Truth Magazine

By Weldon E. Warnock

As we devote this issue of Guardian of Truth in honor of H.E. Phillips, it is my assignment to reflect upon the light side of the life of brother Phillips and to share a few of the humorous incidents in his long and illustrious career. It has been my pleasure to have known brother Phillips and his good wife Polly and family for several years, and to have been in his home and in gospel meetings together on many occasions.

Let-Down at Cottonwood

The first time Elwood preached away from his home congregation was at Cottonwood, Tennessee in the early 1940s. He was told the congregation was small, somewhere between 15 to 20 people. He took two young men with him to help out in the services, such as directing the singing and leading prayer. When Elwood and the young men arrived, the house was full of people. He preached with all vim and vigor that he could muster up, feeling good that such a large crowd had come out to hear him. But his euphoria was short-lived as the people informed him when the service was over that they had confused him with another Phillips – that they thought H.M. Phillips was preaching, an old, seasoned preacher who taught at David Lipscomb College. Anyway, one elderly sister, wearing an apron, must have been impressed as he came by and laid a one-dollar bill in Elwood’s hand.

The Tennessee Rooster

During a gospel meeting between Chattanooga and Nashville, Tennessee Elwood encountered a preacher-hating rooster (perhaps the old rooster had seen several of his brothers sacrificed to the ministry). The farmer with whom Elwood was staying, told Elwood to watch the rooster as he loved to flog people, especially preachers. After a few days of self-imposed exile, Elwood asked the farmer if he could kill the old rooster, because if a rooster ever needed killin’, that one did. The farmer consented, except he did not want Elwood to use a gun. So, armed with a tobacco stick and a pocketful of walnuts, he cornered the fighting rooster in the hen house face to face.

When he got the rooster lined up just where he wanted him, he swung with all his might to decapitate the preacherhating rooster’s head. But lucky for the rooster, Elwood missed, except the comb. He peeled the comb off down to the scalp, and the rooster, taking evasive action, darted out of the hen house and took refuge under the farmer’s house. For the rest of the meeting the old rooster had a phobia toward Elwood, avoiding him like he had the plague. Elwood told the farmer that God made man to have dominion over the fish of the sea and the fowl of the air and that he had proved this in his conquering the rooster.

What About Herman?

Some transients, traveling on foot, came to the door while Elwood and Polly were located in Gainesville, Florida. As the story generally goes, they had run into some bad luck and needed something to eat and a place to stay for the night. Elwood agreed to take them to a nearby motel for the night and also buy them something to eat. As they got ready to leave, Elwood noticed a large, mixed-breed dog tied to a bush. He asked, “Whose dog is that, tied to a bush?” The transients replied, “Oh, this is Herman. He belongs to us. We need a place for him, too.” “Well,” Elwood retorted, “Herman isn’t going to ride in my car. I’ll tie him to the back bumper and let him follow along to the motel.”

So, down through Gainesville Elwood and the beggars go with Herman trailing along behind at about 10 miles per hour. A room was reserved for the transients and the basement was allotted to Herman. After Elwood got the beggars something to eat, they brazenly asked, “What about Herman? He is hungry, too.” Elwood replied, with patience exhausted, “Herman will just have to get by on his own!”

Cold Chili

After a Sunday evening service at the Fletcher Avenue church in Tampa, Florida, Elwood, Polly, some of the immediate family and two or three families from the congregation went to Steak & Shake to eat. Elwood had a craving for some chili, so he ordered a bowl of chili, along with a side order. When the waitress brought the chili, to Elwood’s disappointment, it was cold. Nevertheless, he ate it, but complaining every other spoonful about the cold chili.

When all of them lined up at the cash register to pay the bill, the manager was taking the checks and money for the meals. Elwood was in the front of the line while one of his sons-in-law was toward the back. The manager asked Elwood how his meal was and he thought this would be an opportune time to tell him about the cold chili. The manager apologized and told Elwood the meal was on Steak & Shake. About that time, a voice bellowed out from back in the line from the son-in-law, saying, “Pulling that old cold chili trick again, are you?” The manager looked puzzled and Elwood just looked. After some explaining that it was a joke, the manager seemed satisfied. I think I would have hung a son-in-law from the nearest tree.

