Preaching the Truth

[Resource Manager]

On the evening following the day on which Doris Hamilton and her father had the conversation at the breakfast table, Paul Stephanas, after a hard day’s work at the shop, was busily engaged preparing notes for his talk at the schoolhouse Saturday night.

 

A knock at the door brought Mrs. Stephanas from the kitchen; on opening the door she was surprised to see Timothy Berea, who inquired if Mr. Stephanas was home. Mrs. Stephanas assured him that her husband was home and would be glad to see him. Timothy was ushered into the sitting room where the blacksmith was seated with his Bible open before him and after the usual salutations, Timothy began at once to state the object of his visit.

 

“You will be surprised,” he said, “when I tell you what I have come to see you about; you may not be aware of the fact but your preaching and your conversations at the forge with those who come into your shop have become a source of alarm to some of our leading church members. They seem to fear that your doctrines will cause some of the weaker members to leave the church and believe the things which you teach.”

 

“I sincerely hope.” said Paul, “that not only some of the weaker members, but some of those who are considered ‘pillars’ will have their eyes opened to God’s everlasting Truth and will have the courage to face any opposition that may come as a result of their acceptance of that Truth.”

 

“From your point of view that is quite right,” said Timothy, “but still from their point of view, you can hardly blame them for being somewhat alarmed when they see indications of an undermining influence at work.”

 

“Yes, but all my efforts have been open and above board. I have spoken openly and have invited discussion and have always stood ready to answer questions as far as I was able to do so,” said Paul.

 

“I quite agree with you Mr. Stephanas,” said Timothy, “you have struck out from the shoulder and I can personally testify that I have felt the force of some of your blows; but what I wish to speak about is this. The religious equanimity of this community has been disturbed by your preaching of what you call ‘The Truth,’ and a plan has been evolved by which your teaching can be put to the test to see whether it really is ‘The Truth’ and I have come tonight to see whether you will agree to the arrangement. To come directly to the point, Mr. Stephanas, it becomes my duty to ask you to engage in a debate upon the doctrinal points you have raised with Mr. Hamilton, the pastor of our village church. What do you say?”

 

Paul Stephanas was so much surprised that he could not for a moment find words to answer; recovering from his surprise, however, he said: “Well, I don’t know, Mr. Berea, you see I am only a poor mechanic with very little education, while Mr. Hamilton is a learned man and therefore has a great advantage over me; would it not be better for me to send for one of our brethren who is better educated and who could meet Mr. Hamilton on more equal ground?”

 

“I don’t think that would do at all,” said Timothy. “You are the one concerned in this controversy and I think it devolves upon you to support the position you have taken and for you to show that it is Scriptural.”

[Resource Manager]

“Well.” said Paul. “I have no desire to run away, but I believe in giving the truth the best possible chance by putting its best exponent to the front; however, if it must devolve upon me to defend it, I will with God’s help do my best, and I can assure you I am ready in my own humble and unlearned way to give to every man that asketh, a reason for the hope that is within me, with meekness and fear.”

 

“Past experience,” said Timothy, “has led me to believe that you will give a good account of your stewardship. It has been suggested that the debate take place in the schoolhouse next week, beginning Tuesday evening and to continue as many evenings as may be necessary. However, if you wish more time to prepare, we can arrange it for a later date.”

 

“It makes no difference to me,” said Paul, “I am ready at any time. What is to be the subject of the discussion?”

 

“It has been suggested.” said Timothy, “that the first night be taken up with the subject of the reward of the righteous; the proposition would read thus:

 

“Resolved, That the Righteous are Rewarded by being taken Heaven at Death; Mr. Hamilton affirms; Mr. Stephanas denies.”

 

“That will suit me very well,” said Paul.

 

“Well. I must hurry over to Mr. Hamilton’s and tell him of your acceptance of the arrangement.” said Timothy, rising to go “Have you any suggestion as to a chairman for the evening?” he continued as they walked to the door together.

 

“I can think of no one but yourself. Mr. Berea. You know I have no friends here,” said Paul.

 

“Well, we will see about that later,” said Timothy. “Good night and don’t forget Tuesday night! The whole village will be there.”

 

Timothy went directly to the Hamilton residence and reported his success in getting Mr. Stephanas to agree to a debate. It was Doris who had requested him to see the blacksmith and make arrangements with him, after her father had reluctantly consented to engage in a public discussion.

 

That evening arrangements were made to have Timothy preside throughout the debate.

 

Mr. Hamilton was far from being enthusiastic about it; he acted like a man who was about to go through an unpleasant experience, which he could find no way to evade. Nevertheless he was determined to do his duty as he saw it plainly before him.

 

The debate was announced at the schoolhouse on Saturday night, at the close of Paul Stephanas’s lecture which was well attended.

 

It was also announced on Sunday morning at the village church, after which it became the one great subject of conversation throughout the village.

[Resource Manager]

CHAPTER EIGHT

 

The Great Debate

 

Never in the history of the village, at least not within the memory of any of the villagers, had such an audience assembled as that which was found trying to crowd into the little schoolhouse on Tuesday night, the first night of the debate.

 

The schoolhouse was inadequate to accommodate them: many who could not find standing room were forced to go away disappointed.

 

When the hour arrived for opening the debate, Timothy Berea arose and made a few remarks, stating the cause and object of the debate, the form and rules of the discussion, with a word of counsel to the debaters and to the audience to be calm and to preserve strict order.

 

He said, “Mr. Hamilton will speak on the affirmative twenty minutes, after which Mr. Stephanas will speak twenty minutes on the negative; Mr. Hamilton can then occupy fifteen minutes in questioning Mr. Stephanas or in a speech, after which Mr. Stephanas can occupy fifteen minutes in questioning Mr. Hamilton or in speaking.”

 

It was to be decided at the close of each meeting whether the subject was to be discussed further at another meeting or not.

 

The subject was then announced “Resolved, That the Righteous Are Rewarded By Being Taken To Heaven At Death.”

 

The chairman called upon Mr. Hamilton to open the discussion with a speech of twenty minutes on the affirmative.

 

Mr. Hamilton commenced: “Beloved parishioners, it is with feelings of regret and humiliation that I stand before you at this time, under these circumstances. Regret, that a discussion of this kind should be made necessary, or at least considered necessary by those who have urged me to take part in it. Humiliation, because the dignity of the high and holy office to which I have been called in the ministry, should suffer by its occupant taking part in a public argument with a layman who, well meaning though he may be, is nevertheless illiterate and forty-six unlearned in all those holy studies that are necessary to the proper understanding and correct interpretation of the Divine Word.

 

“You may think this an uncharitable and irrelevant statement, but I can assure you I mean no unkindness and the statement is quite relevant because it forms an important part of my argument tonight. The point is this, being unlearned in theological studies my opponent is unqualified to give an interpretation that will withstand the onslaughts of adverse criticism and which can be depended upon to be in harmony with the whole system of Scriptural theology. You will see how strong this argument is as I proceed and show you the great amount of study and labour that has been necessary to obtain the knowledge we now have.

