Musings

Friday, July 01, 2005

Conversation with a "Calvinist" - 5

After receiving the reply from my young correspondent, informing me that he did not desire to continue the discussion, I felt that I had to reach out in sincerity in a final attempt to shake some doubt into his confidence in the teachings of Calvin. Here's what I wrote:

Why are you so angry? I am not your enemy because I tell you the truth. You don't even understand how terribly you contradicted yourself in the following (my reply with your response underlined):

"Spurgeon believed that the law of God was vindicated, kept flawlessly and His wrath eternally satisfied Yes, substitutionary atonement -- and that in whatever way it may be called "grace," God owes the elect because, in Christ, the law of God is vindicated, kept flawlessly and imputed to them. That's what you believe, ____________. Once again I will state for clarity, I DO NOT believe that God owes man anything. Nothing, No, Zero. Zilch. Nada."

____________, you cannot have it both ways. Either the vicarious obedience and death of Jesus Christ imputed to man EARNS him salvation, or it is of grace. I believe it is by grace through faith, embodied and expressed in obedience (Colossians 2:12). But every Calvinist on the Planet, who knows what Calvin and the reformers taught, knows that Calvin argued that the MERIT of the FLAWLESS MORAL EXCELLENCE and PERFECT OBEDIENCE of Christ (1) vindicated the law of God, and (2) satisfied Divine justice, and (3) appeased otherwise implacable Divine wrath. THAT is what Calvinism teaches, and THAT is what Spurgeon believed and taught. Furthermore, THAT has man saved by MERIT and NOT by grace, your whinings and the preachments of Calvinists to the contrary, notwithstanding.

My prayers for your repentance attend this note. I will patiently await your reply, but understand that you may not want to continue the discussion.

Quite frankly, I did not expect a reply. But, to my surprise, my correspondent sent a final reply:

RP, Once again, I will follow the same path as I have before, except this time, I'll write my response in bold.

Why are you so angry? *grin* I don't know where you get that I am angry. Upset, yes? Why? Because you are trying to tell me what I believe. That is very haughty, prideful and irritating. I am not your enemy because I tell you the truth. I never said that you were my enemy, and about the truth, yes it is your version of the truth. Thus far you have given me NO scripture to support this supposed truth. You don't even understand how terribly you contradicted yourself in the following (my reply with your response underlined):

____________, you cannot have it both ways. Yes you can. Either the vicarious obedience and death of Jesus Christ imputed to man EARNS him salvation, or it is of grace. I do not see why you are trying to separate the two. The two work hand in hand. The salvation that WE receive is all of grace and not by the works of man, but by Christ's perfect work, through the keeping of the law, and His sacrifice. God desires a sacrifice for the sins of men, either that of man's soul, or that paid by with the blood of Christ. You are trying to pit the work of Christ against the grace of God when they work hand in hand. I believe it is by grace through faith Who's faith?, embodied and expressed in obedience Who's obedience? (Colossians 2:12). But every Calvinist on the Planet, who knows what Calvin and the reformers taught, knows that Calvin argued that the MERIT of the FLAWLESS MORAL EXCELLENCE and PERFECT OBEDIENCE of Christ (1) vindicated the law of God, and (2) satisfied Divine justice, and (3) appeased otherwise implacable Divine wrath. Amen. So I suppose I fail to see your point. THAT is what Calvinism teaches, and THAT is what Spurgeon believed and taught. Furthermore, THAT has man saved by MERIT and NOT by grace Wrong. The deed had to be done for man to be saved. But salvation is still by the grace of God for it is given freely, not out of compulsion or obligation. God was not obligated to save anyone. In fact, if it were not for the grace of God and the work of Christ, all men would perish and burn in hell for eternity. , your whining and the preachments of Calvinists to the contrary, notwithstanding.

My prayers for your repentance attend this note. Repentance from what? To what? I will patiently await your reply, but understand that you may not want to continue the discussion. You know, it seems that we are both standing firm on what we believe. We can continue to discuss this issue if you like, but I don't see the point. I will just be praying that the Lord will reveal to you His truth in His time.

By the way, how exactly do you believe that man is saved? If it is not by the work that Christ has done then what is it by? Man's own works?

