Deism
Malcolm L. Hill

What is deism?  Deism is the belief that God created all things and put them in place and motion and no longer has anything to do with the universe and the things found therein.  There are many different points or views of deism and deists often clash one with the other.  We are not interested in giving a long list of famous deists and their particular views.  We are interested in dealing with deism as it affects the church of Christ today.

In the past few months I have been brought face to face with some biblical deists in the church of Christ.  I must say I have been shocked in some who have taken a position that leads one to extreme deism.  Brother H. A. (Buster) Dobbs wrote in  the July 2004 issue of Firm Foundation on page 21: "Is prayer for bread without value and power?  Of course not!  Still, it is true that the prayer-less have as much bread as the prayerful. Your Father who is in heaven "maketh his sun to rise on the evil and the good, and sendeth rain on the just and the unjust."  The one who prays receives bread, and the one who prays not also receives bread just as they both receive rain and sunshine.  Prayer without work brings starvation.  Work without prayer also brings bread.  The difference is not in having or not having bread, but in recognizing and honoring or denying and  dishonoring the blessed giver of that bread." According to brother Dobbs God has nothing to do in special providence with the Christian having daily bread.  Brother Dobbs changes what the Bible says Jesus told us to pray for.  Jesus did not tell us to pray so that the Christian may honor and recognize the giver of that daily bread, even though the Christian should honor and recognize God's gift of bread.  Jesus said to pray for daily bread as a gift from God.  Brother Dobbs at the very outset gets himself in trouble and finds himself in self-contradiction.  We expect this kind of thing from men like those who worked on the New International Version of the Bible but we certainly do not expect such from a seasoned  preacher and editor of a gospel journal.  Brother Dobbs, please come on and get your heart right.  Does God have anything to do with our physical health, our obtaining a job, our obtaining wisdom, our decision making, and a number of other things which have to do with getting  daily bread on the table?  God is not with alien sinners as He is with a praying Christian.  The whole section of brother Dobb's article is given to deism, whether he knows it or not.  I will say that brother Dobbs is brave enough to say what he believes and a number of his kind are not.  I wish I could deal more with brother Dobb's article but I cannot do so at this time.

The brethren who believe the Holy Spirit dwells in the Christian only through the Bible or the Word of God have been responsible more or less in leading brethren to the worst kind of deism.  I am sure they have not meant to do this but they have, just as my son when he was growing up did not mean to wreck the car but he did.  You see, sometimes it is not what we mean to do but what actually happens.  Sometimes what we mean not to do is just as bad as what some have intentionally done.

The indwelling of the Holy Spirit is connected with prayer and providence.  Some want to take prayer and providence but they do not want to accept the personal indwelling of the Holy Spirit in the Christian.  If God can work in prayer and providence through the Holy Spirit and it not be a miracle, then God can work in a Christian through the Holy Spirit and it not be a miracle.  If not, why not?  I cannot explain how God works in prayer and providence nor can I explain how the Holy Spirit works in the Christian.  I have never tried to do so nor do I intend to try because I know that such would be futile.

Shame on the brethren who drew the line on Christian fellowship because some of us believe in the indwelling of the Holy Spirit in the Christian.  Dub McClish and the Memphis School of Preaching bunch were leaders in this.  The Bible teaches that God is still working in the affairs of men today.  He sets some up and pulls some down (Psa. 75:6-7).  God rules in the kingdoms of men (Dan. 4:25,32).  How God works with nonbelievers I know not, but I know he does because the Bible tells me so.  How God works in divine providence I do not know but I know he does because the Bible tells me so.  How God answers the Christian's prayers I know not, but I know He does because the Bible tells me so.  How the Holy Spirit works in His persons in the Christian I do not know, but I know He does because the Bible tells me so (Acts 2:38; Gal. 4:6; Gal. 3:16).

When men pull the working of God out of the affairs of men today all together, they are committing a terrible sin and transgression.  I pray for God to help me preach.  I pray for God to strengthen me and others.  I pray to God to help my children and grandchildren live the Christian life.  I often ask God for wisdom.  I pray for God to comfort the troubled at heart.  I pray to God  to heal the sick.  I pray for God to protect me in journeys and also to protect others as they journey.  On and on this list could go.  I do not intend to stop praying like this nor believing in the providence of God just because some brethren do not like it and I have no intentions of discontinuing my belief that the Holy Spirit dwells in faithful Christians in a  personal way just because some of the brethren do not like it.