 

“Do you see that pile of books over there on the table? Don’t be alarmed. I am not going to read them to you tonight. I have brought them to give you some idea of the great amount of labour and study a clergyman must undergo before he is qualified for the ministry and fit to expound the Scriptures and preach the gospel. In that pile the following sciences are contained in their respective volumes: ‘Bible Criticism, to ascertain the exact time of certain works claiming to be inspired, and if possible their time, place and human authorship; ‘Apologetics, to establish and defend the claim of the Scriptures to inspiration: ‘Hermeneutics,’ to investigate the principles of interpretation; ‘Exegesis,’ to carry those principles into practice by actual interpretation. And so I might continue and speak of other volumes on ‘Dogmatic Theology,’ ‘Polemic Theology,’ ‘Practical Theology,’ and ‘Pastoral Theology,’ etc., and with all this we are none too well equipped for the great work of defending and expounding the Scriptures. How then can an ordinary blacksmith who has not had access to these studies, be depended upon to preach the truth of God? I say it is an unthinkable absurdity.

[Resource Manager]

“But let me proceed to the Scriptures themselves and show how clearly they teach what our proposition affirms. I will not repeat the arguments I presented in my sermon last week upon this subject; it is not necessary to do so for there is plenty of evidence to choose from, For instance the Master, in that grand and eloquent sermon on the mount said ‘Blessed are the pure in heart for they shall see God’ (Matt. 5:8). Now I ask, how can they see God unless they are taken up to Him? They cannot see Him with mortal eyes and in this fleshly tabernacle. When can they see Him? Certainly not during this life: it must be at death when they receive their reward in heaven. Oh! But my opponent says they are not going to heaven! Well, I am glad we don’t have to take his word for it! The Master did not leave us in doubt about it; he not only told us that the pure in heart would see God, but he indicates how and when, in both this and other discourses recorded in the New Testament.

 

“In the same chapter at the twelfth verse he says ‘Rejoice and be exceeding glad for great is your reward in heaven for so persecuted they the prophets which were before you.’

 

“When will the pure in heart see God then? The obvious answer is when they receive their great reward in heaven.

 

“Well, when do they go to heaven? Answer: ‘at death.’

 

“How do we know this? Christ has said so. Turn with me to the 16th chapter of Luke, verse 20. Here the Master is relating the incident of the rich man and Lazarus, the poor beggar. Let us read from the 20th verse, ‘And there was a certain beggar named Lazarus which was laid at his gate full of sores, and desiring to be fed with the crumbs which fell from the rich man’s table: moreover the dogs came and licked his sores. And it came to pass that the beggar died and was carried by the angels into Abraham’s bosom; the rich man also died and was buried.’ In the dialogue which follows between Abraham and the rich man who finds himself after death in torment, the following words are addressed to the rich man in verse 25, ‘But Abraham said, son, remember that thou in thy lifetime receivedst thy good things and likewise Lazarus evil things; but now he is comforted and thou art tormented.’ Could anything be more conclusive than this? A righteous man dies and is carried by the angels to Abraham’s bosom and is comforted,

 

“I see my time is near expired and I want to give my opponent some questions to answer before I close. I want him to tell me why Paul said ‘For me to live is Christ and to die is gain,’ and that he had ‘a desire to depart and to be with Christ which is far better,’ if he did not expect to be with Christ when he departed? (Phil. 1:21-23). Why did the faithful ones look for a city that hath foundations whose maker and builder is God if they didn’t expect to go to heaven? (Heb. 11:10). And if it is argued that this is a city on earth, then why does the apostle in speaking of it in the same chapter at the 16th verse say, ‘but now they desire a better country, that is an heavenly, wherefore God hath prepared for them a city’.” Time called.

 

When the clergyman took his seat there was a burst of applause from the audience, which was interrupted by the chairman who asked the audience to desist from noisy demonstrations. “Let us be calm,” he said, “and weight well the arguments that are set forth and let our judgment of the debate be based not upon partisan feelings but upon reason, common sense and above all the testimony of the Word of God.” He then called upon Mr. Stephanas to speak for 20 minutes on the negative side of the question. Paul Stephanas thereupon arose and addressed the audience.

[Resource Manager]

“Mr. Chairman, Ladies and Gentlemen:

 

“I am called upon for the first time in my life to take part in a public debate; and while to all appearances I am at a great disadvantage, both as to training and natural fitness, yet I do not share the feelings of my opponent who said at the beginning of his speech, ‘It is with feelings of regret and humiliation that I stand before you at this time under these circumstances.’ I confess that I feel neither regret nor humiliation, but on the contrary I believe I feel somewhat as the Apostle Paul did who when he was called to answer before Agrippa said, ‘I think myself happy, King Agrippa, because I shall answer for myself this day before thee.’ I consider it an honour and a privilege to be permitted to defend and present God’s Truth to an audience such as is gathered here tonight.

 

“I will now take up the arguments of my opponent and answer them as far as my time will permit. The first argument he has presented and which occupied the greater part of his speech is this: ‘Mr. Stephanas is a layman, he is illiterate, unlearned and ignorant of all those holy theological studies which clergymen are required to understand and before they can get a license to preach.’ As he was directing your attention to the pile of books, the contents of which he has successfully stored away in the inner recesses of his expansive mind, and was endeavouring with all his power to impress you with his wonderful knowledge, I could not help but think of that story in the Bible about the great giant named Goliath, who terrified Israel by the greatness of his stature. This giant as you will no doubt remember used to exhibit himself daily between the camps of Israel and the Philistines, and it seems that Israel was overawed by his mighty presence. But one day a little shepherd boy came along and without spear or shield or armour, slew the giant with a stone and a sling and stood upon his dead body and with his own sword cut off his head. Now since Mr. Hamilton has been pleased to place himself before you as the giant in this discussion, the only position left for me is that of the shepherd boy and I have a few stones picked out of the river of the water of life (the Word of God), which I intend to sling at this intellectual giant to bring him to the ground. Now I am quite prepared to plead guilty to the charge of being only a poor illiterate blacksmith, without theological training, but then, the disciples of Christ were only illiterate fishermen, and the Master himself was a carpenter, and the Apostle Paul a tent-maker. No, dear friends, God has not left us to the mercy of learned theologians, but, on the contrary, He has invited us to come each one for himself and drink of the water of life freely (the Word of God). If it is necessary for us to fill our minds with the sciences in that pile of books over there, before we can understand God’s truth, then there is no hope for any of us here, for the circumstances of life in which we are placed will never permit us to accomplish such a feat. For my own part I do not care to try, for I consider my limited mental space too valuable to be filled with anything but the incorruptible Word of God, which Paul says ‘is able to make us wise unto salvation’ (2 Tim. 3:15); and ‘is able to build us up and give us an inheritance among all them which are sanctified’ (Acts 20:32).

