Letters to the Editor

Excited about the Truth

Dear Mrs. Bruce,

Would you be so kind as to enter my subscription for one year of the “Tidings.”

I have been studying and reading diligently and have come to the belief that the Christadelphians have realized the word of God in all its truth. Over the past 13-14 months, I have been studying and working towards baptism with Kathy Busby of Spring, TX. She has become such a good and true friend and loyal instructor (I thank God for her).

I cannot tell you what joy getting to know God and our Lord and Savior Christ Jesus has brought into my life. I feel rich in the knowledge of the truth and constantly crave more of God’s word.

I am attending my first Christadelphian Southwest Bible school this summer and I am so excited to meet others whose beliefs are all the same.

Very sincerely in Christ,
JoAnn Lee McDowell
19807 Brentonridge Ln.
Spring, TX 77379

Thank you for sharing your love and enthusiasm. Your attitude brings joy to our hearts and to the hearts of the angels in heaven. So few in these times are eager to learn of His prom­ises and of His statutes. We pray we will soon read of your baptism and that you will be one of God’s jewels when He makes up His treasure.

As you will find in your own ecclesial experience and as is reflected in the pages of this magazine, life in the truth will not all be smooth and easy. Do not let that discourage you; it only indicates God is working to develop our characters that we might be fit to be clothed with immortality.

No minor sins

Dear Bro. Don,

Loving greetings.

I have just noted a phrase (in fact, it jumped out at me from the page) in Bro. Aude Plew’ s letter (April “Tidings,” pg. 117) that really frightens me. “But that (fornication) is a lesser sin,” writes Bro. Plew. Oh please! Who are we to classify sin?

Firstly, let me refer to my pet Bible example of “lesser sin” and “major crime.” A man gathered sticks on the sabbath day and God Himself pronounced the death sentence (Num. 15:32-36). Now compare that to II Sam. 12:7-13; David committed adultery and murder (v.9) and yet God forgave (v.13). Personally, I would never have placed stick gathering as a major crime over murder/adultery as a lesser sin. There was a lot more to it in the mind and attitude of the “criminal.” Only God could judge the intent.

Now take the “major” and “lesser” sins in the letter referred to and let the “mind of the flesh” have a heyday. Better to co-habit than to marry. Once married, you are stuck. If you divorce you are worse than stuck, you are in a mess ecclesially. Sleep around and who’s to notice, it’s not such a big deal. Please! No! This is not the message we should be leaving our young people. Sin, is sin, is sin, is sin. In Rev.21 :8 “liars” are included among those cast into the lake of fire. James 3:3-10 points out the tongue as a deadly evil, hard to control. Is gossip a greater or lesser sin?

Sin is what separates us from God. God alone can say whether our intent was such that we are pardonable through His grace. Only through our acceptance of Christ as our savior and example can we obtain God’s grace, and no sin, none whatever, can be small enough as to not need his grace and mercy and forgiveness.

Besides, being creatures of habit, don’t little lies lead to big lies? Don’t little acts of infidelity lead to big acts? We need to practice to be saints not hope to change some day. Sincerely and for the hope of Israel,

Sis. Arla Easson,
Collingwood, ONT

You have put your finger on a very relevant issue for our times. Sleeping around, having “friends” who share one’s bed regularly and “being engaged” to someone living with you have become commonplace in today’s world. When you find someone has a fiance, 9 times out of 10 you next learn they live at the same address. Because of the legal commitments of marriage, it seems a high percentage of couples are regularly or occasionally living together without being married.

If any believer thinks he can fool God in this matter, he is a fool: the wicked “hath said in his heart, God hath forgotten: he hideth his face; he will never see it…[the wicked] hath said in his heart, Thou wilt not re­quire it. [But the warning is] Thou hast seen it; for thou beholdest mischief and spite, to requite it with thy hand” (Psa. 10:11,13-14).

Bro. Aude’ s comments, however, were in the context of contorted arguments regarding the exceptive clause. It is true that if an unmarried man lay with an unmarried woman, the action was sin, but the penalty was not death; whereas, if one of the parties was married, the prescribed penalty was death (Deut. 22:22,28,29). So God makes a distinction between the situations. Bro. Aude’s comments must be understood in context for he would be the last person to say anything compromising about moral decline.