I must admit that the reply from this young and sincere correspondent gave me some hope for his future conversion to Christ. I was surprised that he tried to diminish the force of my contrast between flawless works and grace, since he must understand that his system of theology tries--howbeit in vain--to uphold that contrast (but one of many contradictions in Calvinism).

At the end of his reply, he posed a fair question and I replied, hoping it might induce him to reply, yet again and thus, to prolong the discussion until such a time as we could be brought to agreement on the scripture and the truth contained therein. Having posed a fair question, he deserved an honest reply...and I gave it. The final post in this series contains my reply to his question...

Conversation with a "Calvinist" - 4

In reply to my response to his answer, my young correspondent wrote the following (he is very inconsistent in his use of underlining and quotation marks, but I understood what he was saying and found no reason to unduly put the discussion on a wrong footing of personal attack):

Ok, I am only going to deal with a few points for now, because I am still deciding whether or not to continue this discussion. I would give you a reason, but you would just come to your own conclusions anyway and tell me that I think either this or this and that what I say cannot be what I mean, so I won't bother. But I will say that, you NEED to look into the mirror of God's word man. You are nothing but hateful, arrogant, rude and prideful. I could name a few, but I won't.

You say, "Calvinism IS grace. Calvinism has NOTHING to do with legalism, but rather opposes it. Calvinism is the foremost opponent of what is known as Christian Liberty. Calvinism DOES NOT believe in 'the open exaltation of salvation by flawless deeds and works of human merit.", [sic] but rather that man is unable to come to God on his own due to the amount of sinfulness and blindness as a result of the fall of man and that He is saved only because God has grace on Him." But, you don't really believe that. I don't? And how is that? I say that I do, but you do not believe me? Why? Please tell me and show me why I d not believe this. You are either lying about what you believe, How am I lying about what I believe? or you are woefully deceived How is that? (the only other alternative is that you are a fool, but I can see that is not true and will not even consider it to be true). From what you have written, is it really that much of a stretch that I could be? *grin*

You believe what Calvin taught. You believe what "the reformers" believed. You believe what Spurgeon believed, and this is what it is: The word of God, pure and simple.

Unfortunately, Spurgeon knew no more about grace than you, ____________. He thought that grace was on the throne by conquest, sitting there "by right." He thought that God ~owes~ the elect salvation, because Jesus earned it and it is their "by right." From this, once again, can be seen your ignorance. You have shown clearly that you know nothing of neither myself, Calvinism, nor Spurgeon. Spurgeon did not believe that God owes man anything, nor that God is obligated to save anyone. You may be able to twist spurgeons words with others and pit them against his, but you cannot do this with me.

You, like Spurgeon and Calvin, believe that grace was EARNED by the vicarious obedience and death of Jesus Christ. You, like Spurgeon and Calvin, believe that it is ~only~ the FLAWLESS MERIT OF OBEDIENCE TO THE LAW OF GOD that saves man. If by this you mean through CHRISTS flawless merit or obedience to the law of God, then yes. If it were not by these means, then how is it that men are saved?

Spurgeon believed that the law of God was vindicated, kept flawlessly and His wrath eternally satisfied Yes, substitutionary atonement -- and that in whatever way it may be called "grace," God owes the elect because, in Christ, the law of God is vindicated, kept flawlessly and imputed to them. That's what you believe, ____________. Once again I will state for clarity, I DO NOT believe that God owes man anything. Nothing, No, Zero. Zilch. Nada.

You know RP, I was going to go on, but it doesn't change. I don't need to have this conversation with you, because it seems that you know me better than I know me. *grin* And I don't need to say anything, because your just going to tell me that I don;t believe that I have said or that I believe something else, so as for now I am done. I was really hoping that we could discuss this topic, but it seems that we cannot. If you ever want to lose the chip on your shoulder, surrender the pride to the Lord and come down off of that horse of yours, then we may be able to discuss this as two adults. But as long as you are going to tell me what I believe, I will have no part in that. It is neither edifying to the Lord nor to myself.

Have a good one*grin*

I must confess that I was disappointed that my correspondent chose to seque out of the discussion with this post, especially since he was the one who initiated the contact and suggested that we discuss the matter. But, I cannot control how others think, so my only option was to reply and hope that he might retain some of what I was trying to say to him.

The next post (#5) contains my reply...