Bed Too Narrow

Polly has traveled with Elwood over the years in gospel meetings. However, there was one meeting in particular that she, perhaps, should have stayed home. They were staying with a family who didn’t act like they were expecting Polly to come. They put them in a bedroom that had only a three-quarter bed. Bedtime for the host was much earlier than what Elwood and Polly were accustomed to, like three hours earlier. They sat there in the bedroom for quite sometime, talking, reading and wondering how to sleep in that bed.

Finally, Polly said she would sleep next to the wall and Elwood would take the outside. This worked for a few minutes until Elwood fell out into the floor. Elwood had to preach the next morning, it was agreed that he would take the inside, next to the wall, in order to try to get some sleep and Polly would venture through the night on the outside. As you can image it was a long meeting and each night a challenge just to say in bed.

The Little Rascal

Several years ago during a meeting in the panhandle of Florida, a little boy began using the meeting house for a playground while Elwood was preaching. He would close and open the front door, and then run up and down the aisle, whooping like an Indian, as well as a few other juvenile antics. After he did all of this for awhile, he came down to the front to the table on which was the Lord’s Supper, and began looking under the cloth that covered the bread and fruit of the vine. holders.

Elwood decided it was time to take action. He said to the little urchin, “Little boy, would you like me to find your parents?” When he said this, a big, robust man got up out of his seat and headed for the front (if I had been Elwood, I might have ducked for cover). But the man was not coming for Elwood, but for his “little rascal.” He took him back to the pew, placed him firmly down, where the little fellow stayed as though glued to the seat. Some thought the people might not come back, but they did, every night, and the little boy gave that “mean” preacher “the eye” after each service when he went out of the door with his daddy.

A Stray Golf Ball

Everybody has a hobby. One of Elwood’s hobbies is golf. Four of us were playing a round at the Babe especially at Zaharias Golf Course in Tampa. We were on the at the ninth hole when we spotted an old man coming toward us on the left side of the fairway far out in the rough, walking his dog. Both of them were just wobbling along, coming in our direction. Jokingly, I said to Elwood, “See if you can hit that old man coming toward us way off over there in the rough.”

Elwood took a practice swing or two, and then hit the ball that left the tee like a bullet. Instead of going down the middle of the fairway where he intended, it headed straight for the old man and his dog as if it had been aimed with accurate precision. We hollered “fore” and the elderly gentleman fell to his keens as the ball sailed just a few feet over his head. Elwood ran a few steps toward the old man, pointed to men, and facetiously said, “He made me do it.” Well, nobody got hurt, thankfully – just a little embarrassed. On the back nine, we saw another old gentleman taking cover behind a tree when Elwood was teeing off. We surmised that word got around about the wild golfer out on the course.

The Ugly Woman

While preaching for the church at Clearwater, Florida, Elwood decided to enroll in a course at the University of Tampa. He was in his late 20s or early 30s at the time as the story is told. The city of Tampa had just installed parking meters and on this particular day when Elwood drove up to campus area, he had no change for the meter.

Seeing the only place far or near where he might get some change was this “greasy-spoon” looking joint that when under the guise of a restaurant, Elwood decided he would venture in, get his change for the meter, and hurry out. He had to go down three or four steps to the entrance, and while he was waiting at the cash register for service, he glanced over to a booth wherein was seated one of the ugliest women he had ever seen. She was as skinny as a rail, gray-headed, wearing a short dress and smoking a cigarette in one of those long holders.

The woman, after giving Elwood the eye and a beautiful (?) Smile said in the Mae West style, “What you say, BIG boy?” Well, Elwood didn’t say anything, only wondering what kind of place he had “stumbled” into. He whirled around, without his change, hurried out the front door, up the steps, and headed for class, taking his changes that the could park for an hour or so without being given a ticket. He would have rather faced a policeman, including a fine, than the ugly woman.

Conclusion

These are just some of the many humorous episodes in the life of brother Phillips. We trust you have enjoyed them. Someone said, “To be able to laugh, especially at one’s self, is a necessary attribute. Blessed is the ma who does not take himself seriously.”

Guardian of Truth XXXIII: 17, pp. 532-533
September 7, 1989

By Elaine Phillips Flatt

I am grateful that I have been given the opportunity to write about H.E. Phillips, who is my Daddy. I wish to express my appreciation to brother Mike Willis for this issue of Guardian of Truth which is devoted to pay tribute to H.E. Phillips. I did not inherit any of Daddy’s ability to write but I will try to express my heart in this article and hopefully those who read it will see H.E. Phillips through the eyes of a daughter.