We have lost and still are losing a sizable number of our young people to liberalism.  We are convinced that it is due to some brethren who have taken God, Christ and the Holy Spirit almost, if not altogether, out of the activities of the world. These brethren have led our young people to believe that the world only operates on a naturalistic basis.  In other words, God created the laws of nature and placed them in motion and they run and operate on their own and God has  nothing to do with things since He created the laws of nature.  This concept kills any hope that one might have as a Christian for help from above in any phase of his life.  Holding this view we are at the mercy of natural law and have no hope for divine intervention.  This is nothing more than godless fatalism—what is to be will be and there will be no divine changes made.  This is not our view of things!  The God I serve is still active and alive  and rules in the affairs of men helping Christians in every way possible.  Let the Christian call upon Him and He will hear (Matt. 7:7-8).  I am convinced that most members of the church of Christ believe this and even if they did not, God still lives and all is well.  He has the whole world in His hands!

Editorial

No man should go to the Bible, or the God of the Bible, to try to teach God what man is, or what he should be; but man should go to the Bible to learn what he is, what he ought to be, and what he ultimately shall be.  Man should not go to the Bible to show what it should teach, but to learn what it does teach, because all of us shall face this in the last great day.  What we shall face in the judgment day may or may not suit us but this amounts to nothing and will mean nothing when God deals with us in that greatest day of all days.  We intend to stay with the Bible whether the number in favor of it is great or small.  We have long found that it is impossible to live as God directs and at the same time please our fellow man and even the brethren in the Lord.

We intend to maintain the old distinction between saint and sinner, vice and virtue, good and bad, right and wrong, denominational and non-denominational, political and non-political, regardless of all consequences.  We shall speak of men being saved and lost, happy and miserable, justified and condemned, obeying the gospel and not obeying the gospel, the five steps to salvation and the five items of worship, and sustained by all sound rules of interpretation, whether it shall be considered sense or foolishness, out of step or in step, old verbage or foolish verbage.

We shall continue to use the Bible terms (I Pet. 4:11), we shall talk about heaven and hell and preach and teach the same.  We have no intention of overlooking sex perverts, homosexuals, and those who continue to take the lives of unborn babies.  We have never contemplated forsaking God's plain and simple warning against the foolishness and hardheartedness of rebellious man against his Maker.  It matters little with us if man laughs at us, scorns us, makes us the offscourings of the earth, and places us with the simple-minded.  We plan on staying with God and His Holy Word because we had rather be a "doorkeeper in the house of our God" than to be in the highest places with scorners of the Almighty.

We know we are supported by the whole cannon of sound criticism,and we most solemnly admonish all who fear God, against glosses of that sickening and supercilious affection, that induces any man for one moment, to hesitate to declare to his fellow man, in the most faithful manner, the terrible threatenings of the Almighty against those who would twist, thwart, change and mislead relative to God's plain and simple revealed word.

The preachers who shirk in this age of sinfulness and pride need to write it in their minds and stamp it indelibly upon their hearts that there is coming a day of reckoning, a day of true judgment, a day without partiality, a day of justice, a day when every preacher of every kind will stand before the King of Kings and the Lord of Lords to give an account for the way he has preached and the things he has preached.

These weakling preachers will be unable to hide behind their puppet elders and their half-baked members in that great and notable day of God.  There we shall all stand stripped of everything but the reality of what we have been and what we have taught and stood for in this life.  Therefore let no man of God be deterred by the ridicule of  Universalists, atheists, skeptics, agnostics, denominationalists, and the pseudo intellectualists, nor the ungodly, from preaching the plain and simple truth of God's eternal word.  We must remember that the "Lord will judge His people" (Heb. 10:30).  "It is a fearful thing to fall into the hands of a living God" (Heb. 10:31).

God said, "With lies you have made the heart of the righteous sad, whom I have not made sad, and strengthened the hands of the wicked, that he should not return from his wicked way, by promising him life" (Ezek. 13:22).  Again the Lord said,  "It is better to enter into life having one eye, than having two eyes, to be cast into hell, into the fire that shall never be quenched" (Matt. 5:29-30).  Is one a friend to his fellow man and his spiritual brethren who knows God's word and God's warnings but refuses to declare the whole counsel of God to one and all and stick to it until the end?