Divorce hurts children

Dear Bro. Don,

Loving greetings in Christ Jesus.

I read with interest the article by Bro. Norm Zilmer on ‘Why God Hates Divorce” (May “Tidings,” P g. 138). I appreciate the enlightening points on the negative aspects of divorce. Too often, I believe, many forget this very realistic and destructive side of divorce. Perhaps if they thought more on it, there would be a lot less divorce in the world and amongst ourselves as well.

However, with absolutely no intent to offend or detract from the good points of the article, I do feel it is necessary to balance a point that was made. The article stated that, “whichever parent has the children, the youngsters still have extreme difficulty becoming useful members of society or God’s family.” Yes, perhaps some do. However, have you ever heard the saying: “Trials can make sinners of some and true saints of others.” Then there is this one: “God forms, sin deforms, truth informs and Christ transforms?” The apostle Paul had to endure a severe trial termed a “thorn in the flesh” because it was good for his spiritual development.

Now this is not to say we should speak well of divorce because it brings trial into the lives of all involved. But I do think we truly should look at every person (young or old) in Christ or out of covenant relation as being labeled very fragile so please handle with care.

I feel the statement made in the letter could be very discouraging to those divorcees trying to raise chil­dren in the truth or those who are the hurting children of divorced parents. If anything, they need all the encouragement they can now get. One thing that should be emphasized is that their extended family in the truth can now give them the encouragement they may not have received from their parents.

As was mentioned, the children suffer when their parents divorce. We can help these children break the chain of divorcing their partners by helping them now feel valuable and loved so that they will not want to leave their partners who highly value them.

The warning in Bro. Zilmer’ s article does need to be sounded but could it not be worded in a way that would convey the exhortation without discouraging those who are the products of such a background?

Keep up the good work.

With love in Christ,
Sis. Jenny Berry,
Ferndale, MI

We see your point. Bro. Zilmer’s observations were correct and provided a powerful exhortation to any married couple to consider the impact their own decisions have on the lives of others, particularly their chil­dren. But once one is in the problem, what do they do? Give up because circumstances are against them?

By no means. As you say, the situation provides opportunity for spiritual parents and spiritual siblings to help. And where there is greater need, God’s arm is not shortened. He can help no matter how dire the circumstance.

The Proverbs say, “give me nei­ther poverty nor riches…lest I be full, and deny thee, and say, Who is the LORD? or lest I be poor, and steal, and take the name of my God in vain” (Prov. 30:8-9). If we are poor or rich, should we look at this warning and give up? No, we should use it to make us more aware of our need and that of others. When we find our­selves in particularly difficult circum­stances, we should pray and beware; when we others in time of spiritual peril, we should pray and help.

Sis. Dorothy Washington

Dear Bro. Don,

Greetings in the Master’s name,

As you know, our mother passed away in April of this year. We have received about 100 cards on her behalf and sound comforting quotes from scripture to ease the loss.

Further, many have sent donations in her name to the CBM, Flor­ida Bible School, Mid-Atlantic Bible School, Eastern Christadelphian Bible School and the Christadelphian Tape Library.

We wish to convey our heartfelt thanks to those brethren and sisters who sent these donations. At times like this, we realize that our bonds in Christ are family bonds of an even higher nature than those formed by the flesh. We take great comfort in looking forward to being joined with the family of God of all ages in the wonderful day that is coming upon the earth.

Yours in the one hope,
Sis. Rebecca Thomas and family
Bro. Reuben E. Washington and
family.

Social Activism

Dear Editor,

Thank you for writing and publishing the editorial on social activist. It answered some questions that I’ve wondered about for some time. It is also as clear an answer as any­one could hope to find this side of the kingdom.

Craig Willoughby,
Gillette, WY

Thank you for your encouragement. We had considerable difficulty condensing our comments into the three pages we allotted ourselves. We are afraid some of the comments may not have been as convincing as they could have been with further elaboration so your reaction is appreciated.

One point that we did not have space to develop is the fact that Jesus had the power to perform miracles for over a year before his first public miracle of healing. Even when he did begin to heal, it was on a much more selective basis than we might realize from a casual reading of the gospels.

