Transgenders make up less than 1% of the population, but Herculean efforts are being made to protect such individuals as though they were an endangered species under attack. How many people even know one? And what are the facts? Do we have any? Are those who have a sex-change operation actually happier? Or is the suicide rate among them significantly higher? How many women desire to be men, and how many men desire to be women? It is reported that the latter is the case 90% of the time. Can anyone run a news story reporting the facts, or is the issue one that elicits too much bias one way or the other for such a simple thing to occur?
For years, this writer’s hair might be dark or light, depending on how much sunlight he was in and maybe the way his hair was combed. His wife might make the comment, “I see you have your blond side up today.” but other days it appeared darker. Is this how it works with transgenders? “Today, I feel my feminine side is up.” Tomorrow he may be competing in a major sports event, but today is different. Isn’t that confusing?
According to the Orlando Sentinel of May 13, 2016, public schools “must permit transgender students to use bathrooms and showers consistent with their gender identity, according to an Obama administration directive” (A3). Just consider the gobbledegook that explains all this:
The guidance from leaders at the departments of Education and Justice says public schools are obligated to treat their transgender students in a way that matches their gender identity, even if their education documents indicate a different sex (A3).
The translation of the bureaucratic gibberish is simply this: If a boy feels like a girl at any given moment—despite the fact that biologically he is a male— he may use the girls’ restroom or locker room. This is what the President of the United States has demanded. (Does anybody think his daughters will have to tolerate males in their locker room?) Any person of sound mind must object to such a perverted practice.
Attorney General Loretta Lynch has shown herself to be as biased as her predecessor, Eric Holder, who wouldn’t recognize justice if it smacked him in the face. The evidence of this charge is his refusal to prosecute thugs with Billy clubs at a Philadelphia polling place (because they were the same race as him?), his refusal to investigate what happened with Fast and Furious, et al. In the same vein, Lynch mouthed these politically correct sentiments:
“There is no room in our schools for discrimination of any kind, including discrimination against transgender students.”
How does anyone present such codswallop to the public and keep a straight face? One would think that 30%-40% of students were being denied rights. We are assured by liberals and secularists that allowing transgenders to use the facilities of the opposite sex is no big deal. If it’s no big deal, why can’t they use those matching their biological gender? No one ever need know or suspect that anything is amiss.
The Orange County School Board here in Florida tripped all over themselves in hastening to comply with the “directive” (translate “coerced demand”). But Texas and ten or eleven other states are talking about standing on principle. (Boehner will probably not like them any more than Ted Cruz for their legal challenge to the president.) Of course, Houston, who has an openly lesbian mayor, and Dallas are all for it.
The President and the Attorney General are citing Title IX as authority for what they are doing. Attorney David Limbaugh objects:
Understand that with Title IX of the Education Amendments of 1972, Congress never intended “sex” to include “gender identity.” The purpose was to ensure women and girls equal treatment under the law. No one in his wildest imagination conceived that lawless public officials would later contort the statute to prevent discrimination against transgender people.
These comments are from an article that is titled,
“Resisting Obama’s Transgender Directive: A Hill to Die On,” which was posted May 17, 2016. He also agreed with the point made in our article for May 22nd— that the departments of Education and Justice have been politicized. Limbaugh also makes clear what the directive actually does:
The administration proclaims, “Gender identity refers to an individual’s internal sense of gender.” So forget your biological makeup; if today you want to identify as a woman, men, you may, and if people refuse to go along with the ruse, they will be punished with the full force of federal law.
This is the reason that this expression of Obama’s absurd agenda must be resisted. How many formal charges of discrimination have been filed?
No one will convince me that this has anything to do with the rights of transgender people. Rather, Obama and his fellow leftist tyrants are seeing how far they can push the envelope—how much they can fundamentally transform America against the people’s will and against the protections guaranteed by the federal and state constitutions.