I want to say from the beginning that my two sisters, Carolyn King of Shelbyville, Tennessee, and Juanita Dennis, of Tampa, Florida share the same love and respect for Daddy as I do, so I write this tribute on their behalf.

How does one start to talk about another who has had so much influence on her life? The first thoughts of Daddy that come to my mind was when I was about five years old. Daddy always had his office in our house and he spent most of his time in his office studying and writing. At that age I knew that Daddy’s office was important because his books were special to him and that is where he would go every morning all dressed up in his shirt and tie (which he still does to this day). He would let me play around him and pull up a chair to sit by him at his desk. I would watch him open his mail or read a book and I would pretend to be his helper. I felt important to him and this started a relationship with a Father who still shows love and care.

Growing up in our home was quite different from most. Our house has been described as Grand Central Station by some. Over the years we have had a lot of people in our home and even some who lived with us for awhile. As I think back, I believe the reason we always had so many in our home is the simple fact that Daddy and Mother love people. Other than just having company over, we usually had the preacher in our home when there was a gospel meeting at the congregation and that was fun to me, even if I had to give up my bedroom for a week. I was fortunate to grow up in a preacher’s home because I was exposed to many good people. Around our dinner table many funny stories were exchanged and important Bible matters discussed with family and friends.

When I was about nine years old, Daddy took me to a couple of meetings in the Alabama and Tennessee area. It was when theinstitutional issues were beginning to divide some churches and Daddy was asked to preach on these subjects. I can remember feeling special to be taking my Mother’s place and taking care of “the preacher.” By the time that I got back home I had heard so much about widows and orphan homes, church supported schools, etc., that I probably could have preached two or three good sermons on the institutional issues. These are just a few of the things I remember about Daddy when I was young.

When I started dating, Daddy had some rules that seemed to be rather strict such as: he had to know who you were going with, where you were going, and when you were to be home. The curfew was usually 11:00 p.m. and you dare not be a minute late because, if you were, he would be waiting for you and your date. I can remember my oldest brother-in-law Hugh say that, when he married my sister Carolyn, they were going to stay out all night long but I don’t think they ever did. As I look back now, I am glad that Daddy did have rules for us in dating. Those rules don’t seem so rigid now that I have a teenage son and two little girls who will be dating before I know it.

Along with the happy times, there have been some sad times related to Daddy’s work as a preacher. We have watched him agonize over those who left the Lord or those whom he could not convert. Anyone that knows Daddy knows that he is not afraid or ashamed to stand up for what he believes the Bible teaches, no matter who opposes him and he has been persecuted many times for taking a stand on a certain issue. During the past few years he has written on topics such as the eldership, divorce and remarriage, fellowship and grace, social gospel and even institutional questions that have developed in the church, and he has lost friends in the process. He felt that teaching God’s word on these subjects was more important than friendships. The Word of God was read and studied in our home and we were taught the importance of God in the everyday decisions that we made. We did not grow up with any material wealth; in fact, Mother and Daddy had some hard times financially that I was not even aware of until I was grown, but we were happy and always had enough to supply our needs. Being the child of a preacher is not always easy because most of what you do is examined by others. I was made aware of my influence on others and the necessity of having and maintaining a good reputation.

There are some characteristics about Daddy that stand out in my mind. He is a strong believer in parents using discipline in bringing up their children. He has always said that teaching a child to be obedient is the most important thing you can teach them. And I am one of three daughters who can testify that he practiced what he preached on the matter of discipline. I always knew that I was in trouble when those black eyes focused on me and I was called to go with him to his office, which was usually the place that he talked to us. I would get a lump in my throat as I walked behind him just wondering if this would be the time he would spank me or strongly rebuke me. Of course, I always wished for the latter. But even though we received our share of spankings from Mother and Daddy, we knew the punishment was deserved and would be just. It was not done out of anger but out of a desire to make us what we should be.

My pride was shattered at the age of sixteen when I received a spanking from Daddy because I did not obey a note that he had left for me at home. I wasn’t trying to be rebellious but I failed to take his note too seriously. Believe me, when you are sixteen years old, you feel that you are too old to get such punishment but that incident vividly brought to mind the importance of obeying Daddy. I remember it to this day and tell the story to my children . The same attitude toward obedience was stressed in our relationship to God.