The implications of this fact are considerable. Clearly he put people’s long-term spiritual welfare ahead of their short-term physical well-being. He could have cured every ill person in the area but he did not. There was a multitude of infirm folk at the pool of Bethesda (John 5) but he healed only one. He had passed the lame man at the gate of the temple many times without healing him for the man was lame until Peter healed him as recorded in Acts 4.

Social Christianity is not Christ’s gospel and is a very deceptive and enticing distortion of the truth.

Use of God’s Name

Dear Don,

I write in response to Robert Geisel’s letter (June, 1990 “Tidings”) regarding the vain use of God’s name.

I, too, am deeply repulsed at the wanton use of our Lord’s name, which is the name above all other names on earth, as a byword. It is as though the person committing this grievous sin were speaking of my wife or children in a slanderous or derogatory manner, ,which I would not tolerate for an instant. It hurts, causing anger toward this person to rise within me. I then must pray and ask to view this person through the eyes of Christ, who saw the sinner and not the sin. Eventually, I become as a bystander, viewing the scene from a distance. In this way, I can see this person as a lost individual in need of God’s love and mercy and realize he/she knows not of what they speak or they certainly wouldn’t use the savior’s name in such a manner.

As to the actual sin of using God’s name in vain, we need to turn to Exodus 20 that we may begin to understand what this sin entails.

Ex.20 :2-17 are what is commonly known as the ten commandments. Yet, to the person of truth, these passages would be better referred to as the “vows of YHWH’ s bride.”

YHWH had chosen Israel (Jacob’s descendants) as His bride and, upon taking her to wife, bestowed upon her His name. As the recipient of this highest of honors, she was expected to behave accordingly. YHWH plainly told her what she was to do and what she was not to do that she might reflect His image and carry His name with honor and dignity.

With this in mind, the reading of vs. 2-7 take on a meaning any married, or single, individual can relate to. All people desire a faithful life-companion, so the context of this chapter of “vows” allows us to empathize with the mind of YHWH concerning His requests and His lofty view of marriage and its fidelity.

If I may be allowed to put forward a simple paraphrase of these vows I would suggest the following:

“I am YHWH, your husband and Lord. I brought you out of bondage into freedom that you might be my bride. I now acknowledge you as such and ask you to abide by these vows of fidelity: I am your husband and you shall place no other gods in my stead. I will tolerate no images of other lovers or deities. You shall show subservience and obeisance to none other than myself, for I am jealous of our relationship and insist it remain ours alone. Do only that which is righteous, that my name be not slandered among mankind. And, if you should slander my holy name, I shall not hold you guiltless.”

And the bride replied, “I agree to this” (Ex. 24:7), and the vows were sealed with blood (Ex. 24:8).

As time passed, the bride wantonly whored among many false gods and “made her bed” with many a heathen king. By the time Messiah appears upon the scene of history, she is “estranged” from God and desolate (the Hebrew meaning of “vain”). She resembles not the chaste bride YHWH had wed, but is useless and void of all that is godly. She has taken the Creator’s name in vain and made it a byword among the nations.

The taking of God’s name in vain is not an act of cursing, thought this in itself is ungodly and extremely offensive, but an act of disobedience and unfaithfulness upon the part of the chosen bride.

The lesson to the ecclesia is simply comprehended. We, as the bride of Messiah, must continually keep our vows of obedience and submission which we proclaimed upon bap­tism into Christ. The danger is that we, too, should go searching for another bridegroom while our betrothed tarries for yet a little while.

Hank Mason
45465 25th St. East
Lot#53 Lancaster,
CA 93535

Your response to those who use God’s name in vain is interesting. For the most part, they really do seem to be quite ignorant of the fact that there is any sin involved at all. In which case, viewing them with a measure of compassion, as Christ did the publicans and sinners, is a useful response. There are those, however, who are deliberately reviling God. In such cases, the anger which Christ displayed toward the wicked, “0 generation of vipers, how can ye, being evil, speak good things?” would be a more appropriate reaction.

The allusion to Israel and the ecclesia as the bride of Christ needs some clarification. The general matter of vows and holding to them is a good exhortation point, but the ecclesia is now the betrothed of Christ and not yet his bride (Rev. 19:7). Furthermore, the language of Israel as God’s wife is highly figurative and based largely on Ezekiel 16. Nationally, they were His people, but not His wife. The faithful remnant within the nation was part of the betrothed of Messiah based on faith, as is the ecclesia of the present time. The figurative language of the nation as God’s wife is employed by the spirit through the prophets to shock the nation into realizing how much they had been favored and how far they had fallen.