Limbaugh must be correct because such a thing does not make sense on the surface of it. There has been no public outcry of transgenders saying they have been abused. The directive must be part of a larger agenda. What’s next—accepting child molesters and decriminalizing rape? Where is all of this heading? What is the end game?
How many readers ever heard of boys who wanted to be girls (seriously) or vice versa? If such is the case, is it not that they are being conditioned or coaxed to think this way by someone? Remember when childhood used to be a time of innocence? And education? No wonder Johnny can’t read or write, but he knows he wants to be Johnella. If Obama and other elitists can convince Americans to allow transgenders to have opposite restroom privileges, then they can convince us all that the Emperor is not naked, either, and we will all be marveling at his new clothes.
Citizens must contact school boards, representatives, senators (state and federal), making it clear where we stand concerning this issue. Department stores that honor this inane policy should be boycotted. The public should notify all major stores they will not shop at such places. Consumers wield great power—if they will only use it. As Limbaugh said:
Folks, there has to be a tipping point—a point at which we’ll no longer tolerate this kind of tyranny, even if it means the states forgoing blood money from the federal leviathan.
Of course, there are voices on “our” side, saying that this directive does not amount to anything and that we should save up our ammunition for something really important. One favorite expression on the part of many compromisers is, “This is not the hill to die on.” David Limbaugh disagrees:
This is a hill to die on, and if the sane states don’t fight back on this one, we might as well just completely surrender the republic today. It’s either that or eventually seeing the people rise up in a way we haven’t witnessed for many years.
Radio talk show host, Rush Limbaugh voiced some excellent thoughts on this subject. Many do not like his politics, but he has never relented in speaking against abortion (even before it was cool) or exposing the grotesque practices of Planned Parenthood. He was one of few who refused to cave on homosexual marriage, and he is correct about this social issue as well. He commented thus on the article just quoted:
My brother David had a column published yesterday. “Resisting Obama’s Transgender Directive: A Hill to Die On.” You know, this whole transgender bathroom business is typical. It fits the pattern that has ended up being so damaging and destructive to conservatives and Republicans. The left attempts to undermine, corrupt, and overthrow elements of our culture and our
society. They do it by trying to normalize behavior that, for eons, has been considered to be anything but. They succeed by beating people down and having them portrayed as bigots or racists or some kind of phobe if they resist whatever is said to be just and filled with civil rights.
The moderate Republicans who keep saying, “This is not the battle we should fight,” have been giving up so often and so readily that their backbones have surely shrunken from nonuse to the point that if they ever should stand up and fight, they would probably collapse en masse. They have given the president everything he wanted in his budget so that we are now over twenty trillion dollars in debt. It would be difficult to imagine anyone acting more accommodative.
Thinking that this transgender issue is not worth fighting over is equivalent to Gedaliah refusing to believe that Ishmael had determined to assassinate him. He was warned by Johanan and others, but he refused to believe them. So, while he was in his “rejection of reality” mode, Ishmael and ten others fell upon him and killed him (Jer. 40:14-41:2). It pays to be cautious; it pays to stand up and fight. The alternative is defeat and death. This current issue is one to make a stand on and die, if necessary.
The TV is my shepherd, I shall not want.
It makes me lie down on the sofa.
It leads me away from the Scriptures.
It destroys my soul.
It leads in the paths of sex and violence for the sponsor’s sake.
Yea, though, I walk in the shadow of my Christian responsibilities,
There will be no interruption,
For the TV is with me.
Its cable and its remote control,
They comfort me in the presence of my worldliness.
It anoints my head with humanism.
My coveting runneth over.
