What is the issue? An exclusive pattern is claimed for caring for the needy and for cooperation in evangelism. Propositions reflect this prejudice and divisive position. It is contrary to the Scripture for churches of Christ to build and maintain benevolent organizations for the care of the needy, such as Boles Home, Tipton Home, Tennessee Orphan Home, Childhaven, and other Orphan Homes and Homes for the Aged that are among us. Affirmative: Roy E. Cogdill, Negative: Guy N. Woods.

Again, they affirm in a negative way: The scriptures teach that congregation "A" may not (does not have the right to) contribute to (send money to) congregation "B" for the purpose of preaching the gospel of Christ." (This is the proposition from the Deaver-Hogland Debate held in Pensacola, Florida, July 18-21, 1977. Hogland affirmed and Deaver Denied.)

In benevolence the theory holds that a congregation may support only a saint. Some at one time would permit an individual to support a private orphan home. Most today hold that the home itself is wrong. (See the article by brother Brian Kenyon in the January 1997, Harvesters.)

In evangelism the theory holds that a congregation may send money to a preacher only. They assert that it is a sin to send money to another congregation for the purpose of preaching the gospel.

There is no exclusive pattern for evangelism. God has left us with expedient judgments in the matter of "how" we take the gospel to the world.

Supposed proof text: I robbed other churches, taking wages of them, to do you service (II Cor. 11:8). "Anti" brethren say they believe in church cooperation and cite this as proof of the exclusive pattern idea. This is not church cooperation. This is a church support of a preacher. In reality, given their position, there could be no church cooperation. The argument meets them for it is the case that churches sent to Paul in order to make it possible for him to be of service to the church at Corinth, so from their would be proof text churches can render assistance to one another in spiritual matters.

For proof that one church may send to another church in spiritual matters I offer the following proof: Read Acts 15:22-32. What does the passage say? (1) It tells us that the Jerusalem church chose men to be sent to Antioch, verse 22. (2) It tells us that the Jerusalem church prepared an epistle to be sent to the brethren of Antioch, Syria, and Cilicia, verse 23. (3) It tells us that Judas and Silas, brethren sent by Jerusalem, were to tell by word of mouth the brethren of Antioch the same things as those contained in the epistle, verse 27. (4) It tells us that the brethren, Paul and Barnabas, Judas and Silas, went to Antioch. There, they gathered the multitude, the church, together and delivered to them the epistle, verse 30. (5) It tells us that Judas and Silas exhorted the brethren of Antioch, verse 32. (6) It tells us that "They wrote thus by them"—"dia Cheiros," verse 23. This is the same as in Acts 11:30, "by the hand of" Barnabas and Paul.

What the passage shows. (1) This passage shows that one church can scripturally send some of its own men to render assistance to another church. A church has the right to support those whom it sends out. In fact, a church should do this, unless in a particular case there is some good reason for not doing it. (2) This passage shows that the assistance which one church may give to another church may involve spiritual matters. (3) This passage shows that one church may send a writing to another church. This writing may involve spiritual matters. This shows that a church may send a tract to another church. If a church may send one tract to another church, it may send a number of tracts to another church, so long as it is expedient to the cause of Christ to do so. (4) This passage shows then, in the light of the fact that a church may send a number of tracts to another church, that church may send funds to another church so that the receiving church may use those funds in the purchase of writings which involve spiritual matters. This simply means that one church may send funds to another church so that the receiving church may purchase tracts. (5) This passage shows that, in the light of point number four, if a church may send funds so that tracts may be purchased, the sa me principle which allows this would also allow radio time to be purchased. (6) This passage shows that Bible teachings on this matter in general—the church sending men as well as written material. There is no single "pattern"—no "exclusive pattern" in the matter of one church helping another church. The assistance may be either men or other matters. It may involve physical needs or spiritual needs. (7) This passage shows that a church may act "through the hand of" a number of men. This passage de- clares this in verse 23, in which we have the expression "dia cheiros." This same expression is in Acts 11:30. Here it is translated "by the hand of." In 15:23, the same expression is translated "by them." At any rate, we know that in chapter fifteen, the church wrote to the church in Antioch "by the hand of" these messangers. (adapted from Thomas B. Warren, Church Cooperation and Orphan Homes, pp. 76-78.)

