Truth Magazine

By Ferrell Jenkins

When Paul and Barnabas returned from their first preaching tour they reported to the brethren all the things which God had done through them (Acts 14:27). Because many brethren in the United States send support to gospel preachers in South Africa and because we know so many of the men personally, I think it appropriate that I give brethren a report of my preaching trip to South Africa.

Brother David Beckley, preacher for the church in Krugersdorp, encouraged me to come to South Africa to present some lessons on biblical authority. He thought I might be able to do this at the conclusion of one of my tours to Europe or the Middle East. Later, I decided to conduct a tour to South Africa and Zimbabwe. In this way I would be able to pay my own way to South Africa and then be able to stay in the country and preach. When this plan was suggested to some brethren and friends in South Africa, numerous invitations to preach were issued.

The Tour

Twenty friends and brethren from across the United States joined me for the tour. We visited Johannesburg, Pretoria, Cape Town and surrounding area, the Garden Route, a private game park adjoining Kruger National Park and Victoria Falls in Zimbabwe. In Cape Town we were met at the airport by Eric and Sharon Reed. Brethren from four congregations met in one location on the Lord’s day so that we could visit with all of them and I was invited to preach for them. The group of about 70 or 80 including our group was made up of whites, blacks, Indians, and perhaps colored (this designation is used in South Africa to describe people of mixed races). Other preachers included Hendrik Joubert, Conrad Steyn and George Harris. Conrad and George have preached for many years in association with the “institutional” brethren. When a sponsoring church in Houston, Texas, made plans to take over the building and hold the deed to it, they “saw the light,” broke with these brethren and took a stand against such innovations. For them it was almost like starting over from scratch. I had an enjoyable visit with Conrad. Both he and George plan to visit brethren in the United States later this year.

When we visited Victoria Falls in Zimbabwe (formerly Rhodesia), Foy and Margaret Short, long-time workers in Zimbabwe, and three other Christians drove about six hours from Bulawayo to visit with our group. I think brother Short is the only white conservative preacher now in Zimbabwe. He works primarily with black churches throughout the country.

In Johannesburg we met with the Brixton congregation. The brethren had inivted me to speak, but I suggested they use brother Roy Foutz, a preacher from Ranger, Texas, and a member of our group. Two of my former students, Les and Linda Maydell, several others from Brixton, and David Beckley from Krugersdorp, met us at the airport upon initial arrival in Johannesburg.

After the Tour – The Work Begins

On the afternoon of May 25 I went to the Jan Smuts airport in Johannesburg with my tour members to see them off on their return to the U.S.A. Then I took a flight to Durban which was paid for by several brethren (or churches) in that area. Upon arrival I was met by Basil and Gloria Cass who work mostly with Indian churches, and by Paddy and Sandra Kendall-ball. We drove diretly to Reservoir Hills where the Indian brethren from at least three different congregations had rented a hall large enough to accommodate our meeting. About 70 were present for the lesson. The next day I went about 75 miles to Pietermaritzburg where the Kendall-ball’s labor mostly with black brethren. Several carloads of Indian brethren drove up from Durban to hear the three lessons I presented in a rented school auditorium. The Indian brethren spoke highly of brethren Gene Tope, now of Pine Hills in Orlando, and Jim Lovell, now near Athens, Alabama, for the work they did among the Indians when they worked in South Africa.

On Saturday night I returned to Pinetown (near Durban) and spent the might with Doug and Sheila Bauer. On the Lord’s day I spoke at a specially called 7 a.m. service at Pinetown. The church there is composed of about 15 adults and meets in a rented hall. Brother Bauer took me to the Bluff congregation in Durban where I spoke at the morning and evening services to about 60 persons. Piet and Zorida Joubert work with the brethren there. The brethren have their own building. I enjoyed an overnight visit with Piet and Zorida.