Surely laziness and ignorance shall follow me all the days of my life;
And I shall dwell in the house of flat screen TV forever.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Sow an act, and you reap a tendency;
Sow a tendency, and you reap a habit;
Sow a habit, and you reap a character;
Sow a character, and you reap a destiny.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Last week Spiritual Perspectives noted many of the names that Abe Lincoln was called when running for President. A “third-rate country lawyer” was one of the kindest epithets used against him. Of course, “grotesque baboon,” “ape,” and “buffoon” were personal attacks. So these tactics are nothing new in politics. Even George Washington’s critics were severe. He was called monarchial and aristocratic. He was condemned as the man who had “entailed upon his country deep and incurable public evils.” Most people would doubt the veracity of charges such as these, but the point is that they were made.
Former Speaker of the House, John Boehner, however, went beyond personal attacks when, at a speech given to college students in California, he called Texas Senator Ted Cruz, “Lucifer in the flesh.” Even most of Cruz’ detractors would not make such a ridiculous statement. Certain criticisms leveled at the former presidential candidate may have some merit, but Boehner is hardly an expert on Biblical topics. (If he were, he would have said Satan, since Lucifer refers to the king of Babylon in Isaiah 14). As Boehner intended the insult, not much could be said that is worse about someone. Jesus said to some of the Jews that they were of their father, the devil (John 8:44), but He offered evidence for His allegation.
What proof did the former Speaker of the House offer? He said that he could get along with both Republicans and Democrats—and almost anyone else—but not Mr. Cruz, and then he threw another insult at him—a worldly and unsavory description, thus showing even further his lack of respect for God’s Word and his so-called expertise concerning it. Maybe his problem is that most of the people he knows are those who compromise, as he does. Cruz, however, will not back down from his principles (not that he hasn’t made mistakes). Cruz refused to play the political game that many in D.C. (in both parties) go along with.
Surprisingly, Cruz said, “If I have said 50 words in my life to John Boehner, I would be surprised. And every one of them has consisted of pleasantries: ‘Good to see you, Mr. Speaker.’ I’ve never had a substantive conversation with John Boehner” (Orlando Sentinel, April 29, 2016, A6). In fact, when Cruz asked to meet with Boehner about the government shutdown, he refused. How shameful to refuse to talk to someone—and then badmouth him! Those who have an argument make it; those who don’t call names. Mr. Boehner has revealed more about himself than Senator Cruz.
The above title is from an article written by Erik Tryggestad in the February, 2009 Christian Chronicle. According to Mike Washburn, executive minister (I do not recall an executive apostle, MLW) of Richland Hills Church of Christ, the 2009 edition of Churches of Christ in the United States committed an egregious error in deleting this congregation from the directory.
The explanation the Chronicle gives is that “the Texas church was one of 21 congregations omitted from the latest edition of the directory for using instrumental music in at least one Sunday morning service.” Carl Royster, the volume’s compiler, said, “The one unifying constant that defines whether or not such a congregation is included in this document is the practice of a cappella worship services.” If I interpret correctly, as long as any congregation claims to be a church of Christ and sings a cappella, they can abandon all other Bible doctrines and remain in the directory. There are hundreds of so-called churches of Christ that need to be excluded from the directory because they “went out from us” (1 John 2:19) long ago!
The article further explains: “In the past, compilers have excluded congregations as they broke ties with Churches of Christ. In 2003 the Oak Hills Church of Christ in San Antonio, then with about 3,500 members, added instrumental worship services and dropped ‘of Christ’ from its name. The church was excluded from the next directory, published in 2006.” But according to the Chronicle, Mike Washburn opines that “Richland Hill’s elders have not broken ties with Churches of Christ, nor did they ask to be excluded from the 2009 directory.” The offended “executive minister” also states, “From a church standpoint, we’re saddened and disappointed. …we strongly feel like we are a part of Churches of Christ and continue a strong love for – and commitment to – excellent a cappella worship (emph. MLW).
May I point out that “executive Mike’s feelings” do not make the Richland Hill’s group a church of Christ! Mike would do well to heed Proverbs 14:12: “There is a way which seemeth right unto a man; But the end thereof are the ways of death.” His true convictions are revealed in this quote: “However, we are a part of a huge movement in our fellowship who do not believe a cappella worship is the sole way of defining who Churches of Christ are” (emph. MLW).
