Dear Greg,
First, I want to reiterate my congratulations on your appointment to the editorship of the Gospel Advocate. It’s an incredible and well-deserved honor. The Advocate remains highly influential in many segments of the Churches of Christ, and you are in a position to do great good for Jesus.
Now, I’m not going to waste your time with most doctrinal issues where we disagree. We disagree, we both know the arguments, and there’s no value in repeating our disagreements. Rather, I want to take this opportunity to point out some opportunities in areas where we likely agree — or could come to agreement.
Letters to the editor
Every issue of the Advocate includes a page dedicated to letters to the editor. Amazingly, every single letter praises the work of the Advocate. I’ve never seen a published letter that was critical.
However, in every other newspaper and magazine, the letters section is a place for other voices. From small town papers to international publications, the letters section will include both praise and criticism. But the Advocate only publishes praise.
I don’t know how long this practice has been going on, but it is clearly not a healthy practice. It comes across as revealing a deep insecurity — a fear that one word of criticism would somehow damage the work of the Advocate, and surely that’s not an impression the editor would want to leave.
You will come across as more secure in your beliefs if you give voice to those who disagree with you.
History of the Restoration Movement
I appreciate that not everyone is an expert on the history of our Movement, but the Advocate‘s presentation of the Restoration Movement history is too selective in what it teaches. When the Bible tells us about the lives of spiritual heroes, the scriptures tell the unvarnished truth — warts and all. We know the ugliness in the lives of Abraham, Jacob, Judah, Moses, Gideon, Samson, David, and Peter. You see, the point of these stories is that God can do great things through imperfect, fallen men. And that’s a great encouragement.
But to hear the Advocate‘s writers tell us about the Restoration Movement’s heros, every man taught the same thing and agreed with the current editorial position of the Gospel Advocate. But it’s not true.
However, I do have to pause to commend the editors for Jack L. Ray’s article “Faith, Opinion and Charity: Defining Campbell’s Maxim” in the July 2010 issue. It accurately summarizes and interprets Thomas Campbell’s “Declaration and Address,” a founding document of the Restoration Movement, in rejecting human inference as a basis for separating fellowship. Amen! It further interprets “opinion” in the maxim very well —
In faith unity;
In opinion, liberty;
In all things, charity
“Matters of opinion involve the wisdom of men coming from inferences and deductions from Scriptures. This freedom is permitted by God, but these private convictions are not to be imposed on others.” Amen!
Barton W. Stone, Thomas Campbell, Alexander Campbell, and … David Lipscomb are often lauded as heroes of hte faith, and then the next issue those who aren’t baptized for remission of sins are described as alien sinners, enemies of God Almighty. And yet these men were not baptized for remission of sins.
There are in fact many such issues where the 19th Century Restoration Movement leaders disagreed with the current editorial positions of the Advocate. And certainly these men shouldn’t be given apostolic authority! But if men with their beliefs deserve praise from your authors, why treat men who teach the same thing today as alien sinners and enemies of the faith?
I just have the trouble with teaching a doctrine that damns these men to eternal perdition while honoring them as heroes.
The Holy Spirit
Editor H. Leo Boles believed in an “ordinary,” personal indwelling of the Spirit, but Foy Wallace denied that the Spirit indwelled by any means other than representatively through the word. And ever since then, the representative indwelling view has been the official position of the Advocate. And it’s just not true.
Many very conservative preachers have concluded that there is a personal indwelling, and they are right. It’s time for the Gospel Advocate to correct the error taught by Wallace (and many after him), take the Spirit out of retirement, and preach the truth of the matter.
At the least, open the pages of the Advocate to both points of view. Don’t let your readers go another month without the comfort of knowing God lives in them through his Spirit because God wants to help them make it. The Spirit is our Comforter and Helper. It’s time to stop denying our members the comfort and help they so desperately need.
That a boy !! Roll Tide…
Very well written letter. Your words were respectful, kind and well thought out. I hope they will take what you said to heart.
Hi Jay, How’s it been going? Is there a way I can search for my comments on your blog? I want to read some of the other comments in threads I have commented on in the past. Specifically, I want to see if Greg commented in any of the threads I did. Thanks.
Our prayers are to let it be so Jay.