--Malcolm L. Hill and Ben Franklin

A Time To Keep Silence?
Kerry Duke

It Didn't Work

"It won't work."  Those were the words of J. W. McGarvey spoken late in his life.  Brother McGarvey regretted his fellowship with instrumental churches.  He was against the use of instrumental music in worship.  But when he spoke at instrumental churches and with instrumental brethren, he said nothing against it.  He thought he could win over erring brethren by avoiding the issue.  Here is what he said to Jesse P. Sewell toward the end of his life:

You are on the right road, and whatever you do, don't let anybody persuade you that you can successfully combat error by fellowshipping it and going along with it.  I've never held membership in a congregation that uses instrumental music.  I have, however, accepted invitations to preach without distinction between churches that use it and churches that didn't.  I've gone along with their papers and magazines and things of that sort.  During all these years I have taught the truth as the New Testament teaches it to every young preacher who has passed through the College of the Bible.  Yet, I do not know of more than six of those men who are preaching the truth today.  It won't work.

Brother McGarvey knew the difference between guilt by association and guilt by fellowship.  He realized that merely by being at an instrumental forum was not wrong.  He saw that participating with instrumental brethren without speaking out against their error was wrong.  This is what he meant by preaching without distinction for instrumental and non-instrumental churches.  He was vocal against the instrument in some settings, but he was silent about it when he was speaking with and to people that used it.

Brother McGarvey learned from experience that this approach doesn't work.  Yet brethren today refuse to listen to his advice.  They are making the same mistake.

A few of McGarvey's contemporaries saw the mistake McGarvey was making and sounded warnings.  Yes, they called McGarvey's name.  One of his critics was James A. Harding:

Harding was sure that McGarvey's toleration of these evils had influenced his colleagues, Moses E. Lard, I.B. Grubbs, and Robert Graham to do the same.  If he had been less lenient, "maybe there would be a different story now," Harding mused.¹

In an article entitled "Another Inconsistency" in the Gospel Advocate of May 23, 1883, Harding fired away at brethren who opposed the instrument in teaching but fellowshipped the people who used it.  Harding was upset with brethren who played both sides of the fence.  One of these was F. G. Allen.  Brother Allen had said, "I have as little fellowship for a church that forces an organ in, and thereby drives good brethren out, as I have for one that practices infant sprinkling."²  Yet Allen made A. I. Hobbs, who preached for a church that put the instrument in, associate editor of the paper of which Allen was editor, Old Path Guide.  Harding in righteous indignation replied:

I think it is high time to give them an answer based upon the word of God.  What does the Bible say we should do with regard to schismatics?  Let the Sacred Writings answer.  Rom. 16:17, "____"; II Thess. 3:6,"____"; II Thess. 3:14, "_____"; Titus 3:10, "____."

Now  it appears clear to me that brethren Yancey, Cline, Hume, and others, were as inconsistent in going to those union meetings at Fourth Street Church, as were brethren Marshall and Stanley in fraternizing with those sectarians at Cynthiana.  And it appears, furthermore, that brethren McGarvey and Allen are equally inconsistent in hobnobbing with these same and other factious people in missionary conventions, etc...Let us follow the Scriptures and avoid these people. The innovators are rapidly gaining ground in Kentucky in the face of an overwhelming majority who are opposed to them, and who favor standing by apostolic teaching and practice in the worship, simply because those who are for the old paths do not stand firmly and consistently by what they believe to be right.³

Ironically, the very preacher to whom McGarvey said "It won't work," Jesse P. Sewell, was strongly opposed to McGarvey's inconsistency.  In December of 1902 he wrote these words in the Gospel Advocate:

Professor McGarvey may speak out against the use of instrumental music in the worship, as he does, and say things against it that those who refuse to use it would hardly say; but what do the people who want the instrumental music care about this thing so long as he gives his influence almost entirely (except in his home congregation) to those who use it?

Brother McGarvey believes that instrumental music is wrong, and so teaches; still he gives his name and influence to a paper that advocates its use and associates with churches that use it (except at home and possibly on a few other occasions.)  So, while he believes and teaches that the thing is wrong, there is not a church in the land that uses it that will not today point to brother McGarvey as "one of the strong men on our side."  His influence goes with his fellowship, not with his faith and teaching.⁴

J. D. Tant was another who deplored preachers who played both sides of an issue.  He said, "When O. P. Speigle tried to force Larimore to take a stand either for or against the organ, brother Larimore wrote a whole page in the Advocate in favor of, or against the organ.  I never could tell which."⁵  Tant thought that the idea of converting liberals by being silent and going along with them was ludicrous.  Reflecting on what he saw in one Texas town, he wrote:

I found no church of Christ here.  There has been a digressive church here for ten or twelve years, and I found some members who had been faithful elsewhere had gone in and worked with these digressives, because there was no church of Christ here.  I also found that the unscriptural things which were first tolerated by said members with a protest were now almost fully accepted; for it takes only a few years for a man to accept any innovation if he will only work with said innovation.   Here is where many members are deceived.  They think if they will go in and work with members who have accepted innovations, they can convert them.  They might as well pour water into the river to make it run upstream, or hire a saloon-keeper to run his bar to try to reform him, as to endorse the work of the digressives in order to reform them.  Many of the prophets and apostles were considered kickers, yet none of them ever engaged in heathen worship to reform the heathen.⁶

In 1937, after seeing years of division, brother Tant wrote about the failure of the strategy of silence which many brethren had used:

It has been fifty years since the division took place at Austin between the church of Christ and the digressives.  I was in that meeting and have been fighting their departures ever since.  J. W. McGarvey argued it is only a 'departure' and they  will finally come back.  When he died, those who opposed him, to show their contempt for him carried his body into the church house and played the organ over his dead body.

Brother Lipscomb advised me when I became one of the editors of the Gospel Advocate in 1895 that when I went to a place to hold a meeting where there was internal strife over instrumental music to just preach the gospel and ignore the trouble—the only unwise advice he ever gave me.  Old brother Hansborough agreed that the only safe way was to withdraw from all organ agitators before it became popular.  If we had done this, we could have saved many church houses, and  many brethren as well.  But like our elders on soft preaching, they did not want to cause any trouble, and so let them disarm us before the fight ever began.  I can remember during those years when the battle was raging all along the line, we had many preachers who would claim, "We are not on either side, and when either group sends for us to hold a meeting, we will go."  Without an exception every one of those brethren drifted into the Christian Church and accepted all the innovations.⁷

It Hasn't Worked

This generation has been warned as well, but most have paid no attention.  In 1976 Foy E. Wallace, Jr., wrote:

The churches of Christ are in the midst of the most serious doctrinal crisis in extent since the emergence of the Restoration Movement on this English-American continent... Repeating history sustains the assertion that every major digression and departure culminating in apostasy has originated in the schools.  The colleges mold the churches and control the preachers who seemingly stand in awe of the colleges—and the result is college domination of preachers and churches.⁸

G. K. Wallace similarly warned of dangerous college influences.  He rightly anticipated the problems from a trend that has become a priority in Christian colleges—accreditation.  In 1971 he warned of the dangers of bowing to worldly standards, even criticizing the school where he had taught for years—Freed-Hardeman:

Most Christian colleges are struggling under guidelines imposed, not by the Board of Directors, nor the President of the school, but by Accrediting Associations that exist in the circles of higher education.

The qualifications of Bible teachers in our Bible departments are being set up by a group of men who know little about the Bible and care less.  Their standards are determined largely by philosophy which is equated with divinity and/or theology.  All of the higher Divinity Schools (if there is an exception I am not aware of it) are dominated by theologians who either openly deny the inspiration of the Bible or secretly seek to destroy the faith.Most of our administrators and members of the Board of Directors are aware of this problem but they are so afraid of the rulings and regulations of Accrediting Association that they are paralyzed.  It does not take a prophet, nor the son of a prophet, nor a dresser of sycamore trees to see where this leads...Freed-Hardeman College has had a long illustrous history and my association with it extends either in a direct or indirect way over a period of twenty-eight years.  If A. G. Freed were living today, he would not be permitted to head the Bible department of Freed-Hardeman College.  If N. B. Hardeman were living and was willing to so do, he could not head the Bible department of Freed-Hardeman College.  The fact that N. B. Hardeman, whose great Bible knowledge is so generally known, could not head the Bible department of Freed-Hardeman College is not because the Board of Directors, the Administration, would not look favorably upon it, but a group of sectarians from an Accrediting Association, would rule him out.

Brethren, we are not only drifting, we have drifted.⁹

In spite of his later error on divorce and remarriage, James D. Bales gave pointed and insightful warnings about how liberalism works. In Modernism: Trojan Horse in the Church, he warned about the subtle corruption of schools by liberals:

It is not enough for those in authority to make stout speeches and hope that those who seek to change the basic purposes of the institution will go elsewhere and start their own schools. As a general rule, modernists are not interested in labor and sacrifice which are necessary to establish institutions of their own. It is much easier for them to be supported by the gifts of those whose values they then proceed to undermine.  As parasites they subvert and take over the fruits of  laborers whose convictions  they do not share.  Their conscience does not bother them, for they have shaped their conscience to sanction their subversive activites.  One can rest assured that the "conscience" of a termite does not bother him as he eats away the foundation.