Preaching to the Zulus

Monday morning a long time friend, Paul Williams, came to take me to Eshowe. Paul and Helen work among the Zulus. They had arranged a 4:30 p.m. service and requested that I speak on biblical authority. Paul has had some debates with black institutional brethren and thought this material would help to confirm what he had taught. About 40 were in attendance including only four whites. All of the approximately 25 converts there are young people. As I spoke, one of the brethren, a teacher in the local high school, translated my lesson into the Zulu language. Some songs were in Zulu and others were in English. The service lasted for two and one-half hours and they were still wanting to ask questions when we closed.

In my lesson to the Zulus I mentioned that I once had a Nigerian student who remembered his grandfather offering animal sacrifices. Afterwards Paul told me that many of those present had fathers and brothers who still offer sacrifices. Several of these young Christians have suffered the loss of their home and family as a result of their obedience to the gospel. I was impressed with the level of commitment which I saw in several of these young people.

When men work in places like Eshowe, it is necessary for them to pay from their own pocket for many things that most of us have supplied by the congregation with which we work. They must drive long distances using expensive petrol (gasoline). They must pay for all the printing, advertising, postage, equipment, etc. used in the work. Paul is running short on his work fund and is in need of immediate help. If you can help, please send him a check by air mail to P.O. Box 324, Eshowe, 3815 South Africa.

Paul and Helen returned me to Pinetown on Tuesday afternoon. That evening I met with the Pinctown brethren in a home. They wanted to ask questions, primarily about divorce and remarriage. The session, with a pot-luck thrown in, lasted from 6:30 until 10.

Back to Johannesburg

Wednesday I returned to Johannesburg and was met by Les and Linda Maydell and taken to their home with a welcomed free night. Thursday was a different matter. Les works with the Brixton church and with several black churches scattered across the area. He had requested that I present five lessons on the Scheme of Redemption at Brixton on Republic Day, a national holiday. I was concerned about my voice, but made it through the day without too much difficulty. More than a hundred black and white brethren – some from far away – came to hear the lessons from 9 a.m. to 4:30 p.m. The Brixton church which hosted the series has its own building. On Friday evening we returned to Brixton to present two more lessons. We were able to catch a few short visits with Ray and Thena Votaw, longtime workers in South Africa, during our visits to Johannesburg.

The lessons on the Scheme of Redemption were taken from my book, The Theme of the Bible, which was recently published in a revised edition. Some friends of mine have helped me purchase 500 copies of the book for free distribution in foreign countries. I took about 70 to 80 copies with me to Africa. Many of these were given to black, white, and Indian preachers and teachers and I am sure they will be used a great deal. Foy Short wanted 40 additional copies for distribution among black brethren in Zimbabwe. Paul Williams wants 20 copies for teachers among the Zulus. Several of the Indian brethren requested additional copies.

Lessons on Authority in Krugersdorp

Saturday and Sunday took me to Krugersdorp where David and Joanne Beckley labor with the church. David also serves as one of the elders. Krugersdorp is the only congregation in South Africa to have elders. Here we were scheduled to present a series of six lessons on biblical authority and two Bible land slide presentations at the Bidi Bidi Nursery School which had been rented for the meeting. The (white) brethren had invited many black Christians from distant places to attend. Several came from Vendaland (about a six hour drive). One group chartered a bus to bring them for the Saturday lessons. We had about 175 present for four lessons on Saturday. Each session included an interesting question and answer period. About 15 to 20 ladies in the Krugersdorp church provided lunch for the entire group at a nearby park. Near the close of the day, some neighbors of the Bidi Bidi Nursery made complaints to the manager of the facility about the presence of so many blacks in the neighborhood. The brethren released me so Brixton could invite me to complete the series. Arrangements quickly were made for me to present the two remaining lessons at Brixton on Sunday morning. I did return to Krugersdorp Sunday evening for one lesson to the brethren there. Both Brixton and Krugersdorp helped me with some of the expenses I had in connection with the preaching portion of the trip.

To me it seems obvious that the future of South Africa belongs with the blacks. What the white brethren are doing to teach and train these black brethren is commendable.