As a side note, I saw somewhere you posted you have arthritis. Have you tried the old remedy of DMSO? I highly recommend it.
I’m afraid there are too many still alive that have written their position in the GA for them to change or allow differences to be published. Their position is clear. Would take a very special person to allow both thinkings.
We’ll see.
I really liked your approach in your letter, Jay. Nice job.
Jay,
An excellent letter — in the spirit of Christ, scriptural, reasonable, courjteous, thoughtful, precise, practical . . . and the adjectives could keep flowing. Your voice carries influence earned by honest, humble engagement over the years. May it now be used of God to accomplish the godly goals intended!
“That a boy !! Roll Tide…” Christian belief is not a big game.
Jay, if your letter is an attempt to open old wounds(and it looks that way to me) of a past debate, I doubt very seriously brother Greg will participate. I know the last show didn’t turn out the way you wished it would, no minds were changed, and most Christians began to avoid it because it became down right ugly. I really doubt anyone wants to participate in something like that again. (that would simply be another divisive tool to deploy)
Now until you can prove you are blessed with something, anything, that those who don’t claim to be indwelled by the “Holy Ghost” aren’t I believe it is a waste of time to consider carrying on this failed argument. I have witnessed good honest Christians on both sides of this argument, that were good servants, and followers of the lord Jesus Christ, and not yet have I seen anything spectacular about those who claim indwellment over those who don’t. I believe both you and I have bodies that are not in the best of health, and I would venture to say we both depend upon human science to prolong a life with as little pain as possible. You who claim the person of God lives in him , and I who believe the spirit lives on this earth through Christians like myself, in our minds not our frail bodies, bodies that depend upon the science of this world. or am I wrong ? you don’t believe in worldly medicines. If the “holy ghost” liven in these old bodies would they be sick, do you remember a time where Jesus was sick, what about the apostles ?
It is strange how people see things differently according to their point of view,
Brother Fudge heaps praise upon Jay for his wordsmanship, and I see it as a slick way not to say what he thinks.
In my opinion the following calls the writers and editor “hypocrites” .
“I just have the trouble with teaching a doctrine that damns these men to eternal perdition while honoring them as heroes.”
And a liar.
“the representative indwelling view has been the official position of the Advocate. And it’s just not true.”
A teacher of false doctrine.
“Don’t let your readers go another month without the comfort of knowing God lives in them through his Spirit because God wants to help them make it. The Spirit is our Comforter and Helper. It’s time to stop denying our members the comfort and help they so desperately need.”
Then he begs, Just let the camels nose under this “hypocritical, lying tent” please.
“At the least, open the pages of the Advocate to both points of view.”
I don’t know the Advocate – but making it another Blog for debating? I Don’t think that’s the vision of this publication. Especially if I were Greg and fully aware of “our” disagreements, then I’d most likely would not open you a door for starting debates on positions “I” regard as unnegotiable.
Alexander
(BTW I am with Jay on the Indwelling of the Spirit – and I don’t know anything about the Advocates position on this)
“Don’t let your readers go another month without the comfort of knowing God lives in them through his Spirit because God wants to help them make it. The Spirit is our Comforter and Helper. It’s time to stop denying our members the comfort and help they so desperately need.”
Could the editor(s) of the Gospel Advocate actually deny its readers the help and comfort of the Holy Spirit? Isn’t the Holy Spirit in them powerful and good enough to help and comfort them regardless of what the GA prints? Doesn’t the Holy Spirit help and comfort believers as soon as they receive him in such a way that they can KNOW that they are being comforted and helped?
Laymond wrote:
“Now until you can prove you are blessed with something, anything, that those who don’t claim to be indwelled by the “Holy Ghost” aren’t I believe it is a waste of time to consider carrying on this failed argument. I have witnessed good honest Christians on both sides of this argument, that were good servants, and followers of the lord Jesus Christ, and not yet have I seen anything spectacular about those who claim indwellment over those who don’t.”
Seriously….
I can’t help but believe this was written to agitate, or aggravate the disagreement between Christians, that is not a matter of salvation, What difference can it possibly make whether you get your faith from reading the scriptures, or feel that “the holy spirit” has his hands on the steering wheel of your salvation.
As long as we both follow the example Jesus set, and gave a map leading toward God. I am one who likes proof of what someone tells me, I can give proof for what I believe, and why. I am still waiting on that proof from the “indwelled” crowd.