Faithful brethren have never argued that a cappella worship is the sole (only) way of defining the church of Christ. I realize that the compilers of the church directory used “a cappella worship” as the “one unifying constant” to determine a congregation’s place in the book when in reality there are other doctrinal matters that must also be considered. The bottom line for this article is that “executive Mike” believes members of the church can worship without a cappella worship!
“Executive Mike” does express a concern “that church members will see Richland Hill’s exclusion as a sign that the church has broken ties with its fellowship.” “That’s not the case,” he said, noting his congregation’s involvement with a cappella churches, ministries, and schools associated with Churches of Christ. He states: “We have great love for the people in our heritage. We want to be a part of this fellowship.”
“Executive Mike” may profess love for the people in “our heritage” (whatever that means), but he surely doesn’t love the Lord and His Word! He has no fellowship with God and thus has no fellowship with faithful brethren!
Let me offer positive proof of my assertion about Richland Hill’s members being out of fellowship with the Lord. The article states: “In 2007 Richland Hills added an instrumental worship service on Saturday nights. A few months ago the church added instruments to one of its two Sunday morning services” (emph. MLW). Men have never had God’s approval to add or subtract from His Word (Deut. 4:2; Rev. 22:18-19).
Christians are commanded to sing (Acts 16:25; Rom. 15:9; 1 Cor. 14:15; Eph. 5:19; Col. 3:16; Heb. 2:12; James 5:13), but there is no command to play an instrument. Neither have faithful brethren forgotten about the addition of an instrumental worship service on Saturday night! We have Bible authority for Christians to worship on Sunday and an example of them doing so (Acts 20:7).
“Executive Mike” wants to worship at Dan and Bethel and whenever he pleases (cf. 1 Kings 12:28-33). Jeroboam learned that God labeled this type of progress as sinful. For the last six months Richland Hills has averaged between 4100 and 4200 for its combined Saturday and Sunday services.
Richland Hills and all other apostate congregations will one day learn that just being “a part of a huge movement” will not get one to Heaven! Such congregations are no longer the Lord’s church! And faithful brethren should not pretend that they are!
[Editor’s note: This article was written for brethren at Paris, Texas, by Marvin Weir and published on February 22, 2009. An article available on spiritualperpectives.org (November 2, 2003) dealt with the adoption of instrumental music at Richland Hills in the Saturday service. It was dealt with after the fact in articles printed on the Spiritual Perspectives website on January 14, 21, 28, February 4, and 11th in 2007. Unfortunately, topics such as these need to be repeated periodically since brethren continue to move in this direction.]
Only one life, ‘twill soon be past.
Only what’s done for Christ will last.
Last week Spiritual Perspectives presented three articles written by various preachers over a period of time on the subject of modesty. However, for some brethren, such topics are a waste of time because they made up their minds a long time ago not to pay any attention to anyone who says anything that disagrees with what they have decided to do.. This attitude can be found in a number of people on a variety of issues. We have often noted, for example, that those who insist on using instrumental music have one final argument they use after all others have failed: “We like it, and we’re going to use it.”
The same thing is true of those who want to imbibe alcohol, play the lottery, or go to the beach. In over 40 years of preaching, this writer has yet to see any written justification for any of those practices. Certainly no one has set forth a logical argument, the conclusion of which is, “It is pleasing to God for me to engage in this practice.” Frequently, even half-hearted efforts are not attempted. It usually boils down to, “We like it, and we’re going to do it.”
No one has an answer to that attitude because it arises from a stubborn will that will not let go of a practice that cannot be justified—kind of like Israel’s refusal to give up idolatry despite everything that God commanded or taught on the subject through Moses and the prophets. About the only response one can make is to affirm that anyone has the freedom to do whatever he wants, but God will call us all to account for what we have done in our bodies (2 Cor. 5:10).