David has assembled some high quality video equipment for use in teaching. He and his son Jon taped the lessons both at Brixton and at Krugersdorp for further use among brethren throughout the country.

The material on Biblical Authority which I used in Krugersdorp is to be published shortly in this country as a study booklet.

Mildred Dark Teaches Women

Sister Mildred Dark of 349 Cason Ln., Murfreesboro, TN 37129, spent about four weeks during April and May in South Africa at her own expense teaching classes for the women. Our paths crossed in Cape Town, and we heard good reports of her work wherever we went.

Conclusion

It was a good trip. During the ten days following the tour I was able to present 23 lessons. I was encouraged by the reception I received and the brethren there seem to have been edified. I am thankful to the Lord for his protection, to Elizabeth, my wife, for her abiding love and friendship, and to the Carrollwood church in Tampa for their encouragement, prayers and financial support. Without them this likely would never have taken place.

Guardian of Truth XXXIV: 20, pp. 624-625
October 18, 1990

By Kevin Campbell

“At my first answer no man stood with me, but all men forsook me; I pray God that it might not be laid to their charge” (2 Tim. 4:16).

No doubt the apostle Paul was not the last gospel preacher to be deserted in this stand for the truth. Thankfully, I did not have that kind of experience in the debate in which I engaged in August. In another portion of this issue, you may read Larry Ray Hafley’s review of that debate. My purpose in writing is to: (1) Thank those who stood with me and encouraged me, and (2) to correct some of the “exaggerations” that brother Hafley made concerning the debate.

There were many who came to my aid in this effort; without whose help things might not have gone quite as well. I didn’t even know some of these brethren before but called and wrote, believing they could and would help. Ronny Milliner and James Bice sent audio tapes of several debates that proved to be invaluable in my preparation. I was also able to make good use of the charts that brother Milliner has put together in booklet form. Melvin Curry, J.P. Halbrook, Mike Melton, and Charles Nicks provided me with debate books and other material that were a tremendous asset. Brethren, never doubt that good is done through debating. The old debates of W. Curtis Porter are still bearing fruit today when young men like me are able to sit at the feet of such men and benefit from their study. Mike Willis sent two notebooks of debate notes on baptism that were an immense help. To all those who did what they could, I offer my heart-felt gratitude.

A special word of thanks goes to two people in particular. First of all, Larry Ray Hafley was a true brother in Christ and a great encouragement. His constant support.coupled with his insight as a debater and student of the word contributed much to my preparation. His reference in his review to his being “useless” and “unnecessary” as a moderator are simply the signs of his modesty. Just his presence alone was a great comfort, not to mention his ability to help provide answers to my opponent’s arguments. He has been and I pray will continue to be a great soldier of the cross. Secondly, I owe my wife Tracy a special thank you. She endured many a long night alone as I was glued to a debate book or at the office until 11 and 12 o’clock at night preparing my notes. She did a major portion of the typing for me and was a constant source of strength. All of this while having to deal with two little boys has made my respect and admiration for her increase greatly over the last several months.

The brethren with whom I work stood with me as well. They were all excited and helpful in bringing this discussion about. You don’t know how much it means to a preacher to be appreciated and supported by the brethren in what he does. Thanks to all at the Morris Road church of Christ in Gulfport.

Finally, the glory for all of this goes to the Lord. I believe that good was done, not because I or anyone else had much to do with it, but because the Lord’s word is “quick and powerful, and sharper than any two-edged sword. ” We have seen and continue to see results of the proclamation of the gospel. It is my prayer that many in this world will be won for the Lord, that he may be glorified in the day of his coming/

Guardian of Truth XXXIV: 20, p. 619
October 18, 1990

By Clinton D. Hamilton

Question: Is the English word body ever used in any other sense than the universal or aggregate, saints of all ages, living and dead, per Hebrews 12:23? (literally the firstborn ones).