While they bore from within, the subverters are willing to operate under such covering as anyone may furnish them so that they can continue their work without serious opposition until they have sufficient strength to take over the institution.  First, the covering of academic freedom which some conservatives use to justify their failure to expose and expel the termites...They overlook the fact that accrediting associations recognize that academic freedom is bounded by the principles on which the institution was founded.  No one has the right to demand such freedom that he enslaves others to support him while he undermines the convictions which they hold and on which the institution was founded.

Second, there may be some individuals on the faculty whose reputation, among the supporters of the institution, is such that the supporters think that the institution is bound to be faithful to its purposes because these men are there.  The termites rejoice in the fact that they are not known to be what they are, and that the reputation of these men gives them time to continue their subversive work.

Third, the termites also take advantage of the fact that there are individuals who want the faith to stand but who are unwilling to be involved in the controversy which may be necessary to uphold it. (Jude 3).  They do not like the liberals, but they dislike a fight even more.  So they continue to quietly paddle the boat rather than deal with those who are poking holes in the bottom of the boat.  They know the water is coming in, but after all the boat is still afloat.

Fourth, they also take advantage of the fact that there are people who will allow personal friends to undermine the principles because they are unwilling to take a stand against friends.

Fifth, the subverters also take advantage of the fact that some feel that because an institution has not yet been subverted, the future faithfulness of the institution is assured.  They may know that termites are at work, but they feel it cannot happen here.  This, of course, helps guarantee that what is taking place will continue until departure does take place.

Sixth, infiltrators also take advantage of administrative carelessness in hiring teachers.¹⁰

It hasn't worked in schools.  McGarvey saw this, but the damage had already been done.  The old College of the Bible in Lexington was absorbed into what is now the University of Kentucky, a school having no resemblance to what it was in the days of McGarvey and Lard.  David Lipscomb University has tried this approach for years, and it has wrecked that school.  Steve Flatt has refused to stand against liberalism in Nashville, Tennessee.  Now the school has had a Disciples of Christ preacher, Fred Craddock, to conduct a seminar for preachers on the campus.  The Summer lectures at Lipscomb have hosted such men as Joe Beam, Jeff Walling, and others.  Yet when the battle was heating up in the 90's, brother Flatt said he was not with the liberal movement headed up by Shelly.  A lot of brethren defended Flatt.

Abilene Christian University, Pepperdine University and many others have gone down the very road that G. K. Wallace warned about.  Freed-Hardeman is trying the old approach brother McGarvey tried.  This school is exchanging faculty members with Abilene Christian Univesity in their lectureships.  Who among them is speaking out against the blatant errors?  Why are brethren still placing their hopes on Freed-Hardeman?

It hasn't worked in journals.  Some brethren contend that papers are different.  McGarvey disagreed.  He said that he had "gone along with their papers."  This has happened today as well.  The Firm Foundation has shifted to a more lenient stance.  Brother Buster Dobbs now has men such as Jack P. Lewis (who believes children's church and solos in worship are acceptable and who strongly denies the authority of elders) and Cecil May, (who at Faulkner has had such men as James Maxwell, a false teacher on divorce and remarriage, and Jim McGuiggan, to speak) as regular writers.  The Gospel Advocate started the year 2004 with a warning about apostasy that called the names of leading perpetrators in the movement.  Yet in the August 2004 issue of the Advocate, Jack Evans, Sr., wrote an article on "The Symptoms of Apostasy" when he is one of the agents of apostasy!  Evans is on public record in debate and in print saying that non-Christian people in adulterous marriages may be baptized and remain in those marriages.  He also takes the absurd view that adultery in Matthew 19:9 is not a sexual word!  Ironically, another article in this same issue of the Advocate said, "We need to take the advice of brother McGarvey.  Fellowship with error leads to a compromise of the truth."¹¹

It Will Not Work

A number of Bible facts and principles show why this approach cannot work:

Departures from the Faith Tend to Get Worse.  One uncorrected error soon leads to another.  "Evil men and seducers shall wax worse and worse, deceiving, and being deceived" (II Tim. 3:13).  "A little leaven leaveneth the whole lump" (Gal. 5:9).

People with Liberal Attitudes Don't Associate Much With People Who Correct Them.  "A scorner loveth not one that reproveth him: neither will he go unto the wise" (Prov. 15:12).  The nature of liberalism is to avoid confrontation and resist correction.  How can it be that liberal lectureship directors invite "conservatives" to speak?