[Resource Manager]

“My opponent quotes Matt. 5:8. ‘Blessed are the pure in heart for they shall see God’ and asks the question, ‘How can they see God unless they are taken up to Him?’ Well, I must say that is a remarkable question for a man to ask with such education as he seems to have. Ask that question of any schoolboy and he will tell you that if the pure in heart are to see God then they must either go to God or God must come to them. But my opponent can see only one way and that is the way which agrees best with his theology. But we must answer the question. When and where will the pure in heart see God in fulfilment of the promise of Christ? Well, we can be certain of one thing, and that is that the pure in heart will not see God by being taken to heaven at death for there is not a passage of Scripture between the covers of the Bible that either teaches or implies that men go to heaven at death. On the contrary, there is abundance of evidence that no such thing occurs. In fact we are told plainly that No man hath ascended to heaven’ (John 3:13). There is no need of our being perplexed over a simple question like this for it has been answered for us thousands of years ago, long before theological seminaries were invented. The Patriarch Job gives us a direct answer to the question; in the 19th chapter of his book at the 25th to 27th verses, he makes this statement ‘For I know that my redeemer liveth and that he shall stand at the latter day upon the earth; and though after my skin worms destroy this body, Yet in my flesh shall I see God; Whom I shall see for myself and mine eyes shall behold and not another though my reins be consumed within me.’ In whatever sense, then, that we are to be permitted to see God it is to be at the latter day upon the earth. The Apostle John said on one occasion, speaking of Christ, ‘But we know that when He shall appear we shall be like him for we shall see him as he is’ (1 John 3-2). Now to see Christ is equivalent to seeing the likeness or manifestation of God; for Christ said on one occasion, ‘he that hath seen me hath seen the Father’ (John 14:9). This will be true in a still larger sense in that great day when he returns to the earth in great power and glory ‘to be glorified in his saints and to be admired in all them that believe’ (2 Thess. 1:10). But Mr. Hamilton says the righteous do go to heaven at death because Christ in his sermon on the mount said, concerning those who were persecuted for righteousness sake, ‘Rejoice and be exceeding glad for great is your reward in heaven for so persecuted they the prophets which were before you.’ Now the trouble with my opponent is that he reads into this passage something it does not contain. It does not say a word about going to heaven. True it says the reward is in heaven. That is because God is there and He has the reward with Him. Peter tells us it is reserved in heaven for us (1 Peter 1:4), that is, it is laid away for us, kept for us, and then tells us that it is to be brought unto us at the revelation of Jesus Christ, that is, when Christ comes again (see 1 Peter 1:13). The Master himself settles the matter when he says in the message which he sent to John on the isle of Patmos ‘And behold I come quickly, and my reward is with me, to give every man according as his work shall be.’ It is quite clear then that the reward is in heaven at present, but that when Christ comes again as he has promised to do, he will bring the reward along with him and bestow it upon his faithful friends who have kept his commandments. My opponent next comes to the parable of the rich man and Lazarus. I knew he would quote this: it is the ancient and time-honoured argument of all heaven-going theorists. He has not told whether he believes it to be a parable or a literal account of an incident that really happened. It makes no difference which view he takes, it is full of difficulties which he will find do more harm to his theory than any argument an opponent can bring against it. In the first place, if he considers it not a parable, but a true story, then it upsets his whole theory.

[Resource Manager]

“What is it that takes place at death according to the teaching of Mr. Hamilton? Does the body of the deceased go to heaven or to hell, as the case may be? Why, no! We know that body is taken out to the cemetery and lowered down into the earth and covered with the sod. No! Mr. Hamilton does not believe that the body goes to heaven or hell, but his idea is, that there is an immaterial, immortal soul in the man concerning which Isaac Watts says

 

‘Up to the courts where angels dwell,

It mounts triumphant there,

Or Devils plunge it down to hell

In infinite despair.’

 

“Now, this soul is supposed to be immaterial, that is, it has no substance, you can’t see it or feel it. It is this soul which my opponent believes goes to heaven or hell at death. Now the story of the rich man and Lazarus will not help him to prove this for it does not speak of invisible souls, but rather of real substantial men with eyes, voice, finger tips, tongue; visible men who can see each other and talk to each other, so that if he considers this a true incident and not merely a parable, then it destroys, rather than supports, his theory. On the other hand if he considers it as a parable, which it undoubtedly is, then it is only a story told to point a moral or illustrate a point and does not necessarily have to be true or even possible. In the 9th chapter of Judges we have a story told of the trees going out to choose a king, and they ask first one tree and then another to be their king, and finally the bramble consents to be their king. Now you don’t suppose that this parable teaches that the trees can talk and enter into political discussion, do you? Well, neither does the parable of the rich man and Lazarus teach that dead men can talk or that the righteous can enjoy themselves in glory while they look on and see the wicked in torture. No, the parable of the trees was intended to teach that Israel at that time had chosen the meanest of Israel’s nobility to be their king, one who would be in comparison with the others in Israel as the bramble compares to other trees of the field. And the parable of the rich man and Lazarus was intended to teach the Pharisees and those who had ears to hear that which he plainly stated in the 15th verse of this chapter (Luke 16) just before he tells the story to illustrate it. His words are these, and this is what the parable teaches speaking to the Pharisees ‘Ye are they which justify yourselves before men but God knoweth your heart for that which is highly esteemed among men is an abomination in the sight of God.’ The parable beautifully illustrates this by showing a highly esteemed but wicked rich man tormented, and a righteous but despised poor man comforted. The parable does not teach the time or place, but Christ tells us the time, place and circumstances in the 13th chapter of Luke, where he says at the 28th verse, ‘There shall be weeping and gnashing of teeth when ye shall see Abraham, Isaac and Jacob in the Kingdom of God and ye yourselves thrust out.’ I see my time has expired so I will have to answer the other questions later.”

 

Whatever may have been the impression made upon the audience by the blacksmith’s address, any one who observed the expression on Timothy Berea’s face could not fail to see that he at least was pleased. He arose and announced a recess of five minutes, to allow the audience to relax somewhat before the second part of the debate begun. When this time had elapsed he called the meeting to order and announced that Mr. Hamilton would now occupy fifteen minutes in questioning Mr. Stephanas, or in speaking, or divide his time between speaking and questioning.

[Resource Manager]

CHAPTER NINE

 

Mr. Hamilton Questions Mr. Stephanas

 

“Beloved parishioners, you will no doubt have noticed that my opponent has left untouched most of the questions which I propounded for his consideration. From his point of view this was wise, for he would find great difficulty in giving an answer that would square with his peculiar views. I do not propose, however, to permit him to avoid these difficulties by simply passing them by, and so I shall proceed to place them before him in such a manner that he will be compelled to answer or to confess that he cannot answer.

 

Turning to the blacksmith he began as follows:

 

Question by Mr. Hamilton: Where do you think the Apostle Paul expected to go at death?

 

Answer by Mr. Stephanas: To the grave.

 

Mr. Hamilton: If he expected to go to the grave why did he say he had a desire to depart, and to be with Christ, which is far better? (Phil. 1:23).