Reply: Yes, the English word body is used in sense other than the aggregate of all the saved of all ages. Soma, the Greek term translated body, is used approximately 86 times in the English New Testament to mean the human body. At least two times it is used to mean the body of beasts or lower animals (Heb. 13:11; Jas. 3:3). It is used also to refer to terrestrial and celestial entities (1 Cor. 15:40).

Sometimes body is used in connection with the Lord’s supper, in which the bread refers to the body with which one communes when he partakes (1 Cor. 10:16). By the very nature of the term itself, body refers to an aggregate of members. The context lets one know what body is under consideration. If the body of Christ is under consideration and the context refers to the saved, the aggregate is the sense. One could have in view a local group of Christians as constituting the body of Christ in that particular locale. Paul wrote to the Corinthians about their relation in that local body of Christ (1 Cor. 1:2; 12:14-31).

Certainly, sometimes all the saved are in view as in Ephesians 5:23 where it is stated that Jesus is the savior of the body. Christ is the head of the body, the church (Col. 1:18; see also Eph. 1:23; 2:16; 3:15).

Question: What is the teaching of Hebrews 8:12? Is that teaching that God is no longer cognizant of sin, or does it simply means that one is not held accountable of sin, after it is pardoned?

Reply: The term remember is from mimnesko which means to be recalled or to return to one’s mind. God says that sins (in this context) will be remembered no more. The sense is that he will forgive and they will not be called to mind as being still on the person. They will have been remitted and having been loosed or sent away will not be brought back to mind. God’s ability to remember or whether he can call to mind is not the issue. Whether man’s sins once loosed are loosed or sent away forever never again to be an issue between the ones forgiven and God is the issue. God will not still remember their sins as if they had not been forgiven (Heb. 10:17).

Guardian of Truth XXXIV: 20, p. 613
October 18, 1990

By Larry Ray Hafley

In August, brother Kevin Campbell met Cecil Patterson, a Missionary Baptist, in debate in Gulfport, MS. The subjects debated concerned the place of water baptism in the gospel plan of salvation. Mr. Patterson affirmed that one is saved “before and without water baptism.” Brother Campbell argued for the plain teaching of Acts 2:38; 22:16; Mark 16:16; Romans 6:3,4; Colossians 2:11-13; Galatians 3:26,27; 1 Peter 3:21.

Cecil Patterson is an experienced Baptist preacher, aged 50. Mr. Patterson is a sincere and capable advocate of Baptist doctrine. He conducted himself as a gentleman.

This was brother Campbell’s first debate. Kevin is only 22 years old (I have spots on some of my neckties that are older than he is). Several brethren, myself included, had misgivings about Kevin’s age and lack of experience and of his ability to handle the truth against an opponent who was preaching before he was born. But those fears and doubts were totally unfounded. Brother Campbell is a quiet, reserved young man, but he has a keen, analytical mind and is a tireless student. His humble demeanor is a tremendous asset. Kevin speaks with great force, power and authority (Tit. 2:15). He knows how to punch, pinch and pierce an argument while maintaining his poise. Frankly, I was surprised at his talents as a speaker and debater. God has richly blessed him, and he has developed those abilities. Our prayer is that Kevin will continue to grow in the Lord and in the front lines of the good fight of faith. May God grant us others of like precious faith and raise them up as good soldiers of Jesus the Christ.

It is refreshing, in these days of soft, vague preaching, in these days when preaching is often reduced to general, topical principles, to hear young men who will sound out the form of sound words without fear or favor and do so with fervor, boldness and “great plainness of speech” (2 Cor. 3:12; 5:11).

Mr. Hoyt Chastain, a veteran war horse (I use that term with respect and affection) for Missionary Baptist schools and churches, moderated for Mr. Patterson. Mr. Chastain met the late and lamented W. Curtis Porter in debate four times. Chastain’s mentor was Ben M. Bogard, perhaps the most famous Baptist debater who ever lived. Mr. Chastain is almost without peer as a defender of Missionary Baptist doctrine. So, Mr. Patterson had the ablest help he could have had.