Another strong characteristic that belongs to Daddy is his faith in God and his love for the souls of men. He has never hidden his desire to go to Heaven and has so stated publicly and privately on many occasions. He has given much time and attention to others in talking to them about private matters. There have been endless hours spent over the years in helping couples with marriage problems or parents who were having problems with their children or maybe just taking the time to encourage someone who was troubled. I have never heard Daddy complain about helping anyone along this line. I have to say that he did not neglect his own family because of spending time with others and I am thankful to him for that. He has touched many lives and it is no wonder that he is loved and respected by so many. He has been a Father to many and his sons-in-law will say that he is their Daddy as well as ours for they love him dearly. He has had and continues to have such an influence on young men who desire to become preachers. This love that Daddy has starts at home with his wife, children and grandchildren; we all have been blessed to have him as an example. Children owe so much to their parents who have taught them the Word of God and set the proper example before them. Being a mother myself, I realize more than ever the importance of a good example.

It would be impossible for me to write anything about Daddy without saying something about Mother. They have been one flesh for 54 years and Daddy would be the first to tell you that, whatever success he has had in preaching the gospel or being a husband and father, was because of the love and support of his wife Polly. He has always displayed a love for her the way the Bible teaches. Mother has been so giving of herself to Daddy and his work. She has undertaken the role of being a preacher’s wife with much love and hard work and many have been the recipient of her kindness and hospitality. Carolyn, Juanita and I have always felt so thankful to have a Mother who took the time to teach us about life and about being a good wife and mother. She has also showered our children with the same love and words of wisdom that she gave to us. The words “Bo Bo” and “Grandmother” are sweet sounds to her ears. “Her children arise up, and call her blessed; her husband also, and he praiseth her.”

Daddy has lived beyond the three score and ten years in this life and the signs of age have shown in his health, Sometimes, because of his health, he worries that he can not do what he once did and he feels that maybe he is not useful anymore. I am thankful for younger men, who are gospel preachers, that realize the importance and need for an old soldier – one who has fought the battles and is there to give encouragement and strength to those who need it. My Daddy is such a soldier, and those across the country who call upon his knowledge of the Bible and seek his wisdom in dealing with problems make him know that he is useful and needed. We realize the void in our lives and in the church when men such as this depart this life.

Daddy, in closing this tribute to you, I would like to say on behalf of Carolyn, Juanita and myself, that we thank you for your faith, your life, your prayers in our behalf and your constant love for us. Maybe the best tribute that we could give you is to live righteously and godly in this present world so Heaven would be ours in the world to come. I pray, if the good Lord wills, that you may live and continue to do good for us and others in the years ahead. We love you.

Guardian of Truth XXXIII: 17, pp. 523-524
September 7, 1989

By Anonymous

In facing hard situations, it seems that preachers’ wives would become experts after dealing with so many problems over the years. However, that does not seem to be the way things are in reality. As a matter of fact, we seem to realize more and more that we are helpless without God and faithful brethren on whom to lean.

A particular incident is vivid in my mind, although there have been many years that have gone by since it happened. A family of Christians were attending where we worshiped and where my husband labored as the local preacher when a tragedy struck their lives. Their only daughter was killed in an automobile accident. At the same time their grandson was injured to the extent that he was left a paraplegic. You would have thought that this would have brought them closer to God to rely on his help as well as to depend on brethren for support.

Instead of either of these, they rebelled against God and wanted no one to come around. Of course, since we have to obey God rather than man, we were obligated to try to do what we could to save them. We were accused of not helping. As a result, I had occasion to talk at length with the wife and mother. She tried to tell me that 1, as well as my husband, knew nothing about tragedies since we were too young to have been through very many of life’s hardships. This, of course, proved that others do not always know what anyone else has had to endure. There are always problems, although they may not be the same ones another faces.

At that time I related some things in my life that I considered quite tragic. My father had left my mother, who then had three children still in school, and she had no job skills to help in supporting us. My father had remarried twice and, of course, to me adultery is a serious tragedy. Only my mother and I were Christians at that time in the family. Since then two have obeyed the gospel, but they are not faithful today. My father died in that adulterous state. “What can be more tragic?” I asked her.