Points 1 & 2 I can see where he might be willing to admit room for improvement. Point #3 wouldn’t likely be in the category of things you agree on or things he is likely to change his mind on any time soon or because of a letter. So I was with you up to that point.
It is important that we open ourselves up to criticism. It is one more way to help understand yourself better and it helps you see how people perceive you and understand what it is you are communicating. For instance, if I never got any negative feedback from my wife or close friends I would probably figure I didn’t really need to improve anything or at least that there are areas I don’t communicate very well on. Feedback of all sorts should be welcome and transparent. That is one reason I very, very rarely delete comments on my blog (only on 1 post ever).
Another thing – since Paul said that he could do all things through Christ who strengthened him, don’t those who deny the indwelling of Jesus thereby deny people the strengthening they so desperately need? Or, is denying the “indwelling” of the Holy Spirit just a whole lot worse than denying the indwelling of Jesus?
Also, do those of us who believe that the Holy Spirit indwells the children of God to give them the help and comfort they so desperately need, believe that the children of God throughout the entire OT did not have the help and comfort that they desperately needed? Or did they not need any help and comfort?
Did God expect a lot less love and faithfulness of his children prior to Pentecost? Did he expect a lot less fruit of the spirit back then since they supposedly didn’t/couldn’t ever have the help and comfort of the Spirit back then?
Hank,
It is possible for Christ to strengthen us without him indwelling us. The difference with the Holy Spirit is that there are some verses that say believers receive the Spirit or that we are the temple of the Spirit who is in us. I guess the whole thing hinges on what “in” means or whether or not we feel like that ended along with spiritual gifts.
Also, it seems like you are trying to even out the OT and NT on these things but the Bible is pretty clear that many things changed when the new covenant changed. So it is not beyond the realm of possibility that God does something in the NT that he didn’t do int he OT and that the difference could lead us to a fuller appreciation of and application of various things like the fruits of the Spirit. We could all list many examples of that.
“However, in every other newspaper and magazine, the letters section is a place for other voices. From small town papers to international publications, the letters section will include both praise and criticism. But the Advocate only publishes praise.”
First of all, I don’t believe that the editor(s) of the GA consider their publication to be akin to “every other newspaper and magazine” insofar as the mission of the GA is to maintain “…the doctrine of salvation through the gospel of the grace of God.” IOW, unlike the St. Pete Times, they are not concerned with soliciting and propagating the views and teachings which they consider false.
Second of all, there are scores and scores of religious papers, websites, etc, that like the GA, aren’t really trying to publicize opposing views and criticisms. In fact, likely most of them. Just try and find a Baptist journal wherein they are happy to print letters criticizing any of their particular religious beliefs. Assuming your church (congregation) has a website, does it regularly post letters and emails of people who have visited and wish to explain why they’ll never com back? Or about the points they disagreed with in the sermon? And I trust tat there are a fair number of “less conservative” publications who choose not to publish criticisms from its readers who object to its positions.
Thirdly, the papers, websites, etc. that do wish to print opposing views and ideas are usually benefited by such. Take this blog here. Were you to decide to only allow favorable opinions to yours, the traffic would come to a screeching halt. Its a different animal.
Jay’s diary reminds me how interconnected we still are: during this time, I went to Lipscomb with Greg, and Jack Ray was the pulpit minister at my parents’ home congregation of Northside in Nashville.
It’s a small world.
Romans 8:8-9 “Those who are in the flesh cannot please God. You, however, are not in the flesh but in the Spirit, if in fact the Spirit of God dwells in you. Anyone who does not have the Spirit of Christ does not belong to him.” —-Wow..I’d say it matters..
Laymond…whose wounds ?? The wounds of those that we told to be quiet and accept the things taught to them ?? The wounds of those who found out they were teaching incorrectly ?? Why should pain and hurt be swept under the rug ?? Seems like that has worked about as well as one would suspect it would….