 

Mr. Stephanas: Because both of these things would be acceptable to Paul.

 

Mr. Hamilton: What do you mean?

 

Mr. Stephanas: I mean that the Apostle Paul would welcome death as a release from his trials, and he would also be glad when Christ returned and he should be with him; this, he said, was far better than life or death.

 

Mr. H.: Does not the language imply that the Apostle expected to be with Christ as soon as he departed this life?

 

Mr. S.: No; Paul would not teach, even by implication, things that were not in harmony with the Truth. There is a sense, however, in which it might be said he would be with Christ as soon as death overtook him.

 

Mr. H.: What sense is that?

 

Mr. S.: Well, when a man dies he lapses into complete unconsciousness, and therefore, though thousands of years pass over him, he knows nothing of it, and when he is brought to life again at the resurrection it will seem as if he had just closed his eyes a moment ago.

 

Mr. H.: What! Do you mean to say that man dies and knows nothing like a beast?

 

Mr. S.: That is exactly what the Bible tells us.

[Resource Manager]

Mr. H.: Where does the Bible teach such a horrible doctrine?

 

Mr. S.: There is nothing horrible about it, and the Bible teaches it plainly in several places. For instance, in Ecclesiastes 3:19 it says: “For that which befalleth the sons of men befalleth beasts; even one thing befalleth them: As the one dieth so dieth the other.”

 

Mr. H.: That refers to the body, not to the soul, which continues to live after the body dies.

 

Mr. S.: It says: “For that which befalleth the sons of men befalleth beasts. As the one dieth so dieth the other.” Therefore, if one of them continues to live after death so must the other and if one of them passes into complete unconsciousness so must the other.

 

Mr. H.: That brings us down to the level of beasts, does it not?

 

Mr. S.: No, only in the matter of death, they are both alike in that state.

 

Mr. H.: Then you think that when a man dies he becomes utterly unconscious like a beast and knows absolutely nothing?

 

Mr. S.: I have already answered that question, but will give you another Bible answer. In Ecclesiastes 9:5 the Lord distinctly says: “The living know that they shall die, but the dead know not anything.” Surely that ought to settle the question.

 

Mr. H.: What becomes of the soul when the body dies?

 

Mr. S.: What do you mean by the soul? The life?

 

Mr. H.: It is not necessary for me to define it for you; I will give you a passage which illustrates what I meant. In Genesis 35:18, speaking of the death of Rachel, these words occur: “And it came to pass as her soul was in departing (for she died),” etc. This is the sense in which I use the word soul. What became of Rachel’s soul and what becomes of the soul in every case at death?

 

Mr. S.: Rachel’s soul was her life, and to say her soul was departing is the same as when we say concerning one who is dying, “his life is fast ebbing away.”

 

Mr. H.: You have not answered my question. Where does the soul or the life, as you are pleased to call it, go when it departs?

 

Mr. S.: I can best answer your question and convey to the audience my meaning, by relating an incident of which I was a witness.

 

Mr. H.: Go on, if it is not too long.

 

Mr. S.: One day, several years ago, while working on a heavy piece of red-hot iron, a shopmate of mine was struck in the eye with a piece of the hot metal, which flew out from under his hammer. We made him as comfortable as we could while we called a doctor. After treating his injured eye the doctor departed, but as he was leaving the shop several of us who worked there approached him and in subdued tones, so that the injured man would not hear us, we asked: ‘Well, doctor, how is it with him?’ To our horror the doctor answered: ‘His sight is gone.’ We were exceedingly sorry for our fellow workman, yet none of us ever thought to ask the doctor where his sight had gone to?”

[Resource Manager]

Mr. H.: Of course not; that would be a foolish question.

 

Mr. S.: Your question is of a similar character. You speak of life or soul as if it was something which might have a separate existence instead of being as it is dependent upon the actions of the organs of the body; sight, hearing, smell, taste, thought, are all manifestations of life; destroy the organ through which they are produced and the manifestations cease. When the heart stops all the organs stop their work of producing manifestations of life, and therefore there is no life in relation to that particular being, but the sight, hearing, thought, etc., which are the real life or soul of the individual, do not exist somewhere else.

 

Mr. H.: That’s quite an oration for a blacksmith; you speak of man as if he were a mere machine.

 

Mr. S.: A wonderful machine, and yet very easily interrupted in its work. In this it is like my forge; you keep the bellows blowing and the fire continues to bum brightly, but when you stop the bellows the fire dies and goes out, but it does not go somewhere else. And so it is when the lungs, the human bellows, stop blowing, the fire of life goes out, but does not exist somewhere else any more than the fire of my forge.

 

Mr. H.: If the soul does not have a separate conscious existence after death, why did Paul say he was willing to be absent from the body and to be present with the Lord? (2 Cor. 5:8).

 

Mr. S.: Paul was not speaking about the soul, but about two different natures or bodies.

 

Mr. H.: Does not the Apostle say, “For we that are in this tabernacle do groan being burdened?”

 

Mr. S.: Yes.

 

Mr. H.: Is it not evident then that what the apostle wanted to do was to “shuffle off this mortal coil?”

 

Mr. S.: No, sir; Paul did not want to shuffle anything off; he distinctly says so in the very passage you quote; his words are: “Not for that we would be unclothed but clothed upon that mortality might be swallowed up of life”. Paul was thinking of putting something on, not of shuffling something off.

 

Mr. H.: What was it he desired to put on?

 

Mr. S.: His “house from heaven.”

[Resource Manager]

Mr. H.: What is his “house from heaven?”

 

Mr. S.: An immortal nature.

 

Mr. H.: Is it the body that puts this on?

 

Mr. S.: Certainly.

 

Mr. H.: How can the body put on another? Does the one fit over the other?

 

Mr. S.: The Apostle Paul explains this clearly in 1 Cor. 15:52-54. He tells us we are to be “changed” and that “this corruptible must “put on incorruption and this mortal must put on immortality;” and in this very passage we have been considering the Apostle says that when this change takes place, “Mortality will be swallowed up of life.” (2 Cor. 5:4). What is really conveyed by this language is that this mortal dying body will be changed into a strong, incorruptible and imperishable body.

 

Mr. H.: I did not ask you to give an oration; you are taking up my time.

 

Mr. S.: I have answered as briefly as possible, but if I have taken too much of your time I am quite willing to allow you as much extra time as you need to finish the points you have in mind.

 

The Chairman: I think Mr. Hamilton is justified to some extent, although his questions were such that they could not be answered with “yes” or “no,” but required some explanation. Under the circumstances, Mr. Hamilton may have an extra five minutes.

 

Mr. Hamilton continued his questions: On one occasion Christ said to his disciples, “Fear not them which kill the body but cannot kill the soul.” Does not this prove the soul’s immortality and a separate conscious existence after death?

 

Mr. S.: No; for the very next sentence says, “Fear him which is able to destroy both soul and body in hell” (i.e. Gehenna), Matt. 10:28. That which is destructible surely cannot be immortal.