Another point in the foregoing letter arouses our curiosity. The expression of the Tetragrammaton in the form YHWH. We are used to seeing this as Yahweh and assume there is some reason for presenting the consonants only, rather than including the vowels. Now, of course, the vowel pointing are what led to the discussion as to whether the right pronunciation is Yahweh or Jehovah so perhaps our correspondent has judicially stepped around that problem by supplying consonants only.

Since the days of Bro. Thomas, Christadelphians have taken great interest in the names and titles of Deity. Of late, some have taken to reading Yahweh when the English text indicates that the Hebrew word in the Old Testament is YHWH. When we do this, we are transliterating rather than translating the word. This is common practice with proper names. Abraham, Isaac, Jacob, etc. are not translations but are transliterations into English of the Hebrew letters.

The Greek text regularly follows this same practice. Sometimes the letters available in one language are not sufficiently equivalent to those in the original language to avoid a rather dramatic change in the pronunciation of the word. We notice this, for example, when Isaiah is transliterated in the Greek to Esaias.

On a very few occasions, we find other than proper names transliterated from Hebrew to Greek. “Eli, Eli, lama sabachthani?” and “the Lord of sabaoth” are two such cases. There is, therefore, a question raised by the fact that YHWH is not transliterated in the Greek text when quoting from the Hebrew Old Testament text. If God wants us to do so, why didn’t the inspired apostles follow such a practice?

How to end prayers

Dear Bro. Don,

Greetings in the Master’s name.

Many end their prayers by saying in Jesus’ name without saying his full name (Jesus Christ). Should a prayer end this way or not?

Yours in Christ,
Reuben E. Washington,
Rahway, NJ

Throughout the gospels, Jesus is called “Jesus.” With a few exceptions, he is only called “Jesus” throughout the rest of the New Testa­ment when reference is being made to him before his glorification to the right hand of the Father. The vast majority of references in Acts through Revelation use the phrasing “Lord Jesus,” “Jesus Christ,” or “Christ Jesus.” That tells us something.

Prior to his glorification, believers did not pray in his name (John 16:24) which was “Jesus.” After his glorification, he was proven to be “Jesus the Christ.” Therefore, the appropriate ending to our prayers is to recognize that we can pray in his name because of his glorification. Thus let the acknowledgement be in the terms “Jesus Christ,” or “Christ Jesus” or “our Lord Jesus Christ.”

The Trinity

Dear Bro. Don:

Your correspondent from Jamaica, Ian Boyne, had a most interesting letter in the January, 1990 issue of the “Tidings.” I felt your comments were right on target, and, of course, agree with your answer.

Perhaps a further thought or two might be acceptable. A standard Trinitarian argument is that Christ, being God, gave us the Old Testament. The Book of Mormon, for in­stance, in 3 Nephi 15:5 has Christ saying, “Behold I am he that gave the law, and I am he who covenanted with my people Israel.” Again 3 Nephi 9:15, page 418, reads, “be­hold, I am Jesus Christ the Son of God. I created the heavens and the earth, and all things that in them are.” Upon this basis, Exodus 33:20 becomes confusing: God speaking to Moses said, “Thou canst not see my face: for there shall no man see me and live.” If Christ were God, all who beheld him would have died:

Mary, Joseph, his brethren, the apostles, the multitudes, scribes, Pharisees, officials, etc. It would have been impossible to crucify him. One look at him, and all of them would have died.

One other thought: Christ is set forth as both the seed of Abraham and David, an heir of the covenants of promise that God gave unto them. This is strange language indeed if Christ being God is heir to the prom­ises that he himself has given.

With much love in the one hope,

                                                                                                                            Gordon Stewart, Salem, OR

Thank you for your additional comments. The Truth is straightforward, consistent and beautiful. We are greatly blessed that our eyes have been opened to see it and to avoid the apostate errors that confuse and befuddle those who believe them.

Several Questions

Dear Editor:

I have been reading your publi­cation for quite a while but a few things are still not clear to me.