At least Jay was pro-active in wanting to see if a “new day” was upon us…One of healing and reconciliation…. or just the same ole same old…. Did anybody else write a letter to encourage, exhort or edify this new person ?? Does anyone else care what this guy approves of in print under the guise of representing the collective thought of the conservative arm of the CoC…unofficially that is… sounds a lot like a denomination if you’re not careful…
Matt wrote:
“It is possible for Christ to strengthen us without him indwelling us. The difference with the Holy Spirit is that there are some verses that say believers receive the Spirit or that we are the temple of the Spirit who is in us. I guess the whole thing hinges on what “in” means or whether or not we feel like that ended along with spiritual gifts.”
I know. And there are verses that just as clearly say that Christ is “in” his disciple (both before and after Pentecost). And if “it is possible for Christ to strengthen us without him indwelling us”, why is it not possible that the Holy Spirit could help and encourage us likewise? Why when the Bible says that Christ is “in” us and that he helps us do we deny that he is actually “in” us and argue that he can help us even though he isn’t? But when it comes to the Holy Spirit, we inconsistently decide that the word “in” means a different “in” that it does when speaking of Jesus, and that for the Holy Spirit to help us, unlike Jesus, the HS has to be “literally” and “personally” in us to do what he says he does? Why not be consistent?
Having said that, and while I have no real problem with your understanding of the matter, it is slightly offensive to read where Jay writes that those who believe differently from him (regarding the HS) are “denying our members the comfort and help they so desperately need.”
Which, it that is true (because some don’t believe that the HS is “personally” in them), then why is he not guilty of denying the strengthening of Jesus since he denies that Jesus is “personally” in men? Again, the word of God declares that Christ is “in” and that he “dwells in” believers every bit as clearly as it says those things about the Spirit.
You also wrote:
“Also, it seems like you are trying to even out the OT and NT on these things but the Bible is pretty clear that many things changed when the new covenant changed. So it is not beyond the realm of possibility that God does something in the NT that he didn’t do int he OT and that the difference could lead us to a fuller appreciation of and application of various things like the fruits of the Spirit. We could all list many examples of that.”
But, in the list of things you see God doing different for people after Pentecost, do you include God “enabling/empowering believers to love him and their neighbors more”?
I mean, just how different was the fruit that the blessed man of Psa. 1 could (was expected to) produce than the fruit able to be produced from us today?
And now that I have a son of my own, I believe that he will be just as able to produce the fruit of the spirit before he is lost as he will after he is saved.
But, my main point is that the ones who interpret the same words differently when they speak about Jesus than when they speak about the Holy Spirit are the ones who are being less consistent. Although I don’t consider them any less Christian or that they are denying people the power of God (although sometimes that ends up happening – when they end up waiting for the Spirit to change them).
Matt,
Mac Deaver, who participated with me in GraceConversation along with Greg Tidwell and Phil Sanders, has publicly endorsed the personal indwelling of the Spirit. (Sadly, men who teach a personal indwelling are often condemned for their views. Indeed, Mac Deaver has been labeled “apostate” by the Contending for the Faith group for his views on the Spirit. http://www.churchesofchrist.com/lectures2011.php)
I’m unaware of Greg having presented his own views to the public, but it’s doubtlessly true that the are contributors to the Advocate who accept a personal indwelling. It’s no longer true that conservative preachers necessarily teach word-only or even that writers in the Advocate advocate for word only.
I would not be so quick to assume that Greg is unwilling to allow the Spirit’s personal indwelling to be discussed in the pages of the Advocate.
John,
Since you have your own WordPress blog, there is such a feature. Go to an administrative page. In the upper left corner, click on “Me.” A drop down list gives you several choices, including “Track My Comments.” That should do the trick!
Jay,
I don’t know of any brethren who have an issue with others merely because of believing in a “personal” indwelling of the Spirit. As far as I know, even the guys who have publicly debated Mac work with, respect, and support scores and scores of men who believe in the “personal” indwelling. The problem (in their estimation) has only come when people who have believed and taught that said indwelling had taken it “too far” (which was what was alleged of Mac). But, I don’t believe any of those men had/have a problem with believing in the personal indwelling per se (ie, a Wayne Jackson). At least, that is how it has appeared to me.
I guess I assumed you were disagreeing with his view. I re-read it and see that was very much an assumption. I don’t know his view either. Thanks for pointing that out.
Back to Hank’s point about how we don’t take the indwelling of Christ the same as the indwelling of the Spirit…Jesus taught that he was in the disciples in John 14, 16 but he also taught it was necessary that he went away so that the Spirit would come and be “in” them (See 16:7). He also uses a lot of interchangeable language between himself, the Father and the Spirit in those chapters.