However, a second response involves an oddity. Even those in the world recognize worldliness for what it is. A Christian who frequently practiced social drinking tried on one occasion to get a fellow-partier to study the Bible with him; the man responded by saying, “Are you serious? You’re as much of a boozer as I am.” It would be nice if that reaction had sobered him up—permanently, but it is unlikely. Many are more committed to their favorite sins than they are to the Lord. The “friend” who spoke so harshly to the “Christian” had no objections to drinking alcohol (especially for himself), but he recognized that this is not proper behavior for one claiming to be a child of God.
Suppose a preacher or his wife had played the lottery and won it. (Actually, one does not need to suppose it; it’s already happened.) How would members of the congregation feel about that individual preaching on Luke 12:15-21, which deals with the warning to be wary of covetousness? Would such a message carry any weight from such a man? Could he quote the verse about the love of money being the root of all kinds of evil (1 Tim. 6:10) without people wondering about him? How about him quoting verse 9 about those who want to be rich falling into temptation? Would not most Christians view him as a hypocrite?
Hi and Lois
So what do those in the world think about modern swimsuits, bikinis, and so on? Most people wear them, but that does not mean they are not aware of the implications of what they are doing. They would not try to excuse themselves by saying, “Oh, some people just have dirty minds,” or with some other red herring. Worldly folks know that the undress at a beach causes lust, but they don’t necessarily object to that. They might think it is wrong for a Christian to participate in it, however. Or maybe they just think it is incongruous.
Sometime last year (June or July) Brian and Greg Walker published an interesting perspective in their daily comic strip, Hi and Lois. Now Hi and Lois and the kids are sometimes at the beach; so the authors probably have no religious or moral objections to being there or to the clothing worn at such locations, but in this comic strip they record what perhaps they think is ironic. It only contains two frames.
In the first one, their cartoon son Chip is walking alongside a girl who identifies herself as Jenny. They are both wearing winter clothing, and snowflakes are falling. She is wearing a snug hat, and he has a baseball cap on, which is turned backward. In the second frame there is snow along the sidewalk; trees and rooftops are also covered. She is wearing a thick coat and boots. He is dressed in street clothes with a scarf around his neck; his footwear appears to be regular shoes. In the first frame, after she introduces herself, Jenny says, “We met at the beach last summer.” Chip says, “Sorry.” Then, in a matter-of-fact manner, he adds in the second frame, “I didn’t recognize you without your bathing suit.”
In the first frame, Jenny’s face is quite friendly, and she is smiling. After Chip’s comment in the second frame, her mouth is down-turned, and her eyes are wide open. Apparently, it has dawned on her that it was not her personality that he had noticed the preceding summer. She may be stupefied, but most people are not. Men (and lads) are attracted to a girl’s figure. Pleasant conversation is just a necessary social requirement. Some have yet to comprehend why so many lie exposed on the sand rather than swimming in the ocean. After all, one could lay out at home.
One church critic said a number of years ago that only members of the churches of Christ referred to beach attire as “bathing suits.” No, even in 2015 non-members still refer to them as such. However, immodesty by any name remains precisely that. So, maybe those who refuse to listen to preachers might take a lesson from the writers of a comic strip who have pointed out a fundamental truth that even those in the world recognize. Going to the beach is about lust—not athletic prowess—or even innocent fun.
Several people said, when homosexual “marriage” was legalized, that the war to have perversion accepted was not over. It has not even taken a year for the next assault on sane-thinking Americans to occur. Our president is pushing really hard for the “rights” of transgenders, even reading into laws what is not there. He apparently has the eyesight of Alice in Wonderland. When asked on one occasion what she saw, she replied, “I see nothing.” “Such marvelous eyesight!” came the response. “To be able to see nothing—and at this distance, too.” The president is seeing problems that do not exist and in his usual dictatorial style is coercing his solutions on states whether citizens want them or not.