1. What is the difference between the two kinds of Christadelphians?
2. Are all believers in Jesus who do not belong to your organization lost? Does this include anti-trinitari­ans like the Jehovah’s Witnesses also? What aboutfollowers ofJesus before the founding of your movement in 1833?
3. Personally I don’t feel that the doctrine ofthe trinity is necessary for salvation, but what about the verse where Jesus says to the Jews, “if ye believe not that I am, ye shall die in your sins” (John 8:24). This is the verse usually used to prove non-trini­tarians are lost.
4. You are accused by some of denying salvation by grace, requiring the performance of particular acts (in addition to baptism) to achieve salvation (somewhat similar to Ro­manism). To what extent is this true?
   Yours in Christ,
   Johnny Plunkett,
   91 Concord Rd. SW
   Smyrna, GA 30082

Following are brief answers. If you wish a more extensive dialog on these matters, write us for the address of the Christadelphians nearest to you

1. There are several different “kinds” of Christadelphians. But I assume your reference is to the Amended and Unamended fellowships which are the largest Chris­tadelphian fellowships in North America. In 1898, one clause in the most widely used Christadelphian summary of first principles was amended. The change was the addition of a parenthetical phrase to the section defining the responsible who will be at the judgment seat of Christ. The amended clause reads: “That at the appearing of Christ prior to the establishment of the Kingdom, the responsible (namely, those who know the revealed will of God, and have been called upon to submit to it), dead and living — obedient and disobedient — will be summoned before his judgment seat ‘to be judged according to their works;’ and ‘receive in body according to what they have done, whether it be good or bad.” The Amended feel the parenthetical phrase is correct, clearly supported by scripture and excludes from the community the wrong view that only baptized people will be brought before Christ for judgment. They feel, therefore, the issue should be made a test of fellowship. For a variety of reasons, the Unamended do not feel the issue should be made a test of fellowship. Some think the words added to the statement are in error, others feel they are not supported by positive Bible proof and others agree with the point but do not feel the issue is of sufficient importance that it should be a matter of fellowship.

You are obviously familiar with Christadelphians and know that we are individuals sincerely desirous of preserving the Truth of the gospel in these last days. Given the absence of a statement of faith in scripture, the wide range of doctrinal error currently taught by the churches and the frailties of our human constitution, it is inevitable that disagreements will occur as to where the line of fellowship should be drawn.

2. Christ is the judge of who will be saved. There may be many individuals who believe the Truth but who have never heard of Christadel­phians. In fact, recent experiences in Jamaica, Korea and Zimbabwe confirm such a conclusion. There may be many people who individually believe the gospel and practice it without affiliation with any group.

We have seen much evidence that mixing false teaching with the Truth leads to the obscuring and disappearance of right teaching. We feel, therefore, the advisability of maintaining a standard of belief and practice. Hopefully, we have been conservative in our position and we will be pleasantly surprised to see many not of our community accepted at the judgment seat. But in the meantime, we try to do the best we can persevering in right doctrine and practice under the present circumstances. Of course, prior to the work of Bro. John Thomas, there were, no doubt, true dis­ciples of our Lord. Much evidence in this regard has been discovered by our Bro. Alan Eyre and has been published in the books “The Protesters” and “Brethren in Christ.”

While the Jehovah’s Witnesses are anti-trinitarian, they reject the promises of God regarding the Jewish nation and the reward of the righteous. They disagree with scripture about the nature of man and the nature and identity of Jesus Christ and believe incorrectly about the devil and demons. Although it is not our business to judge any organization, we personally find it hard to believe that one who believed the true gospel of Christ could remain with Jehovah’s Witnesses.

3. Jesus as the “I am.” Is John 8:24 an allusion to Ex. 3:14: “I am that I am?” Consider John 8:25: did Jesus declare from the beginning that he was Yahweh, the Deity, the Father of all? No! he did not! His contention was that he was the Christ, the Son of the living God.

Look first at the context of this visit to Jerusalem recorded in John 7:10-10:18. The great issue was, “Is this Jesus of Nazareth the Messiah, the Christ?” “Do the rulers know indeed that this is the very Christ…Others said, This is the Christ…if any man did confess that he was Christ…” (John 7:26,41;9:22). On a later visit, he was immediately confronted with the demand, “If thou be the Christ, tell us plainly” (John 10:24).