Conversation with a "Calvinist" - 3

After receiving the reply of my correspondent, this is what I answered by return email:

Is it not interesting that all you "see is hatred, misunderstanding, misrepresentation, sarcasm, etc.," and then judge me on that basis? You pontificate with the same fanaticism of your father, Calvin, and judge that there is no love in my heart and no love in the words that I speak. And, your cynical little *grin* disclaimers do not suit the discussion. Did Jesus *grin* when He cleansed the Temple of the money-changers; And, while you are answering that, consider also whether His righteous indignation was seen by those He removed as "hatred, misunderstanding, misrepresentation, sarcasm, etc."?

Please understand something from the outset, ____________. I wear no name, but the name of Christ. I am not a part of any following that is not following Christ. I preach no doctrine, but the doctrine of Christ. I have no opinion, but the opinion of Christ, except in those matters concerning which God has expressed indifference. Surely you don't think doctrinal matters between us are matters of indifference to God, do you?

I'm glad you've dealt with my "type and worse before" (actually, I'd love to point you to a good English teacher for a bit of instruction in grammar and syntax, but I understand what you are saying and so I'll just plod on). With that experience, you have some understanding of those who take no pride in the flesh and who make it their aim, in all things, to be pleasing to Christ. No doubt, you know I have no righteousness of my own derived from law-keeping, but "that which comes by faith in Christ, that I may know Him and the power of His resurrection and the fellowship of His sufferings, being conformed to His death, if by any means I may attain to the resurrection from the dead." If you have dealt with my type "and worse" (they must be ~really~ bad folks, to be sure!) you will, perhaps, remember that "I have been crucified with Christ; and it is no longer I who live, but Christ lives in me; and the life which I now live in the flesh I live by faith in the Son of God, who loved me and gave Himself up for me."

On the other hand, ____________, I have NOT dealt with many who believe as you do, proclaiming as you do of the teachings of Calvin that "they and they alone are truth." Oh, I run into a lot of people who ~think~ they believe as you, but they don't really believe what you believe, if indeed your precious Calvinism is what you believe. They do not really believe in a God Who has acted arbitrarily to deny even the most minute atomic particle of His mercy to miserable creatures He has created for the sole purpose of damnation--and by that damnation to glorify Himself. They do not really believe in a God who holds the sin of one to be the actual cause of eternal damnation of all ~except~ those who could never be damned by that sin, being created for the sole purpose of salvation--and by that arbitrary, capricious salvation to glorify Himself. They do not really believe in Calvin's sick God, even though some, like you apparently, do believe in that God.

They do not really believe that a vengeful God would unjustly impute to the righteous that which is not their own, nor impute to the unrighteous that which they are not. They do not believe in a capricious and vengeful God Who waits as a blood-thirsty vulture to pounce upon the damned with amazing and unconscionable cruelty and bitter brutality. They do not believe in a system that reflects the callousness of its bitter God by compelling the unbelieving to bend to its ruthless will under penalty of death, dismemberment and disreputable heartlessness.

What they really believe, or rather want to believe, is that God created man in His Own image and after His Own likeness. They really believe that God's righteous character entrusted them with a moral will and the power of moral choice. They really believe that their woeful spiritual condition is because of the wrong choices they, like all men, have made in the face of the revelation of God's will for all man. They really believe that they stand to be judged by God without partiality for their disobedience and rebellion. They really believe that the same righteous God Who created them for His own good pleasure and to be in fellowship with Him, was so moved according to His goodness and merciful eternal wisdom and knowledge, that He saw the choices they would make before they ever made them, and prepared by the willing gift of His Own nature, to graciously attend to their need.

They really believe that it is a gracious God Who emptied Himself to take on their mortal nature and to endure their own weaknesses, yet without surrendering His Own true nature as God. They believe that it was not the merit of His Godlike wisdom and flawless moral choices that appeased a blood-thirsty and vengeful God, but rather that the driving mercy of His gracious gift was a moral sacrifice in their behalf, and that through the simple faith that responds and trusts and confesses and bows to the ways and choices that differ so much from their former choices, He saves them by the resurrection of Jesus Christ from the dead.