It was my pleasure to moderate for brother Campbell. Actually, I did not truly “moderate.” I made a few announcements and poured water for Kevin to drink, but other than that I simply sat and enjoyed hearing the truth. I was completely useless as a moderator, and it is all brother Campbell’s fault, but I have forgiven him. The only time I ever felt more unnecessary was when I tried to teach a duck how to swim.

Kevin had numerous charts which answered Mr. Patterson’s efforts to deny what the New Testament teaches (Mk. 16:16; Acts 2:38). He was thoroughly prepared, and it showed. A Baptist was “baptized into Christ” (Gal. 3:26, 27) during the debate. (Who says, “Debates don’t do any good”?) Campbell preached to more Baptists in two nights than he will preach to in a year of gospel meetings. The attendance was moderately good. Brethren attended from six different states. Several liberal preachers were present as were a few Missionary Baptist preachers.

Baptist Argumentation – Bible Refutation

Mr. Patterson followed the typical route of Baptist preachers. He cited many passages dealing with salvation by faith. Brother Campbell did not deny that salvation is by faith; rather, he showed that salvation by grace, faith and blood does not exclude water baptism.

Cecil Patterson was inconsistent and illogical regarding Mark 16:16. He argued:

(1) There is only one condition of salvation in Mark 16:16; namely, faith.

(2) “Shall be saved” refers to salvation in heaven, not to past or alien sins. This, of course, made baptism essential, for if “saved” is heaven, then baptism is necessary to go there. Secondly, if “saved” equals heaven and not the removal or remission of past sins, then faith in Mark 16:16 is not a condition for the forgiveness of past sins. Mr. Patterson could not clear up his confusion on these points as Kevin pressed him, so he resorted to point number three.

(3) Mark 16:16 is not a part of the Bible. It is not Scripture. This nullified his two previous arguments, for if the passage is not the word of God, it is the word of men and teaches us nothing.

(4) The most obvious failure Cecil made was his argument regarding salvation and how to get to St. Louis. Said Cecil: “He that entereth a train and is seated shall reach St. Louis.” From this he argued that entering the train was essential to get to St. Louis, but whether a man sat or not was immaterial. He had to enter the train, but being seated was not essential. He that entereth the train shall reach St. Louis whether or not he ever sits down. Hence, he that believeth is saved whether or not he is ever baptized.

Kevin answered thusly:

Enter Train + Seated = St. Louis

Believe + Baptism = Salvation

Brother Campbell reminded Mr. Patterson that since he believed that salvation occurred instantly, the very moment one believes, then one is saved before he has an opportunity to be baptized. So, since entering the train is equivalent to belief, then one arrives in St. Louis before he has time to be seated! The audience, both Baptists and Christians, chuckled aloud at this. But Kevin was not through. He told Cecil that one could fly or drive to St. Louis and that entering a train was not the only way to get there. Since faith was the same as entering the train, and one can get to St. Louis without it, then one could also get to salvation without faith. Therefore, neither faith nor baptism is essential!

In response to 1 Peter 3:21 (“baptism doth also now save us”), Mr. Patterson said, “This is the passage they use to teach that baptism saves us. I don’t believe that.” Need I say more?

Kevin asked Cecil if he had ever told a penitent believer to “Arise, and be baptized and wash away thy sins, calling on the name of the Lord” (Acts 22:16). Cecil said, “I have not.” Ananias was not a Missionary Baptist preacher, for he told Saul to do something that Cecil Patterson will not tell anyone to do.

Mr. Patterson argued that Saul was called “brother” before his baptism, so he was a brother in Christ before baptism. But Kevin blunted this Baptist blunder by pointing out that unbelievers were called brethren several times in the Bible (Acts 2:29; 13:26; 22:1). If calling one a “brother” before he is baptized means one is saved before baptism, then calling one “brother” before he believes means one is saved before faith.