From the beginning, the testimony of John the Baptist had been that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God (John 3:28-36). And the great reason the disciples followed him was their conviction he was the Christ (John 1:41,49; 6:69). When Jesus talked to the woman by the well, the key point was that he was Messiah (John 4:25­-26). And when the gospel was preached after his ascension, the great teaching which had to be believed was that Jesus is both Lord and Christ (Acts 2:36).

The reason for the writing of the gospel of John was that people might be convinced “that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God” (John 20:31).

This is the great issue that must be believed or we will die in our sins.

When reading scripture, we strongly recommend you use both a microscope and a wide-angle lens. The Truth will conform to the broad sweep of unambiguous scripture statements and to a careful examination of each phrase or word. If your conclusions about a specific word do not conform to the broad, clear doctrines, then something is wrong with your specific conclusions. And that is the case with the trinitarian approach to John 8:24.

4. In no way do we deny salvation by grace. Apart from God graciously forgiving our sins in the Lord Jesus Christ, we are utterly without hope. However, he does not save us from sin so that we can turn right around and keep willfully sinning. “We are his workmanship, created in Christ Jesus unto good works…” (Eph. 2:10). Salvation by grace is stressed in Ephesians but look at what is also said: “put off…the old man, which is corrupt according to the deceitful lusts…put on the new man, which after God is created in righteousness and true holiness. ..for this ye know, that no whore monger, nor unclean person, nor covetous man, who is an idolater, hath any inheritance in the kingdom of Christ and of God. Let no man deceive you with vain words…” (Eph. 4:22,24; 5:5,6).

The accusation to which you allude is leveled against Christadelphi­ans because we are convinced those who believe in Christ should follow his commands and reflect the moral attributes of God in their daily lives. That is the message of Christ, the apostles and all of scripture. That is a far cry from Romanism which advocates repetitious prayers, donations to the church and perfunctory attendance at church services as the means of securing grace.

Do not be deceived into thinking simply acknowledging Jesus as Lord is all he wants. He tells us plainly, “If ye keep my commandments, ye shall abide in my love…Ye are my friends, if ye do whatsoever I command you” (John 15:10,14).

Angels and the Kingdom

Dear Bro. Don,

Greetings in the Master’s name,

In response to comments by Bro. Gene Turner (pg. 266, Oct. ’90 “Tidings”), we contribute the following: angels are God’s messengers and servants. We are God’s servants and can also be ministering angels. I have a great regard for brethren and sisters who were ministering angels to me years ago. They were surely sent from our Heavenly Father to help me over the trying period of my life and set me on the right way to God’s kingdom.

We have a wealth of information on the kingdom age in the Bible. The prophet Isaiah is full of the land flow­ing with milk and honey, every man sitting under his own vine and fig tree none daring to make him afraid. The last four chapters of Revelation provide beautiful descriptions of the kingdom age — no more pain, death, sorrow or sighing. We must use our thoughts to dwell on these things and make a beautiful picture; it will be even better than anything that mortals can imagine. Let us all strive for it.

With all love in Christ,
J.S. Battersby, New Hamburg, ONT

We apologize for being so tardy in publishing this letter which was received several months ago. Reference is made to the points regarding “we shall judge angels” in I Cor. 6:3 and to a discussion of the saints after the kingdom.

One possibility in understanding I Cor. 6:3 is that “angels” refers to mortal messengers of God in the kingdom. Once the nations are subdued, mortals will likely be given roles of gradually increasing respon­sibility. The term “angels” could thus apply to mortals who become involved in the instruction of others in the Truth.

Isaiah’s allusions to kingdom conditions apply, of course, to the mortal population. Revelation, on the other hand, speaks of the immortal condition to be enjoyed by those who are kings and priests in the millennium. When God is all and in all after the millennium, then the saints of this era will be joined by the faithful of the kingdom age in sharing glorious immortality.

The point of discussion concerned after the millennium. We feel, as does Bro. Turner, that there are some hints that another creation will be started and that we will have a role in it similar to the angels of this present order. As Bro. Battersby writes, the prospect before us thrills the heart and reinforces our determination to be faithful now that we might share in that time of blessing.

Christmas Activities

Brother Don:

I see you have received a lot of artillery over the Christmas holiday. Your answer was very good and may keep things quiet until next Christ­mas.