They really believe that His mercy, and not His vengefulness, leads them to repentance. They really believe that He called a man of faith to be His friend and by his friendship, prepared for all who would follow in his steps a simple example of believing when doubt surrounds them, of trusting when it seems so futile to do so, of hoping when all hope seems lost, of obeying when the frail and pathetic will seems so inadequate.

They really believe that the God of Heaven and Earth is loving, gracious and filled with mercy. They do not believe in Calvin's God, Who of All who ever existed, is capricious, harsh, vengeful, implacable, ruthless, uncharitable and without pity. They do not believe, in spite of what ignorant or just plain stupid teachers have tried to beat into their heads, that the God of Heaven and Earth turned His back on the Incarnate Messiah, despising and abhorring the affliction of the afflicted. They do not believe that He hid His face from Him, but that when He cried to Him for help, He heard.

You believe what Calvin taught. You believe what "the reformers" believed. You believe what Spurgeon believed, and this is what it is:

"He who knows the word "substitution," and can spell its meaning aright, will see that there is nothing due to punitive justice from any believer, seeing that Jesus Christ has paid all the believer’s debts, and now God would be unjust if he did not save those for whom Christ vicariously suffered, for whom his righteousness was provided, and to whom it is imputed. Grace is on the throne by conquest, and sits there by right" (Spurgeon, sermon "The Throne of Grace").

Unfortunately, Spurgeon knew no more about grace than you, ____________. He thought that grace was on the throne by conquest, sitting there "by right." He thought that God ~owes~ the elect salvation, because Jesus earned it and it is their "by right."

You, like Spurgeon and Calvin, believe that grace was EARNED by the vicarious obedience and death of Jesus Christ. You, like Spurgeon and Calvin, believe that it is ~only~ the FLAWLESS MERIT OF OBEDIENCE TO THE LAW OF GOD that saves man. Here's how Spurgeon put it, and no doubt, you will agree:

"The law of God was more vindicated by the death of Christ than it would have been had all transgressors been sent to Hell. For the Son of God to suffer for sin was a more glorious establishment of the government of God, than for the whole race to suffer" (Spurgeon, "Just and the Justifier," pg. 22).

Spurgeon believed that the law of God was vindicated, kept flawlessly and His wrath eternally satisfied -- and that in whatever way it may be called "grace," God owes the elect because, in Christ, the law of God is vindicated, kept flawlessly and imputed to them. That's what you believe, ____________.

And, again...

"It must be so, that since expiation is made, God is able to forgive without shaking the basis of His throne, or in the least degree blotting the statute book. Conscience gets a full answer to her tremendous question. The wrath of God against iniquity, whatever that may be, must be beyond all conception terrible. Well did Moses say, 'Who knoweth the power of thine anger?' Yet when we hear the Lord of glory cry, 'Why hast thou forsaken me?' and see Him yielding up the ghost, we feel that the justice of God has received abundant vindication by obedience so perfect and death so terrible, rendered by so divine a person. If God himself bows before His own law, what more can be done? There is more in the atonement by way of merit, than there is in all human sin by way of demerit" (op.cit.)

Like Spurgeon, you believe that "the justice of God has received abundant vindication by obedience so perfect and death so terrible" that God was OBLIGATED to bow before His own law and to save "by way of merit." Deny it, though you will, that is what Calvinism is, ____________.

Neither Spurgeon nor any other Calvinist who has walked upon this Earth has EVER believed in grace, for to them grace is only the forensic (legal) vindication by flawless moral excellence and perfect obedience imputed to them. Only then, with the law vindicated and wrath satisfied, are they legally--not graciously--acquitted. Not saved, ____________, for they need no salvation; they are flawless, morally upright and seen only in the light of Christ's moral excellence. But, since you cannot see that your theology demands universal salvation for all (since Jesus took the place of all), you have accepted Calvin's bastardized explanation that Christ died only for those whom a capricious God did not individually and personally choose for eternal damnation. You cannot see that respect of persons is a fundamental principal of Calvinism.

You and all Calvinists believe that God has no grace that does not flow out and because of LEGAL vindication. You are legalists of the rankest sort, who find nothing of grace in the nature of God,

...no mercy without compliance,

...no kindness without the appeasement of wrath,

...no love that does not demand forensic satisfaction.