Thanks to the Morris Rd. church in Gulfport for their support during the debate. They all worked hard in preparing for the discussion. It is good to see a church that actively and aggressively encourages controversy and contends openly for the faith once delivered. Some churches may not desire debates against error and may prefer a pseudo positive, non-combatant gospel, but not these brethren.

Some Baptist Advice

Prior to the debate, brother Campbell sent advertisements to scores of denominational churches. Two Baptists preachers responded thusly:

I am forced to say that I cannot post your bulletin about your debate over water baptism.

. . . if you will read the Scriptures, we are told very clearly . . . that debate is dangerous. 2 Timothy 2:14, “words without profit but to subverting of the hearers or (NKJ) ruin of hearers.” We both know that nothing will be settled by such a debate and the world will have one more reason to believe Christians are the crazy ones who cannot get along even with one another. . .

I believe what you are proposing is destined to cause only more confusion among believers. Read 2 Timothy 2:23.

I would urge you to cancel the debate to avoid more confusion in the world about the function of the church.

Yes, debate is “dangerous,” especially to Baptist doctrine. In the context of 2 Timothy 2:14, Paul refuted the doctrine of Hymanaeus and Philetus (2:14-18), showed that Scripture is “profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness” (3:16,17 – the very nature, purpose and function of debate), and told Timothy to “reprove, rebuke, exhort with all longsuffering and doctrine” (2 Tim. 4:24). Does that sound like a condemnation of open, honorable Bible study?

Indeed, Paul condemned, as do we, contentious, wrangling, strifes and quarrels, but he did not condemn orderly sessions wherein disputants are given equal amounts of time to declare their views before a respectful audience. Paul engaged in debate (Acts 9:29; 17:2,3,17-32; 18:4; 19:8,9; 28:23). Several of his debates ended in madness and mayhem (Acts 9:29; 13:44-46; 17:2-10; 19:8,9,23-29), but he was still “bold in our God to speak unto you the gospel of God with much contention” (1 Thess. 2:2). Editors, papers and Baptist preachers who avoid controversy and debate are unlike the apostles and prophets. Jesus and Stephen debated and their audiences killed them (Acts 7:51-60). Ungodly audience reaction is not a detraction against Bible teaching and debate. Did Paul cause the world to believe Christians “are the crazy ones” (Acts 17:4-10)?

“But foolish and unlearned questions avoid, knowing that they do gender strifes” (2 Tim. 2:23). Is salvation by grace through faith a “foolish and unlearned question”? If so, pitch out the Romans and Galatians letters. If not, then the passage does not apply.

It is precisely because of “confusion among believers” that debates must be held. There would not be so much “confusion,” though, if Baptist preachers would not tell people that you do not have to do what the Lord said do in Mark 1

6:16 and Acts 2:38. When Jesus says, “He that believeth and is baptized shall be saved,” and Baptist preachers say, “He that believeth is saved and shall be baptized,” there is confusion. Debates help clarify that confusion.

Certainly, the “world” is confused “about the function of the church.” The world is also “confused about the function of the Christ. ” Should we, then, cease “to teach and preach Jesus Christ,” lest we add to their “confusion” about him? But the world would not be so confused “about the function of the church” if Baptists would cease parading their churches before the world with their human names, titles, organizations, doctrines and practices which are foreign to the New Testament.

Campbell and Patterson are to debate the general church question in the near future. This debate will help clarify whatever confusion that may exist.

Something was “settled by” the debate. As mentioned earlier, a Baptist was “baptized into Christ.” Confusion abounds where controversy is squelched and stifled. Preachers or papers who refuse discussion end up being a shelter to error and a haven to heretics. This may occur with the noblest of intentions, but it is the result of refusing rebuke and reproof nonetheless. Those that will not engage in controversy cannot refute error effectively. Whether they mean to or not, they become a harbor for every teacher of error who needs cover from the fire of the gospel. Efforts to avoid discussion end up as critics of teachers of truth and as apologetic sympathizers for the preachers of error. This happens when men enter the war zone with a shield but without a sword.