Some seek to avoid the teaching by the following: (1) They say these were sent by the apostles; but the record says the whole church was involved (15:22). (2) Some will say, yes, but this was inspired material. If that makes it wrong, one could not even send a Bible to another church—who can believe it?

(Here, I have borrowed from brother Roy Deaver and The Spiritual Sword, (February 1958), pp. 1, 7.) Consequences that follow from the position that the church cannot render assistance to another church in spiritual matters: (1) One church cannot send a New Testament to another church. (2) A church can send to a preacher who needs a church, but cannot send to a church which needs a preacher. (3) One church cannot lend chairs, song books, etc. to another church in connection with a gospel meeting. (4) One church cannot allow its preacher (while continuing his support) to assist another church in a Vacation Bible School. (5) One church could never help another church to build a church building. (6) One church could never help another church carry on a radio program.

Some consequences that a church can render assistance to another church only in connection with physical necessities are as follows: (1) This denies the fundamental Bible teaching that benevolence is a means of evangelism (Matt. 5:16). (2) It makes a distinction between benevo-lence and evangelism which the Bible does not make. (3) It is a system of rank materialism in that it elevates the body above the soul. May a church help another church in connection with feeding the body (of its own mem-bers), but not in connection with feeding the soul?

And when Silas and Timotheus were come from Macedonia, Paul was pressed in the spirit, and testified to the Jews that Jesus was Christ (Acts 18:5). The historical setting of this is the following: I robbed other churches, taking wages of them, to do you service. And when I was present with you, and wanted, I was chargeable to no man: for that which was lacking to me the brethren which came from Macedonia supplied: and in all things I have kept myself from being burdensome unto you, and so will I keep myself (II Cor. 11:8-9).

If this is true, brethren at Philippi kept books on the account from other churches and the distribution made to Paul. Now ye Philippians know also, that in the beginning of the gospel, when I departed from Macedonia, no church communicated with me as concerning giving and receiving, but ye only (Phil. 4:15). In the same letter Paul mentions the long and continued association of the church at Philippi with his work. He sends thanks to them in these words: For your fellowship in the gospel from the first day until now (Phil. 1:5). Yet above, he stated that he had robbed other churches to do free service to Corinth.

Consider the following Commentary on "giving and receiving" (1) But he now expresses himself in the technical language of business: 'as regards an account of giving and receiving,' i.e., as opening a ledger account with credit and debit columns. (R. C. H. Lenski, The Interpretation of St. Paul's Epistles to the Galatians to the Ephesians and to the Philippians, p. 893.) (2) . ,. . . giving and receiving, debit and credit Phil 4:15. (Arndt and Gingrich, A Greek-English Lexicon of the New Testament and Other Early Christian Literature (Second Edition), pp. 204-205.) (3) . [µ] , an account of giving and receiving [i.e. debit and credit accounts. . .], Phil. iv.15; here Paul, by a pleasant euphemism, refers to the pecuniary gifts, which the church bestowing them enters in the account of expenses, but he himself in the account of receipts; . . . (Thayer, Greek-English Lexicon of the New Testament, p. 157).

Brethren, The Bible does not provide an exclusive pattern for evangelism. Those who divide the church over their false assertions are called upon to repent of their wrongs. The principles of evangelism and orphan care which have been upheld have been shown to be in harmony with the teaching of the Bible.

At the present time there are many that hold to these doctrines but some are showing signs of not making them tests of fellowship. This may be good but a word of caution is in order. If those seeking fellowship are acknowledging the element of expediency this is good. If they are seeking unity in diversity they are to be avoided. You can not be sure that once the door is open they will once again divide congregations over man-made hobbies.

There is a current false position being circulated which asserts that all evangelism (including training preachers) must be under an eldership. We have had men refuse to speak on our programs because the school here is under a board of directors. However, it does not seem to hinder them speaking at other schools.