When I was expecting my first child, the institutional issues were just beginning to surface, and the brethren where my husband then preached decided they did not want him to preach as he understood the Bible not to substantiate churches building and/or maintaining these institutions for orphans, widows, etc. Therefore, he was relieved of his work. This was not an easy thing for me, and a direct result of this was our child being born two months prematurely. This, to me, was a serious blow physically and mentally. Being abandoned by brethren whom I had known many years was especially depressing, I told this lady. There were others who did come to our assistance, and, of course, God brought us through this crisis. In fact, not long after our son was born, my husband received a call from Kentucky asking him to come there and preach. This we did as soon as our son was released from the hospital, and we were able to travel. Of course, in the meantime, my husband had to take a secular job, and we moved in with my relatives for those few months.

Other problems arose later when I faced three major surgeries before my 32nd birthday. Also, the premature son was constantly ill and had surgery when he was only two years old.

Later, we adopted a son who, while in elementary school, developed many problems which required some psychiatric help.

I continued to tell her that during that very week in which she and I were talking, I had invited someone we mutually knew to our gospel meeting and immediately was accosted with the remark, “I’m not coming to hear those crazy preachers.” Then quickly the person realized how that sounded and replied, “But I didn’t mean your husband.” However, I reminded him that since my husband preached the same as they did that he, too, could be classed likewise. I reminded him, also, that if the Apostle Paul could be bombarded with persecutions and endure, then surely I could endure.

I told the lady these things were all particularly tragic to me.

I reminded her that we, along with many brethren, personally have helped brethren in many places including foreign lands when famines, typhoons, and the like had struck. As individuals and as a collective body many, including my husband and me, have helped by sending food, clothing, and monies, but we don’t go around broadcasting what we do that others will know about it, but rather we just let God keep the records.

I told her that a church can only function effectively as each member participates. I told her that the church was a place where we are to be busy “going in and going out” as Paul did when he joined himself to the disciples in Acts 9:26-29. 1 continued to tell her that God had designed the church this way so we would avoid becoming spiritually isolated, so spiritual growth could be promoted.

I would like to be able to conclude by telling everyone that I convinced this lady of my convictions and tell you that she and her husband came back into fellowship with God, Christ, and the brethren. However, this was not the case. So far as I know they still remain unfaithful. But I can face God at the judgment with a clear conscience that we tried the best we knew to help in this matter.

Tragedies with me and my family have continued to come. The son who had problems in elementary school continued to have problems in his late teens after he left home, although earlier he had obeyed the Lord in baptism. He spent some time in jail, and I thought my heart would break. But through it all we continued to pray and rely on God for help.

Today as I write I can’t tell you my son is right with God, but I can tell you that he has come a long way. He is attending services of the church more frequently. He has become a good husband and father. And, only this very day in which I am finishing this article, he said to his dad and me, “I know that I need to get myself completely straightened out.” This is the first time since all the problems he’s had, that he’s ever said that. Therefore, prayer does help us. Brethren do help us. God never forsakes us.

When you are ridiculed for standing for truth, when brethren ignore you, when you are accused falsely, just remember that God cares and that he will reward those who endure to the end.

We as preacher’s wives’ can never solve all the problems that come our way, but we can be assured that, with faith and love, we can learn to cope with them and in the end overcome just as John reminds us in 1 John 5.

Guardian of Truth XXXIII: 18, pp. 545, 566
September 21, 1989

By J.T. Smith

In 1959 H.E. Phillips wrote a book entitled Scriptural Elders and Deacons which has provided a great source of information for those who want to study the subject of church organization. (All quotations in this article will, be from this book unless otherwise identified.) In the book, brother Phillips discusses the nature and organization of the church (with special emphasis on elders, their qualifications and work, and deacons, their qualifications and work). As is the general rule with all of brother Phillips’ work, it is complete and true to the Book.

In the late 1960s, the late J.D. Hall financed a periodical called Sentinel of Truth in which he and brother Charles A. Holt began to espouse the doctrine that the church is not an organized, functional unit and that elders are nothing more than older persons. They contended that there is no such thing as the appointment of men to the eldership, for there is no such thing as the eldership.

“Necessity of Organization”

In his discussion of the subject of organization (p. 3), brother Phillips said, “Organization is absolutely necessary to order and to accomplishment to the fullest of ability when two or more people are associated in any given task. The lack of good organization in the church is the greatest hindrance to the efficient administration of the mission of the church. Since the Lord has but one church, and has given us one pattern for all congregations, it follows that the organization revealed in the New Testament is the only acceptable one. Any departure from or substitution for that divine pattern is heresy before God.