 

Mr. H.: What does Christ mean by the soul in this passage?

 

Mr. S.: The word “soul” is used in a great variety of aspects in the Scriptures and it is not always easy to decide definitely which of these aspects the writer had in mind. Personally I believe the word is used in this passage in the sense of “Individuality.”

 

Mr. H.: And pray, tell me, what is individuality?

 

Mr. S.: That which distinguishes us from each other, which makes us distinct beings.

[Resource Manager]

Mr. H.: Well, what is that?

 

Mr. S.: Principally our character and disposition.

 

Mr. H.: According to your materialistic theory when a man dies he is altogether non-existent; if that is the case, is not his character and disposition dead also?

 

Mr. S.: No, sir; his character and disposition are reserved in God’s “book of remembrance” (Malachi 3:16), and at the resurrection, that character and disposition, or individuality, or identity is flashed upon the man again and he is the same identical person who existed before death overtook him.

 

Mr. H.: How can God destroy a man’s character and disposition in hell; if a man’s disposition is such that God finds it necessary to cast him into hell will he not continue to be wicked when he arrives there?

 

Mr. S.: The “hell” of the Bible is not a place where men are preserved in torture, as modern religion teaches. The word “hell” in this passage, as you know, is “gehenna,” which means “the valley of the son of Hinnom,” a place outside the walls of Jerusalem where fires were kept continually burning to consume the garbage of the city, and in which were thrown the bodies of criminals and carcasses of beasts, refuse, etc. It therefore became synonymous with the ideas of disgrace and complete destruction. This is to be the fate of those who live in stubborn disobedience to the will of God. Eternal death will overtake them. They will be destroyed in the grave both body, individuality, character, disposition and everything pertaining to them (Revelation 20:12-14; 2:11).

 

Mr. H.: That will do. Then turning to the audience he said: “My dear parishioners, I am sorry that I have been to some extent responsible in bringing you here to listen to these heresies; this man’s doctrines bring us down to the level of the lower animals. He does not believe in the blesssed doctrine of the “immortality of the soul,” a doctrine believed by all the world. Why, even the crude nations believed it, the Indians, the Hindus, the Chinese, the New Hollanders, the Laplanders, etc., all believed this blessed doctrine, to say nothing of such men as Socrates, Plato and other great philosophers and hundreds of thousands of Christians and yet this man has the audacity to deny it.”

 

Time was then called by the chairman.

[Resource Manager]

CHAPTER TEN

 

The Blacksmith Questions Mr. Hamilton.

 

After a slight pause, the chairman called upon Paul Stephanas to either speak or question Mr. Hamilton for his allotted time. Paul commenced:

 

“Ladies and Gentlemen: Mr. Hamilton speaks of my contentions as ‘heresies,’ so I suppose I am, in his opinion, a heretic. Well, I find that history informs us that all who have contended faithfully for the Truth in every age have been considered heretics by those who know not the Truth, and the doctrines they preached were called ‘heresies’ by the religious leaders of their day. Stephen was stoned to death for ‘heresy’ and the Apostle Paul confessed before the Roman governor ‘that after the way which they call heresy so worship I the God of my fathers, believing all things written in the law and in the prophets.’ If to believe all things that are written in the law and the prophets is heresy, then I am glad to take my stand with Paul and plead guilty to the charge. Calling me a ‘heretic,’ however, does not prove that the righteous go to heaven at death; and I want to call the attention of this audience to the fact that my opponent has utterly failed to produce a single passage of Scripture, which can reasonably be said to prove that the righteous go to heaven at death. Before I get through I intend to prove beyond the shadow of a doubt, that this doctrine is absolutely false, and that to accept it is to reject the Bible, I ask you also to notice that my opponent has departed from the subject, and has used a great deal of his time questioning me about the ‘soul.’ I am just as well satisfied, however, that he has done this, for the doctrine of ‘the immortality of the soul’ which he believes, is at the root of all religious misconception. This doctrine is the great dividing line between truth and error. You cannot enter the domain of religious truth until you cross this line and leave this doctrine behind you. My opponent, in his closing remarks, tells us it must be true, because so many believe it, and he mentions the Hindus, the Chinese, the Mohammedans and even the Greek philosophers Socrates and Plato, etc. Well, all I can say about this is, that unless he can find some reliable witnesses, his case is sure to be thrown out of the court of common reason. Who would care to have a question which involves eternity submitted to the vote of heathen idolaters who bow down to the stock of a tree and worship the work of their own hands? What means had they of knowing the truth about immortality or the future reward? They had no revelation from God; and they could not of themselves penetrate beyond the boundary line of human experience. One by one they went down in death; also their fathers, mothers, sisters and brothers; they buried them or sacrificed them to their gods of wood and stone and then they saw them no more; none returned from the great abyss of death to tell them what was there. And so their testimony like all merely human testimony on this matter, is worthless. We thank God that He has given us a book which tells us whence we came, what we are, and whither we go. To this book, the Bible let us appeal.”

[Resource Manager]

Mr. Stephanas then proceeded to question Mr. Hamilton.

 

Mr. Stephanas: Mr. Hamilton, can you tell me of a single instance recorded in the Bible of one going to heaven at death?

 

Mr. Hamilton: What about Enoch and Elijah?

 

Mr. Stephanas: Did they die?

 

Mr. Hamilton: No, they were translated, so the Bible says.

 

Mr. S.: Exactly, and the fact that they were taken from the earth alive and in full bodily form does not prove that those who die go to heaven. I repeat my question: Can you tell me of a single instance in the Bible of one going to heaven at death?

 

Mr. H.: What about Christ?

 

Mr. S.: Did Christ go to heaven at death?

 

Mr. H.: No, he went there after he rose from the grave.

 

Mr. S.: Oh, then it was after his resurrection that he ascended to heaven?

 

Mr. H.: Certainly, after his resurrection.

 

Mr. S.: Did he go to heaven in bodily form?

 

Mr. H.: Yes, in bodily form, his disciples saw him ascend.

 

Mr. S.: Is this the way you contend that men go to heaven at death?

 

Mr. H.: Oh, no; only their souls go there; their bodies remain in the grave until the resurrection at the last day.

 

Mr..S.: Exactly. And what I want to know is this: there are a great many deaths recorded in the Scriptures, many of them righteous men and prophets; can you tell me of one single instance where one of those who died expressed the hope or expectation of going to heaven when he died or do you know of a single instance where the Bible speaks of them as being in heaven after they died?

 

Mr. H.: Well, no. We are not told so; and in fact I do not think the “grand secret” is ever revealed to us until, as Lord Tennyson expresses it, “we have crossed the bar.”

 

Mr. S.: Oh, then it is a secret that is not revealed until after death?

 

Mr. H.: I am inclined to think so.

[Resource Manager]

Mr. S.: In view of the fact that you are still alive, how did you come to know this grand secret so well that you are willing to enter into a debate on the subject?

