not able to do, a work to which all congregations sustain the same relationship.

In the early part of this century, the church at Henderson, Tennessee began such a work. Under the elders there, evangelists were to be sent out into western Tennessee and Kentucky, northern Mississippi, northeastern Arkansas, and southeastern Missouri. The Henderson elders offered them-selves to choose the men, send them out and see to the work, and asked other congregations to provide the funding. David Lipscomb was still editor of the Gospel Advocate and opened fire on the plan with heavy artillery. He saw it as a died-in-the-wool missionary society which was made no better for being under the elders of the Henderson church. Under such fire, the plan withered and died.

Revised Versions

After World War II, the sponsoring church was reborn. The Union Avenue church in Memphis, Tennessee decided to become a sponsoring church for the work in Japan. The church in Brownsville, Texas sponsored the work in Italy and the Broadway church in Lubbock, Texas became sponsor for the work in Germany. After the first wave of excitement and enthusiasm had faded somewhat, opposition was raised to such plans. Articles began to appear in the Gospel Guardian and this opened a loud controversy taken up by the Gospel Advocate. Numerous articles began to appear on the subject of church cooperation. Those opposed to the sponsoring church arrangement were soon dubbed “anti-cooperation.” The Preceptor which began in 1951, also took aim on this subject and opposed the sponsoring church. It became commonplace for men who wanted to go overseas to preach, to find a sponsoring church. That practice persists to the present hour.

The signature sponsoring church effort began in 1951 when two young preachers, James Walter Nichols and James D. Willeford, brought a plan which they had used on a more limited scale in the Midwest, to the elders of the Fifth and Highland church in Abilene, Texas. It was a plan for a nationwide network radio program. The elders agreed to accept the sponsorship of this program. I heard the first broadcast in the home of one of the elders of the West End church in Atlanta, Georgia. As the program expanded to television and monetary demands became greater, the solicitations became more fervent. Soon one of the elders devoted full time to traveling the country seeking funding for the work. Area representatives were chosen over the nation.

Truth Magazine and the Controversy

When Truth Magazine began, it was nearly a year be-fore direct reference was made to a sponsoring church and even longer before Herald of Truth was singled out. Early issues of the paper carried articles on a variety of subjects, many of them aimed at modernism which was a real threat in the Chicago area where the paper was born. But there were early articles on Bible authority and on controversy and attitudes which ought to prevail in the wake of it. In December 1956 there was a reprint of an article on “Church Cooperation” by H. Leo Boles which appeared in the Gospel Advocate in 1932. Ray Ferris followed with an article in February 1957 on “What Is Autonomy?” In March 1957, Bryan Vinson, Jr. had an editorial on “Our Level of Discussion” in which he mentioned that Herald of Truth (and some other subjects) were being defended on an emotional level rather than a studied scriptural investigation. In 1958 various articles appeared which mentioned the sponsoring church along with church supported benevolent institutions.

In April 1959, Morris W.R. Bailey of Canada, wrote on “When Is a Practice Unscriptural?” In it he dealt with the sponsoring church and the Herald of Truth in particular. In October 1959, Harry Pickup, Jr. wrote on “The Oversight of Elders.” In 1959-60 Cecil Willis wrote a series on “All-Sufficiency” which dealt with this subject. During these years there were reports of several debates among brethren on this subject. These included both of the Cogdill-Woods debates (Birmingham, Alabama and Newbern, Tennessee), the Flannery-Inman debate in Columbus, Ohio, and the Grider-Woods debate in Louisville, Kentucky.

Perhaps the best article of all to that time, was the one by Bryan Vinson, Sr. in November 1961 (“Some Basic Facts Considered”) in which he cited arguments made against the sponsoring church by Foy E. Wallace, Jr. Among them, Wallace had argued that the sponsoring church violated the scriptural limitations placed on elders in 1 Peter 5:2 where they are charged to oversee “the flock among you.” He charged that the sponsoring church created an inequality among churches, sort of a system of religious feudalism. He said it made brotherhood elders of these men and argued that was a step in the direction of Rome. He further argued that this practice created an interdependence of churches without scriptural warrant.