“If we allow a deviation from the divine organization of the local church, how can we object righteously to the change or innovation in the worship of the church, or the terms of entrance into the church? One is as important as the other” (Ibid., p. 3).

In the chapter “Perverted Organization of the Church,” brother Phillips points out the danger of changing church organization. He said, “Many religious leaders have departed from the New Testament model of the church in several ways, but no departure is more glaring than that of the organization. Most gospel preachers would contend loudly for sound doctrine in the church, but are careless and indifferent toward the organization. Those who teach and practice a perverted organization in the church are as unsound as the one who preaches another gospel, and should be disciplined as false teachers, for so they are” (Ibid., p. 5).

Brother Phillips then discusses seven unscriptural ways of changing church organization. They are: (1) Elders Just Puppets, (2) Trial Government, (3) Preacher Rule, (4) Leadership Ruling, (5) Majority Rule (Business Meeting), (6) Committee Rule, (7) Inter-Congregation Rule. None of these measure up to the kind of organization which God has set forth for the church. All are perversions of God’s plan.

“The Scripturally Organized Church”

“Since the church of Christ must be organized, and since the Bible teaches the complete will of Christ in all matters relating to the church, we must see what the Scriptures teach about the organization of the church. If we follow the Scriptures in organizing the church, it will be a ‘Scripturally Organized Church'” (Ibid., p. 3). “What do the words ‘organism’ and ‘organization’ as we use them mean? Webster’s Unabridged Dictionary is a good authority and here are his definitions:

“Organism: ‘1. Any organized body or living economy; any individual animal or plant. 2. The state of being organized (rare). 3. An organized body of people; an organization. 4. Any organ of a living body.’

“Organization: ‘1. The act of organizing; the act or process of arranging and getting into proper working order; as, the organization of an expedition. 2. The state of being organized; that which is organized; an organized body. 3. Organic structure; the disposition or arrangement of the organs of the performance of vital functions. 4. The arrangement of the parts of an aggregate or body for work or action; systematic preparation for action'” (Ibid., p. 2).

Now having determined what is meant by organization, brother Phillips says, “We must determine now what the Bible means by ‘Church'” (Ibid., p. 2).

In discussing the organization of the church, brother Phillips draws the following conclusions.

“Different Kinds of Organizations”

“There are principally three kinds of government possible in the local church. If one of these classifications falls into the divine pattern, the others are not possible in church organization.”

He then lists three different kinds of organizations. “Monarchy – A government where all legislative, judicial and executive powers are invested in one man. The Monarch is the law-giver, the judge and executor of the law. The subjects have no power at all except as the supreme ruler delegates. The subjects have two alternatives: (1) To submit to the laws of the supreme ruler and enjoy his promises, or (2) rebel and pay the consequences” (Ibid., p. 4). Of course this fits perfectly the kind of government that we see in the Scriptures as it relates to the Kingdom of God.

The other two kinds of governments listed are, Democracy, and Republic (which space will not permit us to define). These do not fit God’s pattern.

Brother Phillips then lists “. . . four conditions of organization of the church today (only four of which are cited below, JTS). Almost if not all will come in one of these conditions.

“A. Scripturally Organized – having qualified elders and deacons appointed and performing the mission of the church in a scriptural way.

“B. Scripturally Unorganized – having no members qualified for elders and deacons. . .

“C. Unscripturally Organized – having unqualified and unscriptural men ruling as elders, or some human organization as ‘committees’ or ‘business meetings’ ruling the congregation.

“D. Unscripturally Unorganized – having men scripturally qualified for elders and deacons but have never been appointed and are not serving, but where they ought to be appointed” (Ibid., p. 4).

“Scriptural Meaning of ‘Church'”

“There are three ways in which the word ‘church’ is used in the New Testament, each of which must be understood when speaking of the organization of the church.

“A. The church is used in the aggregate or universal sense. This refers to all the people the world over, young and old, men and women, who are in the church. It is used in such passages as Ephesians 1:22,23. Christ is the head of the church.

“B. The church is used in the sense of all the people of God in a district or country. This includes several congregations geographically separated from others, as in Galatians 1:2 – ‘Unto the churches of Galatia.’