I have been a Christadelphian for 70 years and this issue has come up many times. I have not always given

the same answer. Christmas has become a national holiday and I observe it as such — people are off work, business places are closed and my family flies in from a distance. It is an appropriate time to exchange gifts. My grandson came home and I gave him a good Bible dictionary. I did so not because I thought Jesus was born on December 25 (because he was not) but because I wanted him to have the best helps in his study of scripture.

We must keep the words “strong” or “weak” in quotation marks, be­cause we don’t know who they are yet. If those who object to observing Christmas are the “strong,” then they will “receive” those who merely observe it as a holiday without any thought of the ancient idolatry associated with its origin, and they will “receive” them without “doubtful disputations” (Rom. 14:11).

Some have conscience of the idol unto this hour but others do not. They are all brethren in Christ and will receive one another with open arms (1 Cor. 8:7).

It is regrettable that we have to drop profitable edification from time to time to debate the relative importance of “days” (Rom. 14:5,6).

Aude Plew, Bloomington, IN

Dear Bro. Don:

Loving greetings in Christ Jesus.

It was wonderful seeing you in Lompoc last week, and getting to attend the day with the word. It was very special and your classes were great. Thank you so much.

Must say I’m thrilled with the letters about Christmas. Grandpa’s letter upset me greatly and I frankly couldn’t believe it. Now I can rejoice that so many others took the time to write you their opinion about this pagan holiday and l’ m certain that if “Grandpa” were here to read these letters, he’d write another letter showing his drastic change of view. When I learned the Truth, Christmas just didn’t fit anymore. With its pagan origin, I wanted to run from it as far and fast as I could. It’s been tough doing it, however, since my husband didn’t embrace the Truth, and delights in the season. The whole thing makes me sick– the gaudy lights, the commercialism, the pretense they are remembering Jesus. (Jesus tells us in Luke 19:22 how he wants to be remembered.) It’s certainly the wrong thing to teach children and you never hear them say anything but, “I want.” When a brother or sister says: “Merry Christmas” it makes me wince. It makes me feel they have one foot in the world.

There has been a lot on divorce and remarriage and I can not understand how those of like precious faith view the matter so loosely. The ec­clesia is the bride and she is to keep herself unspotted from the world. The ideal is there and anything short of ideal is unacceptable. After all, this life should not be an indulgence of the old man of the flesh but we should live as new creatures in Christ glorifying God so long as we have breath. It is also impossible to understand how a previously divorced and now baptized sister or brother is considered lily-white as far as the previous marriage is concerned. The apostle Paul says that they are to remain in the position in which the Truth found them (I Cor. 7:20,24). After all, John the Baptist would not have lost his head if he’d believed in remarriage.

It is my belief that the ecclesias are in serious trouble because they are getting more and more like the world about us. It’s frightening and it’s like the days of Noah and like the days of Lot. May Yahweh give us the strength to consider only glorifying Him. May we continually ask, “0 Lord what woulds’ t thou have me do?” and may we listen to his answer to us. After all, the apostle Paul told us, “Make not provision for the flesh, to fulfill the lusts thereof’ (Rom. 13:14).

May Yahweh bless you and yours.

Your sister in Christ,
Dorothy Woolridge,
Santa Barbara, CA

Dear Brother Don,

Just a note of encouragement. I am in complete agreement with “Grandpa’s letter,” re Christmas.

I have run into opposition on this myself. One brother I knew was very much against any observance of Easter (rabbits, egg-hunts, etc.). He once told me, “Do you realize Easter was named after Astarte and you know what sort of woman she was.”

It came to my mind that here was an example of “consciousness of the idol” (I Cor. 8:7). He seemed to feel that she was somehow real. The scripture tells us that an idol is nothing. “Ye are of nothing, and your work of nought” (I Cor. 8:4; Isa. 41:29). And so I had considered the origins of Easter and Christmas as nothing — having no reality. Paul was not conscious of the idol, and would eat meat offered to idols, except where it might cause offence (I Cor. 10).

It seems something of a paradox, but in Romans 14 Paul considers the brother with the most scruples the weaker brother; the stronger brother sees past all that to the weightier matters.

Your conclusions in March ’90 issue are perfectly right! But, then, we are the ones who must, in some degree, make allowances for the weaker conscience.