You say, "John Calvin is not MY theological father," but there is not a single point in which you would defer from his pontifications, if your testimony is to be believed. Not only is Calvin your theological father, but Augustine is your theological grandfather -- and neither of them is a son of the Father in Heaven (before you get in a snit over those words, consider what Jesus said in John 8:33-47). Both denigrated salvation in Christ Jesus and proved in their lives and writings that they knew little or nothing of the scripture. Both were unwilling to rise to the challenge of a moral appeal to those whom God created in His image and likeness, choosing rather to slander all and bring disrepute on the revelation of God in Christ Jesus. Both were progenitors of systems of FORENSIC justification, and both were wrong...as you are wrong, ____________.

As God is my witness, ____________, I have not one shred of ill-will toward you, nor am I pleased to have to speak with such plainness of speech and apparent harshness. My heart is filled and overflowing with deep love for you and a prayer for your enlightenment, according to truth. I have no intention of having fellowship with you in what is wrong, but neither am I content to leave you in error and soul-endangering sin. It is because of the merciful and gracious character of the God of Heaven and Earth, the Father of our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ, that I appeal to you to repent. But, if you will not come because of His gracious goodness---and make no mistake about it, ____________, you have NEVER come to Him on that basis, choosing rather to believe that His blood-thirst and implacable wrath must first be LEGALLY SATISFIED before you can approach Him---I say, if you will not come by His goodness, then knowing the terror of the Lord and the certainty of a coming day of judgment, I would appeal to you in strong words and (hopefully) Christ-like persuasion to repent and come to Him Who knew no sin, but was made a sin-sacrifice that you might be the righteousness of God in Him.

Incidently, you quoted me as saying something I ~DID NOT~ say. I did not ask if you would continue the ~PROGRAM~ of the man whose name you wear (you changed the spelling of my word in your response). I asked, "Will you continue the pogram of the man whose name you wear?" Rather than me running the risk of you misunderstanding my point, perhaps you should look up that word and in the context of my question, answer it again.

I am always happy to discuss the scriptures with reasonable men and women of goodwill and integrity of heart. My warmest personal regards attend this way-too-long note, and I await your faithful reply.

Not one to be cowed by a straightforward reply, my correspondent set his pen to the task of answering me. The next post (#4 in the series) contains his reply...

Conversation with a "Calvinist" - 2

In the following reply to my post, my sincere, but deluded correspondent underlined his own comments and left citations from my post without any underlining. He wrote from his heart and, without a doubt, he pressed his reply with vigor and conviction. Here's what he wrote:

"Man you are pretty harsh. *grin* But that ok. Just shows the true colors of both you and the "following" that you are with. You claim to preach truth is love, but all I see is hatred, misunderstanding, misrepresentation, sarcasm, etc... There is no love in the words that you speak. Is there no love in your heart? For the most part man, I got all of this from the website. Later on in the email, you asked me if I have ever had a an original thought from the scriptures. Have you? All I see is the same old rhetoric that can be found on the site. I want your opinion, not the opinion of the "following" that you are affiliated with. Let me hear you thoughts. Or are these thoughts your thoughts? I sure hope not due to the amount of hatred and discussed. Are the following thoughts your own? Or are they conditioned responses due to your affiliation with this "following"?

"I am reluctantly going to reply to the "lovely" email that you sent, point by point, underlining my reply for clarity. I am not in any way expecting these words to reach you ears. I am merely doing this because I fell lead by God to preach the truth in LOVE.

"Thank you for your note. I am always happy to sit with those who are interested in spiritual matters. Happy to DISCUSS or just happy and quick to pronounce? However, I am not interested in a harangue with someone who proudly wears the name of his theological father as though it is a badge of honor. For not wanting to argue you sure are good and trying to get ones dander up with offensive words, nasty remarks, and hatred. *grin* Just so you know, I have dealt with your type and worse before. If you are looking for some joy out of getting me upset, its not going to work.

"John Calvin is not MY theological father. And I am in no way wearing his name as a name badge, but yes, I proudly hold to the system of beliefs that bears his name for they and they alone are truth. If you would like me to, I can refer to them as the Doctrines of Grace from now on.