– 14:10 – Jesus is in the Father and the Father is in him
– Same in 14:11
– 14:17 – the Spirit lives with them and “will be” in them
– 14:20 – “On that day you will realize that I am in my Father, and you are in me, and I am in you.”
– 14:26 – The Spirit comes in the name of Jesus
– 17:11 – Jesus is no longer “in the world”
17:21 – Jesus is in the Father and the Father is in Jesus
So Jesus is in us, we are in him, the Father is in Jesus and Jesus is in the Father and the Spirit is in us…I mean, if you want a complete view you could conclude a trinitarian indwelling as how can you separate any of these things out like we do? I am not going that route but just saying that in these scriptures the Father, Son and Spirit are inextricably tied together. We like to separate them to try to understand their various roles.
I will have to think about that some more but I am curious what other readers here think about Hank’s point on that matter.
Matt….assuming Romans 8:9 is not some culturally applicable only statement, then the indwelling of the Holy Spirit is necessary to “belong to Christ.” That poses an interesting question to those that believe baptism is what saves….and really to those of us who believe Grace through Faith saves ….either way…without the indwelling of the Holy Spirit we, according to this passage, do NOT belong to Christ… That causes me to appreciate that it is once again God’s mercy and grace that we are part of this whole thing…We could hardly demand that God indwell us…but it is obviously necessary to belong to Him…
It would be an odd argument indeed to speak to being “saved” because we were baptized but at the same time deny the indwelling of the Holy Spirit… IMHO
Jay;
Many thanks for your kind words.
Did you know, by the way, that the Gospel Advocate Co. keeps H. Leo Boles’ book on the Holy Spirit in print?
Best wishes,
GA Tidwell
Matt, it depends on what the word “in” means 🙂
You are a more generous man than I, Gregory Alan Tidwell
I believe that is proof that a good Christian spirit lives in you.
good luck on the new service given you to do.
Price,
As I mentioned above it is really interesting how interchangeable Paul and Jesus talk about God, Jesus and the Spirit. Go even broader than just Rom 8:9,
“9 You, however, are not in the realm of the flesh but are in the realm of the Spirit, if indeed the Spirit of God lives in you. And if anyone does not have the Spirit of Christ, they do not belong to Christ. 10 But if Christ is in you, then even though your body is subject to death because of sin, the Spirit gives life[d] because of righteousness. 11 And if the Spirit of him who raised Jesus from the dead is living in you, he who raised Christ from the dead will also give life to your mortal bodies because of[e] his Spirit who lives in you. ”
Here you have the Spirit of Christ, the Spirit, and the Spirit of God and they all seem to mean the same thing in this passage. So to Hank’s point about why don’t we believe in an indwelling Christ since the language is the same it could well be that the indwelling of the Holy Spirit is seen by Christ as partly that.
Romans 8:9-11 says that we only have life due to the Spirit being in us. That seems pretty concrete to me. It also says that believers are to be in the realm of the Spirit rather than the realm of the flesh and that happens when the Spirit is in us…not near us or around us or through reading the Bible alone but by the Spirit being in us. It is amazing to me that we systematize so many things together, plans of salvation, ways to worship, etc but we have a hard time systematizing the role of the Spirit in a way that is consistent with scripture. I think it is because we have a heritage that so much wants to have things figured out and locked down that the Spirit so much defies that so we mentally keep the Spirit at arm’s length.
To Hank’s point…just because someone doesn’t understand the Spirit indwells them doesn’t mean the Spirit can’t. I think that is where we have to land on this issue. Just like with baptism…I can’t get re-baptized every time I learn something new about baptism but that doesn’t mean my baptism wasn’t real. So it is with the Spirit…if we have to understand the Spirit perfectly for the Spirit to work in whatever ways the Spirit needs to work then we are all in trouble! So we will disagree on this but the Spirit will keep doing what the Spirit does,
“5 Jesus answered, “Very truly I tell you, no one can enter the kingdom of God unless they are born of water and the Spirit. 6 Flesh gives birth to flesh, but the Spirit gives birth to spirit. 7 You should not be surprised at my saying, ‘You must be born again.’ 8 The wind blows wherever it pleases. You hear its sound, but you cannot tell where it comes from or where it is going. So it is with everyone born of the Spirit.”” – John 3:5-8
Matt I wouldn’t dare try and disagree with what you wrote. I certainly think that the Bible speaks to the Father, Son and Spirit being “one”…whatever that means is probably beyond description…I always considered them as having different roles… But, I am at a total loss to try and put a definition on God… All I know is that HE, however that is defined, was promised to us as a Paraclete therefore I believe that it must be so…
All I know to say to those who cannot accept God living in the child of God is that any god that is seen as over or up there while we are over here is a very small god.