He insists that men be allowed to use the ladies’ bathroom—or shower with young women in their locker rooms. When are people going to say, “This is ridiculous, as well as dangerous!” and stand up to a man who has taken upon himself powers that he does not, as president, have? He has politicized the “Justice” department with Eric Holder and continues to do so with the new Attorney General. The IRS has been proven to be prejudiced against those not of the president’s party. Oh, but don’t forget; he promised to get to the bottom of it. Right! On The Charlie Rose Show, writers are laughing about the false claims they made to get Obamacare passed, such as, “If you like your doctor, you can keep your doctor.” They now admit that this and other statements were lies that they used to gain public support.
It is not unusual for elitists to think they can pull the wool over the eyes of the “rubes,” but how often do they admit their lies while they are still in office? And why don’t those taken advantage of muster up a little anger over these tactics? “He who sins is of the devil…” (1 John 3:8). Why are not more people outraged by those who do what the devil, the father of lies, does? Now the elitists are becoming so bold that they no longer feel a need to use much subtlety. They want men to be able to use just any restroom or shower without even a formal intention (such as a doctor’s evaluation that a procedure is in progress) of changing one’s gender, which is both bold and sick.
Ultimately, the goal of such schemes must be the destruction of both Christianity and the family. If it is not the intention, it will nevertheless bring about the same result. It’s time for people to quit obsessing over entertainment and pay attention to what is happening in this nation. It’s time that all people began to read the Bible again and resume standing by God’s standards.
What a power the church would be:
If all of the sleeping folk would wake up,
And all of the lukewarm folk would fire up,
And all the dishonest folk would confess up,
And all the disgruntled folk would sweeten up,
And all the discouraged folk would cheer up,
And all the estranged folk would make up,
And all the gossipers would shut up,
And all the true soldiers would stand up,
And all the church members would pray up,
And all that are in debt would pay up!
Article by T. Pierce Brown
For almost fifty years I have been trying to encourage personal evangelism and soul winning from the classroom and pulpit. I have conducted workshops on personal evangelism and teacher training. I have taught preacher-training classes. In all of these I have tried to emphasize not only proper methods and actions, but especially proper attitudes. I have taught teachers how to use the blackboard, audio visual aids and study materials. I have taught personal evangelists how to sit around the table in an open Bible study, or show a filmstrip.
I have taught preacher students how to walk to the pulpit and breathe properly. I have taught proper methods of study and exegesis. Not only have I dealt with homiletics, hermeneutics and apologetics, I have emphasized the need for understanding general semantics, enunciation, pronunciation, gesticulation and grammar. Especially have I stressed the importance of properly relating the doctrine we teach with the practice we perform.
There is one aspect of the subject of sowing the seed that I have probably neglected as much or more than any other. That aspect is suggested in Psalm 126:5-6, which says, “They that sow in tears shall reap in joy. He that goeth forth and weepeth, bearing seed for sowing, shall doubtless come again with joy, bringing his sheaves with him.”
It is my judgment that much of our failure to produce the great harvest of souls that we should be producing is the failure to feel as deeply as we should the sorrow for and horror of sin and its consequences. Probably one reason we do not feel any more emotion about the sacrifice of Christ is that we do not care enough to cry about those for whom that sacrifice was made. It seems that many of us find it relatively easy to sound like Jesus did in Matthew 23:13 and other places when He said, “Woe unto you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites!” We do not find it as natural to feel as He did in Mark 19:41 when He wept over Jerusalem. Paul said in Acts 20:19 that he had served the Lord with many tears. Far too few of us have.
The tears of which I speak are not tears of disappointment because we are not properly appreciated for our great sacrifices and devotion. They are not tears of frustration because our pet project is not appreciated, applauded and supported as it should be. They are not tears of bereavement for the personal loss of some prized possession or a loved one.
The tears of which I speak, of which we are probably in short supply, are tears of sadness for our own insufficiency, lack of concern and lack of true Christ-likeness. They are tears of compassion as we contemplate the lost condition of the majority of those about us and their consequent destiny.