"I wonder why anyone, who would worship and serve the God of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob, would proudly wear the name and revel in the theological identity of someone who lived and died 1500 years after Jesus died so that we might be called by His name and find salvation in Him only. As the great Charles Spurgeon said, Calvinism is just a nickname for Christian. But thats beside the point. You sure seem to take allot of time slashing and bashing the name of Calvin rather than dealing with the issue, whether the systems of Calvinism are true. Why don't you stick to that? I wonder why anyone would pat himself on the back for writing an email signature that denies both the spirit and the word of God's eternal revelation. How have I patted myself on the back? How do you know what I have done? That is a very bold assumption. And how does it deny the spirit and the word of God's Eternal Truth?

"I wonder why anyone would cite John 17:17 in his signature, even as he propounds a dogma that denies it to be true. Why? How do I propound a dogma that denies that John 17:17 is true. You are all about making factitious statements, derived from your own mind, rather than stating the truth. Maybe you should try that next time. A little less accusation and a little more supports for your beliefs. I wonder how on Earth a person can read the Word of God Well wonder no more... and then consent to bend to the will and way of a man who never understood the nature of God And how do I do this?, the scriptural identity and work of Christ, the revelation of the Divine mystery of redemption, the work of the Holy Spirit, the nature of the church, the nature and fruits of faith, and the nature of Divine grace? Like I have said several times before, you are so quick to make these claims, but you add no support. You say that I do this and that, but where is the proof?

"I wonder why anyone would claim to believe in grace when ~every~ element of the theological system he wears is fraught with legalism and the open exaltation of salvation by flawless deeds and works of human merit? You need to take less time slamming and name calling and take a little more time studying what true Calvinism is. Calvinism IS grace. Calvinism has NOTHING to do with legalism, but rather opposes it. Calvinism is the foremost opponent of what is known as Christian Liberty. Calvinism DOES NOT believe in "the open exaltation of salvation by flawless deeds and works of human merit.",but rather that man is unable to come to God on his own due to the amount of sinfulness and blindness as a result of the fall of man and that He is saved only because God has grace on Him. Do you know anything about true Calvinism? Or just what your "following" teaches you to believe? It seems more of the later.

"Have you ~ever~ had an original thought from the scriptures Have you?, or one that did not suckle the teat of a 29-year old fanatic and murderer of God's people? Man, do you have any grace and forgiveness in your heart? Have you done anything wrong in your life? Calvin was a sinner just as we all are. He did something that was very very wrong and he knew that, repented and was forgiven for that. Who are you to hold that above his head? Are you God that you should not forgive? Will you continue the program of the man whose name you wear? Yes I shall.

"Shall we begin with James 2:24, or will you also deny that the epistle of James is inspired of God and profitable for teaching, for reproof, for correction, for training in righteousness; so that the man of God may be adequate, equipped for every good work? Will you take that scripture for what it says and preach it exactly as James wrote it, without saying that James did not mean what even the ignorant can read that he said? Or, should we consider Colossians 2:12? Or, perhaps you would prefer to discuss Ephesians 2:8-9? We can begin whereever you like. I do not fear the word of God, but imbrace ALL of it as truth. So, lets get down to buisness now that you have hopefully gotten over your name calling and remarks without support or backing, maybe now we can actually discuss what the Word says. So, please, throw anything out there you would like.

"Remember, lets actually deal with scripture."

Truly, the last sentence of my correspondent should be the focus of our exchange. I have found, however, there are many who claim to want to "actually deal with scripture," but they end up citing historical personages and writings of other, even as my young correspondent did in his reply to my response.

The next post in this series will contain my reply to the post cited above. Before I go, let me be careful to thank you for your interest and attention to my musings. I have no intention to serve any other than my Lord and I hope that conviction is evident throughout this exchange.

Conversation with a "Calvinist"

Back in 2003, I received a note from an avowed Calvinist, based on with some materials posted on a website with which I have a nominal relationship. These writings call into question the basis of Calvinist thinking, and are based those writings on the body of extensive writing, from both John Calvin and those who espouse his teaching, that is widely and easily accessible on the Internet.

Here is the note I received (all information that might identify the author has been deleted):

"Beings that you are part of the www.bible.ca organization, I was wondering what you view is on Calvinism and if you also personally believe it to be heresy. If so, then I would love to begin a discussion with you on the topic."

His reply was signed with a typical email signature which also contained the following:

"John 17:17"

and

"Salvation is by grace alone, through faith alone, in Christ alone, as revealed in the Scripture alone to the glory of God alone."