The second letter brother Campbell received appears below.

After reading your letter and seeing your flyer the only conclusion I can come to is that you and Mr. Patterson will make a mockery of the Christian life and bring reproach to the body of Christ. No where in the Scripture are we commanded to debate baptism! Also, seeing the position you take on baptism, I can see that you know nothing of the Greek language, in which the Bible was written or else you would understand what Acts 2:38 is saying. Baptism is the evidence of salvation. It does not bring salvation. If it could, then all the people before Christ would be saved, for we know that they were baptizing before the Lord died on the cross. Here’s a question you need to ask yourself, “If water could bring salvation, then why did Jesus have to die and shed his blood?” (Heb. 9:22-28) However, from the statements you made in your letter, I don’t think you will believe the Word. You seem to me to be a self-proclaimed, know-it-all-theologian who has all the answers. May God help you! The sad thing in all of this is that the majority of the people in our area are dying and going to hell, and you are more interested in debating than getting the Gospel out. It’s my prayer that you will forget this silliness and do what will honor and glorify the Lord Jesus. “Preach the Gospel! “

If this Baptist preacher had attended the debate, he would have seen how well brother Campbell knew “the Greek language,” especially that of Acts 2:38. But any man who reads Acts 2:38 and says “Baptism is the evidence of salvation,” needs more help in the English language than anything else. Jesus shed his blood “for the remission of sins” (Matt. 26:28). Wonder if that means his blood is “the evidence of salvation”?

“No where in the Scripture are we commanded to debate baptism.” How about Jude 3; Philippians 1:17; 2 Timothy 3:16; 4:4? Would this Baptist preacher refuse to discuss faith, grace or salvation by the blood of Christ with a Jew because

“we are not commanded to debate” those topics? Note a parallel and paraphrase of the letter above:

No where in the Scriptures are we commanded to debate repentance! Also, seeing you know nothing of the Greek language . . . or else you would understand what Act 2:38 is saying. Repentance is the evidence of salvation. It does not bring salvation. If it could, then all the people before Christ would be saved, for we know that they were repenting before the Lord died on the cross. Here’s a question you need to ask yourself, “If repentance could bring salvation, then why did Jesus have to shed his blood?” It is not blood and repentance, it’s just blood (Heb. 9:22-28) . . . The sad thing in all of this is that the majority of the people in our area are dying and going to hell, and you are more interested in writing against debating than in getting the gospel out . . . . .. Preach the Gospel!”

The letters above are characteristic of those who argue that it is wrong to argue. I wonder if it is wrong to argue that it is wrong to argue? Further, note the “loving” words and phrases in the latter letter – “make a mockery . . . bring reproach . . . you know nothing . . . I don’t think you will believe the Word. You seem to be a self-proclaimed, know-it-all-theologian who has all the answers . . . you are more interested in debating than getting the Gospel out . . . forget this silliness. . .”

Whew! All of these “sweet, loving” words in one paragraph from a man who likely deplores “unloving, judgmental” preaching and debating! Those who rail against sharp rebuke (Tit, 1:13), often do so quite sharply. It is typical of those spiritual sweeties who disdain “negative” preaching as an affront and as an insult to their urbane, dignified, sophisticated, above-the-battle posture. They spit accusations and use harsh words against those who use harsh words. From ambush that will not allow a reply, they smile and let you know that they are above such things I Happy is he that condemneth not himself in that thing which he condemneth.

Conclusion

Brother Campbell wishes to thank all of those who helped him prepare for the debate. We anxiously await the next Campbell – Patterson debate on the general church question. Both men will affirm: The Scriptures teach that the church of which I am a member is scriptural in origin, name and doctrine. Let us pray for our young brother Campbell as he continues to contend for the faith.

Guardian of Truth XXXIV: 20, pp. 616-618
October 18, 1990