 

Mr. H.: I have every confidence in the truth of the faith I hold. While there may not be any definite statements in the Scriptures which express our belief in so many words, yet there are guide posts along the way that point in the right direction and which indicate the course we should take, and though now we see through a glass darkly, the time will come when we shall see face to face.

 

Mr. S.: That is a sad admission. It is equal to saying, I may be right, but I am not sure. I would commend to you the exhortation of Peter, who said, “We have also a more sure word of prophecy, whereunto ye do well to take heed as unto a light that shineth in a dark place, until the day dawn and the day star arise in your heart” (2 Peter 1:19). Mr. Hamilton, what is your honest belief with regard to all the righteous dead of past ages and those also who have died in our day?

 

Mr. H.: I believe they are in that happy state pictured in Revelation 14:1-3, in which it speaks of them as being in heaven playing upon harps, and singing the new song.

 

Mr. S.: Are you not aware that this is a picture illustrating events that are still future?

 

Mr. H.: I prefer to consider it as a literal statement.

 

Mr. S.: You commit yourself to considerable absurdity. In the first place, you will remember that when John saw this vision he was on the isle of Patmos (Rev. 1:9), an island in the Aegean Sea, and it says he saw a lamb with 144, 000 on Mount Zion. Now, Mount Zion is in Jerusalem, which at this time was a heap of ruins in possession of the Romans. Now if you consider his statement in Rev. 14:1-3 as a literal statement, then you commit yourself to the belief that John, from a remote island in the Aegean Sea, saw in Jerusalem, some hundreds of miles way, a lamb with 144,000 standing on a hill in that ruined city. Mr. Hamilton do you believe this in its literal sense? And I would also like to know if you think the four beasts mentioned were literal beasts and if the harps of this multitude were attuned and their voices lifted in song to the brute creation?

 

Mr. H.: Well, you put it rather strongly. I had not considered it quite as literally as that.

 

Mr. S.: Just another point. If the righteous are in heaven playing on harps, they must have bodies, seeing that fingers are required to play a harp. Now you said a little while ago that it was only “the soul” that went to heaven and by “the soul” you mean something that is “immaterial, without body or parts,” how do you explain this?

 

Mr. H.: Oh, that is easily explained. Paul said in 1 Cor. 15:38, “But God giveth it a body as it hath pleased Him.”

[Resource Manager]

Mr. S.: Oh, then you think the soul enters a new body when it gets to heaven?

 

Mr. H.: Yes.

 

Mr. S.: Do you believe in the resurrection and judgment to take place at the last day (John 5:28 and 6:39,40).

 

Mr. H.: I do.

 

Mr. S.: What is to be raised.

 

Mr. H.: The body.

 

Mr. S.: Can the body live without the soul.

 

Mr. H.: Certainly not.

 

Mr. S.: When this great day arrives and the body is raised from the dead and the soul in heaven has already taken up its residence in another body, you will have two bodies for one soul; how is this difficulty to be adjusted?

 

Mr. H.: I refuse to answer.

 

Mr. S.: Very well, we will not press you on the point, as we appreciate your difficulty. I would like to ask you, however, what the resurrection and judgment are for? What purpose do they serve in God’s eternal plan?

 

Mr. H.: It is the time when God takes account of His servants to see how they have served Him and to divide the sheep from the goats and reward the righteous and punish the wicked.

 

Mr. S.: But this has already been done, if your theory be true. The righteous are in heaven and the wicked in hell. The “Westminster Confession of Faith,” which is the statement of faith accepted by the Presbyterians, states that the souls of the righteous at death do immediately pass into glory and, on the other hand, the souls of the wicked go into a state of torment. Here, then, according to this theory, there are millions of souls in heaven enjoying its bliss and other millions of souls suffering the tortures of hell for ages. Are these souls to be brought back from heaven and from hell to stand before the bar of justice and mercy?

 

Mr. H.: As far as I can see they must stand before the Judge at the last day.

 

Mr. S.: What for?

 

Mr. H.: To be judged.

[Resource Manager]

Mr. S.: Judged! After they have been condemned or approved?

 

Mr. H.: I must admit it looks incongruous.

 

Mr. S.: It is worse than that; it is a reflection upon God’s wisdom. It would appear as if God after the righteous had been basking in pleasure for ages and the wicked had been writhing in torture for an equal period, had become apprehensive that a mistake had been made and that some who were in hell should have been in heaven and vice versa, and so He brings them all together again for judgment. I say it is a reflection on an all wise God which no true believer would entertain for a moment. Mr. Hamilton, have you ever considered the case of Hezekiah?

 

Mr. H.: Yes, I am quite familiar with his history; he was one of the best of Judah’s kings.

 

Mr. S.: I want to read to you the recommendation which the Word of God gives him. It is found in 2 Chron. 31:21, as follows: “And in every work that he begun in the service of the house of God, and in the Law and the Commandments, to seek His God, he did it with all his heart and prospered.” Now if this heaven going theory is true, don’t you think that a man like Hezekiah would be sure of it?

 

Mr. H.: No doubt he was.

 

Mr. S.: Why, then, when he came to death’s door, did he weep and lament and pray to the Lord and when the Lord answered his prayer and added fifteen years to his life, why did he bless and praise the Lord? Was he glad because the Lord kept him out of heaven for fifteen years more?

 

Mr. H.: Well, it does seem strange but then we are all timid in the face of death.

 

Mr. S.: Have you noticed the reason Hezekiah gives for not wanting to die?

 

Mr. H.: I don’t know that I have.

 

Mr. S.: It was not timidity or uncertainty. On the contrary, he knew exactly where he would go at death and what state he would be in. He expressed it in the following words: “Behold for peace I had great bitterness, but Thou hast in love for my soul delivered it from the pit of corruption; for thou hast cast all my sins behind my back. For the grave cannot praise thee, death cannot celebrate thee, they that go down into the pit cannot hope for thy truth. The living, the living he shall praise thee as I do this day” (Isa. 38:17-19). So you see it was because he knew that death would place him in a pit of corruption and beyond the power to praise and serve the Lord that he lamented at the thought of death. Mr. Hamilton, do you still think Hezekiah expected to go to heaven?

 

Mr. H.: It does not appear so.

[Resource Manager]

Mr. S.: There was another great king of Israel who is referred to in the Scriptures as a man after God’s own heart (Acts 13:22). Have you considered his case?

 

Mr. H.: You refer to David.

 

Mr. S.: Yes. What became of him at death?

 

Mr. H.: I suppose he received the reward of the righteous.

 

Mr. S.: Have you ever read Acts 2:34?

 

Mr. H.: I cannot recollect. I suppose I must have read it some time.

 

Mr. S.: It states distinctly that David did not ascend to heaven, and the 29th verse tells us that “he is both dead and buried.” Have you ever considered the 11th Chapter of Hebrews?

 

Mr. H.: Oh, yes; many times.

 

Mr. S.: What do you find there with regard to the reward of the righteous?

 

Mr. H.: I have not noticed so much about the reward, but have always considered it a grand dissertation on faith.