I could not righteously fail to reply to any legitimate questions in the mind of the author and so I wrote back, as follows:

"Thank you for your note. I am always happy to sit with those who are interested in spiritual matters. However, I am not interested in a harangue with someone who proudly wears the name of his theological father as though it is a badge of honor.

"I wonder why anyone, who would worship and serve the God of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob, would proudly wear the name and revel in the theological identity of someone who lived and died 1500 years after Jesus died so that we might be called by His name and find salvation in him only. I wonder why anyone would pat himself on the back for writing an email signature that denies both the spirit and the word of God's eternal revelation.

"I wonder why anyone would cite John 17:17 in his signature, even as he propounds a dogma that denies it to be true. I wonder how on Earth a person can read the Word of God and then consent to bend to the will and way of a man who never understood the nature of God, the scriptural identity and work of Christ, the revelation of the Divine mystery of redemption, the work of the Holy Spirit, the nature of the church, the nature and fruits of faith, and the nature of Divine grace?

"I wonder why anyone would claim to believe in grace when ~every~ element of the theological system he wears is fraught with legalism and the open exaltation of salvation by flawless deeds and works of human merit?

"Shall we begin with James 2:24, or will you also deny that the epistle of James is inspired of God and profitable for teaching, for reproof, for correction, for training in righteousness; so that the man of God may be adequate, equipped for every good work? Will you take that scripture for what it says and preach it exactly as James wrote it, without saying that James did not mean what even the ignorant can read that he said?

"Or, should we consider Colossians 2:12? Or, perhaps you would prefer to discuss Ephesians 2:8-9?

"Have you ~ever~ had an original thought from the scriptures, or one that did not suckle the teat of a 29-year old fanatic and murderer of God's people? Will you continue the pogram of the man whose name you wear?"

No doubt, my words were strong, as they were intended to be. They were intended to be the thrown-down gauntlet of a crusader for the will of God. I do not think myself to be the possessor of all truth, but I know God has revealed Himself and am willing to let Him speak for Himself.

And so, the correspondence continued...

Monday, November 22, 2004

The Moral of the Story - 3

Still More of What I’ve Learned from Email

Every now and then, I will receive something via email that has absolutely no spiritual lesson. It may be funny or it may be just interesting. Some of these are kept in my "Keepers" folder (if they are worth keeping), but most are simply discarded to the electronic Recycle Bin to await my emptying the trash at some future time.

The "lesson" for today came from my daughter, and when I read it a spiritual lesson came thundering in. I hope you will like it, and the "moral of the story" that follows:

Life Before the Computer
Slightly Edited

An application was for employment
A program was a TV show
A cursor used profanity
A keyboard was a piano!
Memory was something that you lost with age
A CD was a bank account
Compress was something you did to garbage, not something you did to a file.
If you unzipped anything in public, you'd be in jail for awhile.
Log on was adding wood to a fire
Hard drive was a long trip on the road
A mouse pad was where a mouse lived (in beatnik talk)
A backup happened to your toilet!
Cut - you did with a pocket knife
Paste - you did with glue
A web was a spider's home
A virus was the flu!
What will the new millennium bring to our lives?

Royce’s "Moral of the Story"

I suppose it would be simplest just to say that the moral of the story is that times change. Technology improves. But, there is a larger, better application for a preacher who wants to call it like he sees it.

The fact is, technology is not the only thing that is changing. While God is immutable (not subject to change) and Jesus is "the same yesterday and today and forever" (Hebrews 13:8), this old spiritual world is changing so fast I can hardly keep up!

One of the grandest slogans of the collective heirs of the Campbell-Stone (or Restoration) movement is, "We speak where the Bible speaks, and are silent where the Bible is silent." Unless you are over 40 years old, I suspect you have never heard that! But, it’s a good slogan, nonetheless.

We used to "get onto" the denominational folks for all of their terms and phrases that are without scriptural precedent and support. Along the way, some of them listened and agreeing, came in obedience the gospel. Nowadays, however, "our" language is no better than "their" language. We call things, not by Bible names, but by the descriptive names of human origin.