People of Like Mind are Drawn Together.  "Can two walk together, except they be agreed?" (Amos 3:3).  This is just human nature.  Liberals and conservatives who work together have one thing in common: neither of them believe their differences are important enough for them to take issue with the other.

It is the Conservatives who are Silenced at Liberal Lectureships. The righteous prophet Micaiah was expelled from the gathering of false prophets because he told the truth (I Kings 22:15-28).  Jehoshaphat, a conservative leader, was rebuked because he took part in this work with Ahab when he should have condemned Ahab (II Chron. 19:2).  Liberals typically voice their liberal ideas, but conservatives are forbidden to dissent.

There is a time to keep silence. There is also a time to speak.

Endnotes
¹Earl I. West, Search for the Ancient Order (Indianapolis, IN: Religious Book Service, 1979), vol. III, pp. 50-51.
²Earl I. West, Search for the Ancient Order (Indianapolis, IN: Religious Book Service, 1979), vol. II, p. 237.
³Ibid.
⁴Ibid., p. 442.
⁵Fanning Yater Tant, J. D. Tant—Texas Preacher (Gospel Guardian, 1958), p. 449.
⁶Ibid., 276-277.
⁷Ibid., 455-456.
⁸Foy E. Wallace, Jr., The Present Truth, p. 1019.
⁹G. K. Wallace, "Christian College Guidelines," Gospel Advocate, May 20, 1971, p. 310.
¹⁰James D. Bales, Trojan Horse in the Church, pp. 13, 14, 15.
¹¹Russ Burcham, "Are We Stuck in a Heritage We Do Not Like?" Gospel Advocate, August, 2004, p.25.

Open Letter to the Readers of Contending for the Faith and Living Oracles

In the May, 2004 issue, Kent Bailey, in his Contending For the Faith article entitled, "Last Word... — Malcolm Hill, The Holy Spirit Controversy, and Special Pleading,"  made several charges against me and the Woodbury Church of Christ.  For the readers' information, I do not know Mr. Bailey, and as far as I know, he has never been to Woodbury to worship, or to Cannon County.  How he has received his false information, I do not know.  I do, however, challenge him to demonstrate that his charges are true or repent.

For the readers of Contending For the Faith's information, I state the following as true:

1. I do not endorse the "concept of Easter Sunday" and never have, if by "the concept of Easter Sunday" Mr. Bailey  means special Easter services, sunrise services, etc.  I do believe that I preach the gospel (I Cor. 15:1-4), and believe it is right to "preach Christ and him crucified" (I Cor. 2:2).  If following the path of the Apostle Paul is wrong, I plead guilty.  However, I do not believe it is wrong, and Bailey is wrong to contend that it is.
2. The Nashville Jubilee.  The Woodbury Church of Christ and I have never supported this Nashville event.  I have checked our bulletins and our announcement sheets all the way back to 1990, and Bailey can come and do the same.  This event has never been publicized, or announced.  I have personally never attended this event.
3. Paul Rogers.  Paul and I are friends.  About 20 years ago, he conducted a gospel meeting for the Woodbury church and I have spoken at Centerville.  Through the years I have received his bulletin and he mine.  We have encouraged each other, challenged each other, and I have learned a great deal about "building" the Lord's church in a small town, humanly speaking.  There are some issues that I have discussed with him on which we disagree.
4. Dedicating babies.  The Woodbury church of Christ has never had a baby dedication.
5. Foot washing.  In a Bible class, a teacher thought he was doing a "good thing" by giving a demonstration of foot washing when studying John 13.  It is sad how church gossipers have taken this and made more than was ever intended.  I will also say to Mr. Bailey that footwashing as a religious practice will never be done on my watch.
6. Brethren, I am under the oversight of the Woodbury elders.  We work together in harmony and unity.  Even this has not been sent without their knowledge and approval.

Brethren, Kent Bailey has drunk deep and long from the devil's cesspool of gossip, lies, rumors, and has taken them and now spread them maliciously.  He himself has now become a liar, a gossiper, a rumor monger.  I have asked him to come to the Woodbury church personally and repent and to use his column to repent.  I have asked his elders to send him.

You will know and I will know soon if he has the heart and the spirit to do what is right or if he will remain in his unsaved condition.  I will also say that on any "rumor" or "gossip" that Malcolm Hill has ever heard, he has always called to verify the information.

Herb Alsup
Woodbury Church of Christ
100 East Water Street
Woodbury, TN 37190