You say, “but God is in heaven”. Heaven is not a locality. Heaven is where God is. And God is not only “Beyond the asur blue”, but within all. We become aware of this when we become aware of being children of God.
This may be too much for many within the legalistic or fundamentalist church to Grasp, but Thomas Merton said that we are not truly aware of God until we are aware that God is closer to us than we are to ourselves. That does not mean that God is sitting a literal throne in a place far, far away, thinking to self, “Yes, indeed, I know them”. It means that God and God’s are one. Jesus taught this when he fed and healed the masses; that they were children of the Father, one with him and the Father. They felt far, far away already…and alone.
Jay;
In your characterization of the Gospel Advocate you are highly selective in your presentation of its history. I would say your distortions are unfounded and unkind.
In particular, when you said “Foy Wallace denied that the Spirit indwelled by any means other than representatively through the word. And ever since then, the representative indwelling view has been the official position of the Advocate,” You were not telling the truth. (I am not saying that this was intentional, but what you said is not true.)
Please refer to F. Furman Kearley’s book, God’s Indwelling Spirit, if you want a more complete understanding of this matter. Furman, of course, was the editor of the Gospel Advocate, and this excellent study was published by the Gospel Advocate Company.
GA Tidwell
Regarding the indwelling of the HS Laymond wrote the following: “You who claim the person of God lives in him , and I who believe the spirit lives on this earth through Christians like myself, in our minds not our frail bodies, bodies that depend upon the science of this world. or am I wrong ? you don’t believe in worldly medicines. If the “holy ghost” liven in these old bodies would they be sick, do you remember a time where Jesus was sick, what about the apostles ?”
In the scriptures we see people healed by Jesus as well as the apostles. We even see what I’ll cal prayer cloths taken to people in order to heal them. However, we also see that Paul had a thorn in the flesh that was not healed. I believe it was Paul that instructed Timothy to have some wine for his ailments. Note that Paul did NOT send Timothy a prayer cloth.
I doubt many here would argue that wine is more effective than prayer, the HS or the power of God however it might be exercised. I simply wish to point out there may have been a false dichotomy presented the quote above.
Cheers,
Randall
Jay,
I commend you for your fine letter. Greg is a good man and I’m sure he will take this in the spirit given.
Two quick things. 1) I am quite certain that Greg believes in the personal indwelling of the Holy Spirit.
2) H. Leo Boles theology of the Spirit was anemic at best. In his book, that Greg has pointed out is kept in print by the GA, … I say let it go out Greg!! Reprint K. C. Moser instead!!! Boles believes in a “representative” indwelling of the Spirit not a personal indwelling of the Spirit. He writes in his book The Holy Spirit
“Neither God nor Christ dwells personally in us. God is in his heavens and Christ is at the right hand of God.”
God & Christ dwell in Christians representatively through the Spirit. And the Spirit likewise dwells through a representative and not literally or personally.
“As God and Christ dwell in us through the Holy Spirit, so the Holy Spirit dwells in us through his agent, the word of truth.”
Boles comes very close however to identifying the Spirit and the word …
The indwelling is practically reduced to what Boles calls “faithfulness.”
“The more faithful a Christian is the more of the Spirit of Christ he has; the more consecrated Christians are the richer and fuller are the blessings of the Holy Spirit”
Quotations from The Holy Spirit: His Personality, Nature, Work pp. 207-209.
I agree with the plea … let us have better articles on the Holy Spirit. 🙂
Shalom,
Bobby Valentine
If one doesn’t have the indwelling of the Spirit, he or she won’t get it (the indwelling) simply by discussion or Bible study. if one has it, she or he will evidence it whether able to explain it like a scholar or not.