I certainly hope no polarization occurs on these issues. Still worse is the prospect that some might make the matter a point of fellowship. Keep up the good work and don’t be discouraged over an occasional hornet’s nest!

Your brother,
Ted Plew, Bloomington, IN

Dear Bro. Don:

I would like to say how much I appreciate the letter from Grandpa and also the letters of negative response. This is a very touchy subject, as is marriage and divorce. Often people never have an opportunity to listen to or even want to listen to an opposing opinion. Brothers and sisters who are able to maintain high moral standards due to circumstances in their spiritual life, families and fellowship will often be unable to understand the reasons others, through more difficult and trying circum­stances, have drawn an opposing conclusion.

My husband is not a Christadel­phian and Christmas is a very special occasion to him and his family even though they are not religious.

He is a wonderful husband, loving, kind, supportive and a terrific father but has always been suspicious and basically jealous of my belief

A sister that lived close to me had a very opposing attitude to Christ­mas. She would have long talks with me and covered all the negative aspects as were described in the letters that were submitted to you. This was very difficult for me. I felt terrible guilt, shame and most of all terror and fear that I would be rejected at the judgment being condemned for supporting or even going along with such a celebration. I cried and fretted a great deal until finally I talked to my husband about my changed feelings and new enlightened understanding.

He proclaimed that he did not believe in Christ or God. That it was a time of year for families and especially children and my religious ideas were ridiculous. If I was going to start becoming fanatical, I could leave.

Well, the only thing I accomplished was to promote my husband’s rea­sons for feeling suspicious and negative about the meeting. Things I had been able to attend freely up until that point became annoying to him. I knew that if I pursued the Christmas issue it would mean war and a pos­sible marriage breakdown.

I though about Naaman in!! Kings 5:18: “In this thing the LORD pardon thy servant, that when my master goeth into the house of Rimmon to worship there, and he leaneth on my hand, and I bow myself in the house of Rimmon: when I bow down myself in the house of Rimmon, the LORD pardon thy servant in this thing.” It’s interesting that he mentions bowing twice.

One thing I have learned is that I have gained more by being positive than negative. Christmas is full of opportunities to declare, in a positive way, your belief more than at any other time of year.

I usually buy cards that say Happy Holidays rather than Merry Xmas. I make a special effort to write each and every friend, old and new, a short letter and enclose with it a pamphlet, the latest “Bible Magazine” or current events pamphlet.

At Christmas time, people who are elderly, poor and widowed feel exceptionally lonely because of the large emphasis placed on family love and giving. What a terrific opportunity for us to move in and visit them taking a small gift with a card and a pamphlet. We can invite them to join us for dinner or attend an ecclesial function.

I’ve taught my children that Christ­mas is not a time of getting but of giving. It is a special time to show others how much we appreciate their efforts all year. They give a small gift or box of candy to all their teachers including Sunday school and CYC leaders. They go with me to take groceries and often a turkey to someone who is not so blessed as we are.

My husband is proud of his chil­dren. At first, he felt very worried about what they would be taught at Sunday school and refused to allow them to attend. If I had made a big issue out of Xmas, I’m sure they still would be at home on Sunday mornings.

My husband is now becoming more secure and trusting. He not only allows the children to attend Sunday school and CYC but will often drive them and pick them up.

All I can say from my own experience is being positive about situations pertaining to Christmas has been more spiritually beneficial than opposing and condemning would have been.

Love, your sister in Christ,
Grace Montgomery, Vernon, BC

Thank you all for your letters. We will draw the Christmas issue to close for the present. From the letters, short notes and extensive personal comments, some points have stood out. Evidently no one in the brotherhood “observes” Christmas as a religious holiday. Those who exchange gifts or have a Christmas tree have generally toned down their activities in recent years and may do so further as they become more aware of the sensitivities of their brethren and sisters. There also exits a broad-based recognition of the danger of stimulating covetousness and the need to emphasize giving over receiving .

Most recognize that a person’s background and circumstances will determine their attitudes in this matter. They see it as an area where there is room for a variance of opinion as to how principles should be applied to each person’s own family life.

This is an issue where we feel we all need to heed the apostolic warning, “Who art thou that judgest another man’s servant? to his own master he standeth or falleth… for the kingdom of God is… righteousness, and peace, and joy…”(Rom 14:4, 17)