I have heard church members moaning because the elders do not assign them some official task for which they can get recognition. I have heard some wail because the church does not promote some program to satisfy their desire for entertainment, fellowship or ease. But I have not heard or seen many who go forth sowing the seed of the kingdom, weeping for the lost or weeping in intense awareness of the sacrifice Christ made for us.
A few years ago a man left a congregation because of its lack of spirituality. He said he knew it was not spiritual because he never saw a tear fall or a chin quiver when the Lord’s Supper was taken. I asked him how he knew there were no tears or quivering chins if he was partaking properly. True spirituality is not proven by a tearful eye or a quivering chin. Yet there is little doubt that many professed Christians never feel any more emotion at the contemplation of lost souls or a dying Savior than they would feel if their pet died.
I am not advocating that we cultivate the ability to cry on demand, nor that we equate outward expressions of emotion with true concern. But I am suggesting that, until and unless far more of us who preach, teach classes or do personal evangelism have the kind of feeling and action suggested by David in Psalm 126:5-6, we will not be able to come rejoicing, bringing in the sheaves. As important as techniques and methods are, none of them are as significant as the loving concern that can cause us to weep as we go forth sowing the seed. —Copied
[Editor’s note: T. Pierce Brown preached for the South Seminole Church back in the late ‘70s. He was instrumental in calling attention to the problems associated with the Crossroads movement. His article, “Cultism in the Church,” opened the eyes of a multitude of brethren. It was published in The Gospel Advocate of February 22, 1979. He has also served as a director of personal evangelism and taught up to 3,000 students in Africa by correspondence. He passed to his reward in 2008.]
Article by T. Pierce Brown
Last year I was picking blackberries when an inspiration for an article came to me. I wrote it, but do not remember it being published. Today, however, I went again and was again inspired. It was not the kind of inspiration that Paul had, but it may be worth considering. As I picked berries, the thought occurred to me that there are many lessons that relate to principles of personal evangelism.
First, if you are more concerned with being bitten by chiggers, stung by yellow jackets, scratched by briars or other trivial things, than you are with picking berries, you will never be a great berry picker. If anything is more important to you than glorifying God by being a fisher of men, you will never be a great soul winner.
Second, you may find them where you least expect them. If you are really interested in picking berries, you will discover them by the side of the road, in little patches hidden here and there in the field. They are ready whether you are or not. “But sanctify in your hearts Christ as Lord: being ready always to give answer to every man that asketh you a reason concerning the hope that is in you, yet with meekness and fear” (1 Peter 3:15). You should be ready!
Third, you either get them when they are ripe and ready, or you do not get them. In my 50 years of experience in trying to do personal evangelism, I have noted two significant things, both of which are bad. There are those who are always procrastinating. They plan to try to win a soul for the Lord when the time is ripe. The time never gets ripe, and those who would obey the gospel if it were presented to them are forever lost.
On the other hand, there are those who are so eager to get someone baptized that they “pick them while they are green.” A person who “obeys from the heart the form of doctrine which is delivered unto him” (Romans 6:17-18) and then is made free from sin must first be taught. It is true that he does not need to know all that he will learn in the next 50 years, but he has to understand the facts of the gospel and realize what it means to accept Jesus as Lord. In the 50 years I have been picking blackberries, I never remember picking a green or red one that ever ripened properly. I doubt that I could find many persons who were baptized without having been taught properly who have ever matured properly.
A fourth lesson came to me as I was leaving one clump of vines. I had picked all I saw as I was going in, but as I was coming out, I saw almost as many more. The principle is: If you think you have done all the good you can do by using one approach, and have not been very productive, it might be worthwhile for you to look at things from some other angle. This applies not only to the methodology by which you set up a Bible study, but the techniques by which you study with an individual.