 

Mr. S.: Are you aware that the 39th and 40th verses tell us plainly that they died in the faith and did not receive the promised reward, that they must wait until a future day when all will be rewarded together?

 

Mr. H.: I had not noticed that.

 

Mr. S.: Have you ever read John 3:16?

 

Mr. H.: Oh, yes; I have preached dozens of sermons from that text.

 

Mr. S.: What about John 3:13?

 

Mr. H.: Let me see; I don’t seem to remember it.

[Resource Manager]

Mr. S.: The next time you preach from John 3:16, I would advise you to extend your vision just three verses above and read the context in the 13th verse. It states: “No man hath ascended into heaven.” Now, in conclusion, I have one or two questions on the soul. Do you really believe the soul is immortal?

 

Mr. H.: With all my heart.

 

Mr. S.: What is an immortal soul?

 

Mr. H.: An indestructible, imperishable, never-dying entity.

 

Mr. S.: Is your belief based upon the testimony of Scripture?

 

Mr. H.: Oh yes; the Scriptures speak often about the soul.

 

Mr. S.: About an immortal soul? Can you give me a single passage that speaks about an immortal soul?

 

Mr. H.: Oh, well, I don’t know that the words immortal soul are used, but still the soul must be immortal; otherwise man would disappear altogether.

 

Mr. S.: If I produce from the Word of God passages of Scripture which prove that the soul is destructible, perishable and subject to death, will you accept the fact that man is mortal and unconscious in death?

 

Mr. H.: You would have a great difficulty in proving that.

[Resource Manager]

Mr. Stephanas then addressed the audience. “Ladies and Gentlemen: I have a few moments left and I want to call your attention to the fact that my opponent has utterly failed to produce a single testimony from the Bible to show that the righteous go to heaven at death, or to prove that other point which he has brought up, that the soul is immortal. Now the following facts have been brought out in this discussion:

 

“There is no record of any of the righteous having gone to heaven at death.

 

“It is positively stated concerning one righteous man (David) that he did not go to heaven. And concerning the righteous of past ages, that they have not received their reward as yet.

 

“It is stated in the New Testament that no man hath ascended to heaven.

 

“There is not a promise of heaven to the righteous in all the Bible.

 

“The only argument advanced, to support the doctrine of the immortality of the soul, is that the soul must be immortal, an assertion without proof.

 

“And now in closing I have the following facts for your consideration:

 

“The soul is not immortal because it is spoken of as being destroyed (Ezekiel 22:27, Acts 3:23). And of dying (Psalm 78:50, Job 7:15). Of being saved from the grave (Psa. 49:16. Isa. 38:17).

 

“The righteous do not go to heaven at death, because, in the first place there is no passage of Scripture which says so, and in the second place it is distinctly stated that the righteous are to be recompensed in the earth (Prov. 11:31), that they are to inherit the earth (Matt. 5:5), that they are to dwell in the earth forever (Psalm 37:22, 29), that they are to reign on the earth (Rev. 5:10).

 

“There is much more that might be said, but I think the subject has been sufficiently discussed, and I am sure that those who have eyes to see and ears to hear will recognise the fact that the things we have contended for are the true teaching of the holy men of old who wrote the Scriptures by the power of God.”

[Resource Manager]

The chairman then arose and asked the audience not to leave until he had held a short conference with the debaters, after which he would make an announcement.

 

He then turned to Mr. Hamilton and the blacksmith and asked them if a new subject should be taken up for the next meeting, or if they wished to continue the discussion of the same subject.

 

Mr. Hamilton at once replied that there would be no further discussion of any kind so far as he was concerned.

 

“Do you mean to say you will not go ahead with the debate?” asked Timothy.

 

“That is exactly what I mean; I am sorry I entered into it at all; I don’t think any good purpose can be served by such a discussion. It does not affect our salvation, either one way or another whether we believe in Mr. Stephanas’ interpretation of Scripture or mine. All a man has to know is ‘that the blood of Jesus Christ cleanseth us from all sins,’ and I am sure we all accept that.”

 

“What have you to say about that, Mr. Stephanas?” asked Timothy.

 

“Well, if that last statement is correct and that is all we have to know, I have been wondering why it was necessary for Mr. Hamilton to absorb all the information in that pile of books on the table and why the community pays him to preach, for I am sure Farmer Jones could tell the people ‘that the Blood of Christ cleanseth us from all sin.’ This idea that ‘it makes no difference what we believe’ is absolutely wrong, for Christ said ‘he that believeth the gospel and is baptized shall be saved and he that believeth not shall be condemned,’ (Mark 16:16) Now it is impossible to believe the gospel and believe the things which Mr. Hamilton teaches, therefore, I say let us sift the matter to the bottom. I am ready to continue the discussion.”

 

“What do you say?” asked Timothy, turning to Mr. Hamilton.

 

“I have nothing further to say,” said Mr. Hamilton, and, turning away, he started toward the door.

[Resource Manager]

CHAPTER ELEVEN

 

Seeking the Truth

 

Timothy and Mr. Stephanas talked together for a few minutes and then Timothy called the audience to order and announced that Mr. Hamilton had refused to go any further with the debate. He also announced that the home of Mr. Stephanas was open to any who were interested to know the Truth of these important matters, and that he would gladly spend his evenings with any who would call upon him for the discussion of Bible subjects. With some expressions of regret that the debate could not be continued, Timothy brought the meeting to a close.

 

After closing the meeting, Timothy congratulated the blacksmith on the way he had handled the Scriptures and assured him that he would be among those who would take advantage of his help in the evenings at his home.

 

He then sought out Doris and escorted her home. There was a strange strained silence between them as they walked along the country road. Doris’s expression and demeanour seemed to say, “Please don’t ask me any questions.” Timothy was quick to interpret it and so they walked along in silence until, arriving at the Hamilton home, they bid each other “good night.”

 

There were few indeed who availed themselves of the offer of the blacksmith to spend his evenings with them in Bible study. A few came at first, but soon dropped off until eventually the only visitor was Timothy Berea, who availed himself of every opportunity to visit the Stephanas’ home.

 

Many a night this earnest young Bible student and the devout blacksmith sat facing each other across the table with their Bibles open before them until far into the night, seemingly obvious to the passage of time, so deeply engrossed did they become in their studies. Timothy soon began to see the truth expressed by the poet, that

 

From childhood, most have been led,

So they believe because they were so bred;

The priest continues what the nurse began,

And so the child imposes on the man.

 

He soon began to see through the shallowness and inconsistency of modern religion, and longed to be connected with a religion that reflected the simplicity and truth of the teaching of the meek and lowly Jesus of Nazareth and his fishermen apostles.

 

The Sunday morning services became irksome to him, and the sermons, many of which were preached for his particular benefit, were a trial of his forbearance.