“C. The church is used in the local sense. This refers to all Christians living and meeting in a certain place. This is in the congregational sense. Christ is the supreme Ruler, and the apostles exercise His authority in all doctrinal matters. But in addition to this the eldership is delegated with local authority in the church. All work and worship is done through the local church, therefore, all work must be done under the eldership, properly the authority in the church.

No worship, praise or particle of the mission of the church can be expressed outside the local church. All work of the church that is done in a scripturally organized form must be done under the eldership. There is no organization, except the apostles under Christ, in the church in the first two senses. If such an organization can be formed to supervise several local churches, why are not all organized missionary societies and such like scriptural? The same authority that would grant one would grant the other” (Ibid., pp. 11-12).

“No Elder Theory”

“A. There is no such office in the church as elders. It is argued that there is no such thing in the church as an ‘office.’ That the expression ‘office of a bishop’ in 1 Timothy 3:1 is from episcopee which means twice ‘visitation’ and twice ‘oversight,’ but not at any time as ‘official’ authority. It is further argued that this is a work and not an authority.” ‘If any man desire the office of a bishop, he desireth a good work.’

“The word office in 1 Timothy 3:1 is from Episcopee and is defined in Abbott-Smith’s Greek-Lexicon as: ‘Office, charge, esp. office of an episcopos.’ Thayer’s Greek-English Lexicon gives a similar meaning.

“It is admitted in the above that twice the word in 1 Timothy 3:1 means ‘oversight’; and that twice in 1 Timothy 3:10,13 the word means ‘work.’ Is it to be understood that anything that is a work is not of authority? Christ was and is in authority – supreme authority in the church – but he also has work to do. All men in authority, whatever degree it may be, must work in executing that authority. It is true that the ‘office of a bishop’ is a ‘good work.’ But it is also admitted in the above argument that the word means ‘oversight.’ What is oversight? It means to oversee, to look over, to superintend. Does one appointed to look over the affairs of another have any authority at all? Authority always carries the idea of responsibility, and responsibility carries the idea of authority. If one Christian is in any way responsible for another Christian, to that extent he has authority and must exercise it in order to fulfill his responsibility” (Ibid., pp. 19-20).

The conclusion of all this information is described by brother Phillips. “If we submit to men called ‘elders,’ we will have to do away with the authority of Christ, it is said. But to reject the authority of the eldership as Christ has appointed would do away with the authority of Christ. Any man to whom Christ has delegated authority must be recognized as such or we reject the authority of Christ” (Ibid., p. 21).

From the above it is easy for us to understand why brethren Hall and Holt would have pronounced anathema on brother Phillips’ book and would have it cast into the depths of Hell. In fact, there were several articles by brother Holt in Sentinel of Truth regarding the book and brother Phillips’ position.

As with the above material, the remainder of the book deals with many other aspects of the organization of the church, qualifications of elders and deacons and their work. If you do not have the book, it is a must for your library and well worth the price you will pay.

On November 13, 1967, brother Charles Holt published an open letter to brother Phillips in Sentinel of Truth in which he challenged him to a debate on the church and eldership issues. This was in response to an earlier statement by brother Phillips in Searching the Scriptures expressing his intentions to “review some of the things that you and J.D. Hall have written which I believe to be error.” However in his reply December 7, 1967, brother Phillips pointed out that even though brother Holt had challenged him to a debate to be published in Searching the Scriptures and Sentinel of Truth, “After a thorough search through your letter I am unable to find a proposition, or even a hint of one, that you want to debate.”

According to brother Phillips’ statements in Searching the Scriptures, there were a couple of meetings between him and brother Holt at the Florida College Lectures in January 1968. It was his understanding that both men agreed to a suggestion made by brother Phillips. “I suggested again that we agree on propositions, number and length of articles and publish them in book form. I understood ,Charles to agree with this.” Whether he agreed or not, the discussion never came to pass.

It is the considered opinion of this writer that the positions taken in brother Phillips’ book are unanswerable, thus the reason for brother Holt’s failure to engage in the debate.

It is also the considered opinion of this writer that H.E. Phillips possesses one of the greatest minds among us. It shows in the material that he has authored, not only in the above mentioned book, but in all his writings throughout the years.

It has been my privilege to study at the feet of this great man on numerous occasions. He is one of the finest Christian gentlemen I have ever had the privilege of meeting. My thanks to God for him and for his God-given ability.

Guardian of Truth XXXIII: 17, pp. 517-519
September 7, 1989