In June 1963, editor Cecil Willis unleased heavy bombardment on the practice with an article on “Brotherhood Elders.” In 1966 Cecil Willis debated Clifton Inman at Parkersburg, West Virginia and thoroughly exploded the argument usually made for the Herald of Truth that it was an “expedient” way to preach the gospel. Willis showed not only that the practice violated scriptural teaching on the work and oversight of elders, but he produced several charts showing from financial reports from the Highland church that it was costing huge sums of money just to “grease the machinery.” He showed how many gospel preachers could be supported at current levels by the funds used to solicit more support. He further questioned the expediency of any-thing which had produced so much tension and division among brethren.

Effectiveness

There can be no doubt that the material published in the paper had a telling effect in helping to salvage scores of congregations and hundreds of brethren, particularly in the Ohio Valley and Upper Midwest who otherwise would have followed the multitude to do evil. The influence of Cecil Willis, Earl Robertson, William Wallace, James P. Needham, and the earlier work of Bryan Vinson, Jr. and Sr., Leslie Diestelkamp, Gordon Pennock, Ray Ferris, and others, made a great difference. There are many faithful churches now in these areas where men are laboring today due to the hard work and unrelenting teaching of these good men and those who assisted them. When the history of the work is written, if it is accurately done, the effect this paper and its writers had on the study and thinking of brethren during these turbulent years will be profound. The abuse they suffered in the process was beyond imagination for those who did not experience it.

Guardian of Truth XLI: 1 p. 3-4
January 2, 1997

By Connie W. Adams

When Truth Magazine began in the fall of 1956, the sponsoring church issue had been brewing since shortly after the end of World War II. As American servicemen came home from Europe and the Pacific with images of the horrors of war stamped in their minds, a new wave of evangelistic fervor surged through the hearts of many brethren. This admirable zeal was tainted by a failure to keep in focus what the New Testament taught about the work and organization of the church. That the local church was obligated to preach the gospel at home and abroad to the limit of its ability was not in doubt. But the limitations upon the oversight of local church elders was not so clearly perceived. This zeal without knowledge gave rise to the sponsoring church.

Just What Is a Sponsoring Church?

A sponsoring church is one that assumes a program of work, accepts responsibility for funding it and then solicits other congregations to pro-vide the money. The elders of that sponsoring church agree to oversee the work, guarantee the expense, provide what funding they are able and then rely on other congregations to send them the funds to accomplish the work. In this arrangement, a local church eldership assumes a work which it alone is not able to do, a work to which all congregations sustain the same relationship.

In the early part of this century, the church at Henderson, Tennessee began such a work. Under the elders there, evangelists were to be sent out into western Tennessee and Kentucky, northern Mississippi, northeastern Arkansas, and southeastern Missouri. The Henderson elders offered them-selves to choose the men, send them out and see to the work, and asked other congregations to provide the funding. David Lipscomb was still editor of the Gospel Advocate and opened fire on the plan with heavy artillery. He saw it as a died-in-the-wool missionary society which was made no better for being under the elders of the Henderson church. Under such fire, the plan withered and died.

Revised Versions

After World War II, the sponsoring church was reborn. The Union Avenue church in Memphis, Tennessee decided to become a sponsoring church for the work in Japan. The church in Brownsville, Texas sponsored the work in Italy and the Broadway church in Lubbock, Texas became sponsor for the work in Germany. After the first wave of excitement and enthusiasm had faded somewhat, opposition was raised to such plans. Articles began to appear in the Gospel Guardian and this opened a loud controversy taken up by the Gospel Advocate. Numerous articles began to appear on the subject of church cooperation. Those opposed to the sponsoring church arrangement were soon dubbed “anti-cooperation.” The Preceptor which began in 1951, also took aim on this subject and opposed the sponsoring church. It became commonplace for men who wanted to go overseas to preach, to find a sponsoring church. That practice persists to the present hour.