 

There seemed to be so much human philosophy and so little of God’s word, so much sentiment and so little reason, and a studied effort to please rather than to hold forth the faithful word. As he advanced in his Bible studies he became more and more alienated from the worldly church, and the time finally came when he announced his severance from it. He talked about his new belief, which he referred to as “the Truth,” to every one who would listen, but he soon began to see that people shunned him, and that they would sometimes take a circuitous route to avoid meeting him, and being drawn into conversation with him. He was pointed out in the street as one who had become a religious fanatic, and sometimes they said an infidel. In his own home, where fervid love was wont to reign, a coldness developed until there was frigidity of atmosphere that seemed to freeze the fountains of heavenly currents of love. His mother’s attitude particularly troubled him; she had always been profuse in her manifestation of affection toward him, but now she was cold and formal and took little interest in anything he said or did. In addition to this almost unbearable condition, Doris had hidden herself from him for three weeks after he left the church.

[Resource Manager]

Truly he had found the pearl of great price, but he was paying a heavy price to obtain it.

 

Timothy said nothing about these things for a time, but endeavoured to bear his own burden with all the fortitude he could command. He soon lost his light-hearted demeanour and began to go about his daily tasks with a heavy heart. Instead of improving, things went from bad to worse, until finally he could stand it no longer and he determined to seek relief by unburdening himself to the one who now appeared to be his only human friend, Paul Stephanas.

 

And so one evening, after a trying day in the field, he went down to the blacksmith’s home and told his story to a kind and sympathetic listener. Mr. Stephanas did not seem at all surprised and when Timothy got through he remarked, “I have wondered why you have been so long in coming to tell me this. Yours is no new experience. Full well do I remember my own trial; and there are hundreds of true believers today who can tell you of similar experiences at the time when they obeyed the Lord’s command to come out and be separate” (2 Cor. 6:17).

 

“But why should it be so,” said Timothy, “in view of the fact that it is called the gospel of peace? And when Christ was introduced to the world at His birth, the angels sang, ‘Glory to God in the highest and on earth Peace, good will toward men?’ How is it that instead of peace we have dissension and estrangement and enmity in our homes?”

 

“The gospel of peace,” replied the blacksmith, “is the good news or glad tidings of something to come and not something that now exists: the song of the angels was prophetic and will not be realised until the world is brought under subjection to Christ. When the Master appeared 1900 years ago, it was not to bring peace but to preach peace to come. You know Timothy when it will come: it is when the kingdom of God is set up on earth. Then, as Isaiah tells us, ‘The work of righteousness shall be peace and the effect of righteousness, quietness and assurance forever.’ (Isaiah 32:17). Have you ever noticed the Master’s words concerning this? In Luke 12:51 he says: “Suppose ye that I am come to give peace on earth? I tell you nay, but rather division; for from henceforth there shall be five in one house, three against two, and two against three. The father shall be divided against the son and the son against the father and the mother against the daughter and daughter against the mother: the mother-in-law against the daughter-in-law; and the daughter-in-law against her mother-in-law,’ and Matthew’s account adds: ‘And a man’s foes shall be they of his own household.’ So you see your position today accords perfectly with the predictions of the Lord some 1900 years ago.”

[Resource Manager]

“What you say is true,” replied Timothy, “and I feel ashamed to think that I should have complained at all but it does seem unreasonable to me, that people should so bitterly oppose that which is obviously true. How can they properly worship God when they oppose the obvious teaching of His word. By so doing are they not making Him out to be a liar?”

 

“That is true,” replied the blacksmith, “although of course, they would be shocked if you told them that. Indeed, they probably conscientiously believe that you are wrong, and so close their minds against the truth. The call of the Gospel demands that a person manifest the courage of his convictions, and do what is right. Such an attitude is pleasing to God. Jesus Christ declared: “True worshippers shall worship the Father in spirit and in truth: for the Father seeketh such to worship Him.”

 

“Well, Mr. Stephanas,” answered Paul, “that is what I have come to see you about. I want to worship God in truth, and I am determined to do so come what may. I want to be baptized into the name of Christ. How can it be arranged?”

 

“Why, that can be arranged quite easily,” replied Paul. “It is customary for us to examine the candidates for baptism in order to ascertain whether they fully understand the first principles of the truth before they are baptized; this is as much for their sakes as it is for the keeping of the purity of the faith, for you know, a baptism which is not preceeded by the acceptance of the true faith is of no avail.”

 

“That is quite right and reasonable,” said Timothy, “otherwise you would soon find yourself a mixed multitude such as we find in the modem church. Well, I am ready now to be examined. I don’t want to lose another day for Christ may come at any moment and I want to be ready when He comes.”

 

“Very well,” said Paul, “we will proceed at once.”

[Resource Manager]

CHAPTER TWELVE

 

Preparing for Baptism

 

Mr. Stephanas first explained the purpose of the questioning he proposed to submit to Timothy.

 

“It is designed,” he said, “to ascertain both your understanding of the Bible, and your attitude of mind towards the things of Jesus Christ. Our practise in doing this is based upon Apostolic custom. Paul told Timothy that he had ‘professed (the word is better rendered confessed) a good profession (or confession of faith) before many witnesses’ as Jesus Christ had before him when he was subjected to questioning by Pontius Pilate as to his beliefs (1 Tim. 6:12-13). Therefore, in now questioning you, I am following an Apostolic pattern.”

 

“I am quite agreeable to that,” replied Timothy. “Certainly, if I am astray upon any point of doctrine, I desire to be corrected.”

 

“Very well,” answered Mr. Stephanas, “we will proceed.”

 

He then commenced to question his young friend in the following manner:

 

Question: Why do you want to be baptised?

 

Answer: Because I want to be saved.

 

Question: What do you mean by being “saved”?

 

Answer: To be saved in the Scriptural sense is, first, to have your sins forgiven and admitted into covenant relationship to God and Christ, and afterwards, at the day of judgment when Christ comes, to be made immortal (1 Cor. 15:53-58).

 

Question: And you think this cannot be done unless you are baptized?

 

Answer: Why, no! Christ distinctly said, “He that believeth and is baptized shall be saved; but he that believeth not shall be condemned.” (Mark 16:15, 16).

 

Question: Do you think then that after you have been baptized that your salvation is assured and that you have only to await the coming of Christ to receive the reward of eternal life?

 

Answer: Oh, no; I don’t believe that. I understand that baptism simply admits me into the race for eternal life. When I am baptized I will become a candidate for the Kingdom of God and will be on probation for eternal life. Still the conditions are such, and the assistance rendered and the encouragement given by God and the Lord Jesus Christ so great and so fully adequate to our needs, that I know no sincere candidate need fail in this race for life.

 

“I am glad,” said Paul Stephanas, “that you realize this fact, for it will save you from a sad awakening when the Master comes, and you will be more likely to be found among those who watch and pray that they enter not into temptation.”

 

Question: Have you ever been baptized before?

 

Answer: They tell me I was sprinkled when I was a baby, but of course that was not baptism. Baptism is immersion in water, not the sprinkling of a few drops of water on one’s face.

 

Paul Stephanas was pleased with Timothy’s answers; he realized the Truth had found an abiding place in this honest heart. The questioning proceeded and Timothy was always ready with his answers.