Fifth, occasionally I found a whole bunch that were ripe, and it appeared they could all be picked with one clutch of the hand. Many times, when such is tried, half of them are dropped, and many are mashed into a pulp. It is generally better to pick one at a time, so individual attention can be given to its welfare.
Sixth, learn to stick to one bush until you get the maximum good done. If you are always looking around to find more likely places to find berries, it may be you will cover half an acre and not get a bucket full. There are preachers who almost always think the grass is greener or the field is more productive on the other side of the fence, but one needs to try to finish what he starts to the best of his ability before flitting around.
Seventh, be gentle and careful. It is possible that if you step on all the briars that get in your way, or jerk and slash unnecessarily, you will not only destroy many future plants that would be productive, you will actually shake off many berries you could be picking now. Another interesting side effect may be that one of the briars you jerk around may slip loose and slap you across the face with its sharp thorns. Colossians 4:6 says, “Let your speech be always with grace, seasoned with salt, that ye may know how ye ought to answer each one.” There are many other references that teach the same principle. Many of us feel that most of our remarks to those of other religious persuasions should be seasoned mostly with pepper. [Copied and slightly modified]
At our Evangelistic Review meeting last Sunday afternoon, we discussed several of the efforts various members had been trying of late in order to have Bible studies. This article is to inform the members of the congregation, as well as brethren elsewhere of what is being tried. Several are doing traditional things that we have always done, such as carrying some cards with us, which have information about the church—including its website—in case we get into a conversation and someone asks us for information. Some also carry the tip card, which thanks a server at a restaurant and also invites them to join us for worship. Of course, contacting visitors is an important source. Members have frequently studied the Scriptures with brethren whose attendance has been infrequent and whose involvement has been minimal. Some also contacted those from whom fellowship has been withdrawn.
Back in January, we had our door-knocking campaign, and about one-third of the members went out one or more times. Three have been baptized as a result of those efforts, and four other studies remain in progress. Many hours were spent to find just a few interested people, but that is what it takes in the materialistic world of today. A few Christians have continued this program on their own, spending from one to two hours a week in a territory assigned to them. This part of the city may consist of from 500 to 1,000 houses, but it is exclusively theirs. Some begin by writing down every street number within the parameters. If someone is not home, it will be noted and visited later. Using plastic door hangers, workers are prepared to leave behind something that advertises the church. It may be something the South Seminole Church has produced, or it could be a paper or DVD produced by others. They call back from time to time on those who have shown an interest. (Sometimes it takes several contacts to set up a Bible study.) We have territories available for as many members who volunteer to do this work.
Over the years, at least five have been baptized from the nursing and rehabilitation center where we regularly conduct worship on Sunday afternoons. Three of these have passed on, but for these efforts, they might have entered eternity unprepared. This past Sunday thirty were present. Members who participate in the worship there are assigned to find and bring various patients to the meeting. Many of the residents tell us how much they appreciate us coming and conducting worship. We take some time afterward to visit with them and see who might be interested in a Bible study.
Universities now have a free speech zone, in which students are free to say or distribute whatever they wish. Some of our students have set up a table with various materials available for free. Many students are actually interested in what has been made available to them. A few Bible studies have resulted from this technique. Some of our young people have done the same thing in a park. These efforts have just recently begun, but they look promising.
Another member stands on the corner of a well-traveled intersection where it’s a four-way stop, offering free materials. Yes, the police questioned him, but there was not much they could say, since his sign says, “No Donations Accepted.” He has free materials for those who are interested. Some have expressed interest in, “Why Are There So Many Churches?”; “Where Do We Go When We Die?”; and “Is the Bible From God?”
Those who are Internet savvy make use of Facebook, Tweet, Twitter, Instagram, and other social media that some of us have no clue concerning. However, younger members may be able to use these advantageously. The important thing is that we use our time and resources in spreading the gospel. Each Christian needs to learn to be effective in reaching others.
You must be logged in to post a comment.