The signature sponsoring church effort began in 1951 when two young preachers, James Walter Nichols and James D. Willeford, brought a plan which they had used on a more limited scale in the Midwest, to the elders of the Fifth and Highland church in Abilene, Texas. It was a plan for a nationwide network radio program. The elders agreed to accept the sponsorship of this program. I heard the first broadcast in the home of one of the elders of the West End church in Atlanta, Georgia. As the program expanded to television and monetary demands became greater, the solicitations became more fervent. Soon one of the elders devoted full time to traveling the country seeking funding for the work. Area representatives were chosen over the nation.

Truth Magazine and the Controversy

When Truth Magazine began, it was nearly a year be-fore direct reference was made to a sponsoring church and even longer before Herald of Truth was singled out. Early issues of the paper carried articles on a variety of subjects, many of them aimed at modernism which was a real threat in the Chicago area where the paper was born. But there were early articles on Bible authority and on controversy and attitudes which ought to prevail in the wake of it. In December 1956 there was a reprint of an article on “Church Cooperation” by H. Leo Boles which appeared in the Gospel Advocate in 1932. Ray Ferris followed with an article in February 1957 on “What Is Autonomy?” In March 1957, Bryan Vinson, Jr. had an editorial on “Our Level of Discussion” in which he mentioned that Herald of Truth (and some other subjects) were being defended on an emotional level rather than a studied scriptural investigation. In 1958 various articles appeared which mentioned the sponsoring church along with church supported benevolent institutions.

In April 1959, Morris W.R. Bailey of Canada, wrote on “When Is a Practice Unscriptural?” In it he dealt with the sponsoring church and the Herald of Truth in particular. In October 1959, Harry Pickup, Jr. wrote on “The Oversight of Elders.” In 1959-60 Cecil Willis wrote a series on “All-Sufficiency” which dealt with this subject. During these years there were reports of several debates among brethren on this subject. These included both of the Cogdill-Woods debates (Birmingham, Alabama and Newbern, Tennessee), the Flannery-Inman debate in Columbus, Ohio, and the Grider-Woods debate in Louisville, Kentucky.

Perhaps the best article of all to that time, was the one by Bryan Vinson, Sr. in November 1961 (“Some Basic Facts Considered”) in which he cited arguments made against the sponsoring church by Foy E. Wallace, Jr. Among them, Wallace had argued that the sponsoring church violated the scriptural limitations placed on elders in 1 Peter 5:2 where they are charged to oversee “the flock among you.” He charged that the sponsoring church created an inequality among churches, sort of a system of religious feudalism. He said it made brotherhood elders of these men and argued that was a step in the direction of Rome. He further argued that this practice created an interdependence of churches without scriptural warrant.

In June 1963, editor Cecil Willis unleased heavy bombardment on the practice with an article on “Brotherhood Elders.” In 1966 Cecil Willis debated Clifton Inman at Parkersburg, West Virginia and thoroughly exploded the argument usually made for the Herald of Truth that it was an “expedient” way to preach the gospel. Willis showed not only that the practice violated scriptural teaching on the work and oversight of elders, but he produced several charts showing from financial reports from the Highland church that it was costing huge sums of money just to “grease the machinery.” He showed how many gospel preachers could be supported at current levels by the funds used to solicit more support. He further questioned the expediency of any-thing which had produced so much tension and division among brethren.

Effectiveness

There can be no doubt that the material published in the paper had a telling effect in helping to salvage scores of congregations and hundreds of brethren, particularly in the Ohio Valley and Upper Midwest who otherwise would have followed the multitude to do evil. The influence of Cecil Willis, Earl Robertson, William Wallace, James P. Needham, and the earlier work of Bryan Vinson, Jr. and Sr., Leslie Diestelkamp, Gordon Pennock, Ray Ferris, and others, made a great difference. There are many faithful churches now in these areas where men are laboring today due to the hard work and unrelenting teaching of these good men and those who assisted them. When the history of the work is written, if it is accurately done, the effect this paper and its writers had on the study and thinking of brethren during these turbulent years will be profound. The abuse they suffered in the process was beyond imagination for those who did not experience it.

Guardian of Truth XLI: 1 p. 3-4
January 2, 1997