I cannot tell you how many times members of the church have introduced me to their friends as "our Pastor" or "my Minister." Truth be known, if I am anybody’s minister, I am the minister of Christ and only secondarily the minister of men. Furthermore, I am nobody’s "Pastor" for the Spirit has not appointed me to the work (Acts 20:28).

About 3000 years ago, Nehemiah told about the children of God and the effect of their pagan and foreign spouses upon them and their children. He said, "As for their children, half spoke in the language of Ashdod, and none of them was able to speak the language of Judah, but the language of his own people" (Nehemiah 13:24). When the people of God are constantly and relentlessly subjected to the language of Ashdod, that is the language they are going to speak!

It’s time we stopped currying the favor of denominational apologists and seminary-trained preachers. If we are ever going to turn the tide of language back to the words of Divine origin, we are going to have to start (once again) "calling Bible things by Bible names." Paul said,

"There are, perhaps, a great many kinds of languages in the world, and no kind is without meaning. If then I do not know the meaning of the language, I will be to the one who speaks a barbarian, and the one who speaks will be a barbarian to me" (1 Corinthians 14:10-11).

We don’t sound like "Barbarians" anymore, because we are speaking their language (they have never abandoned their language in favor of God’s, so if any movement has taken place, it has been on our part).

It may be true that technology is changing, but it is not possible that the Word of God will do so. He remains faithful, for He cannot deny Himself. He is immutable; He does not change. If we belong to Him, we won’t be changing, either!

Point: What do you think we called things before men devised their own language for spiritual things?

The Moral of the Story - 2

More of What I’ve Learned from Email

Earlier, I told you that computers are marvelous (are you convinced yet?)! Every day I receive email from friends, brethren, loved ones, and acquaintances. I also receive a lot of "spam" (Computer Lesson #2: "Spam" is not a canned meat product; it is the relentless stream of unsolicited marketing garbage that arrives with the other electronic mail. Junk mail comes to your home or Postal Box number, and "spam" comes to electronic mailboxes.)

Still, I get a LOT of excellent information from those who apparently, think I need it. Here is another example with a worthy message:

Fishermen?

Now it came to pass that a group existed that called themselves fishermen and there were many fish in the waters about them. In fact, the whole area was surrounded by streams and lakes and the fish were hungry. Week after week and month after month and year after year the group called themselves fishermen and met in meetings and talked about those called to fish, the abundance of fish, and how we might go about fishing. Year after year they carefully defined what fishing meant, defended fishing as an occupation, and declared that fishing be the primary talk of fishermen. These fishermen built large beautiful buildings for local fishing headquarters and their plea was that everyone should be a fisherman and that everyone should fish.

However, the one thing they did not, they did not fish!

In addition to meeting regularly these men determined to send out fishermen to places where there were many fish. This sending committee was headed by those who had great vision and had courage to speak about fishing and to promote the idea of fishing in far away streams and lakes where many other fish of different colors lived. They hired staff and held many meetings to define fishing, to defend fishing, and to decide what new streams should be thought about. But the one thing the staff and the committee members did not do, they did not fish!

Large, elaborate training centers were built whose original and primary purpose was to teach fishermen how to fish. Over the years courses were offered on the needs of fish, the nature of fish, how to find fish, and the psychological effects of fishing. Those who taught had Doctorates in "Fisheology." But the teachers did not fish! They only taught about fishing.

Further, the fishermen built large printing houses to publish fishing guides. Presses were kept busy day and night to produce material solely devoted to fishing methods. A speakers' bureau was also organized to schedule special speakers on fishing. After one stirring meeting entitled "The Necessity of Fishing," two young men left the meeting and actually went fishing, and one of them actually caught two fish! He was honored for his great catch and was scheduled to appear at all the big meetings to tell how he did it. So he quit fishing in order to have time to tell his experiences to other fishermen.

Now it is true that many of the fishermen sacrificed and put up with all kinds of difficulties. Some lived near the water and had to put up with the smell of dead fish. Some had to endure the ridicule of some who made fun of these fishermen's clubs because they claimed to be fishermen but they did not fish.

And they wondered about those who thought it was of little use to attend the meetings and talk about fishing. I mean, after all, were they not following the Master who said, "Come and I will make you fishers of men?" Imagine their chagrin when someone actually suggested that they were not really "fishermen." Yet it did make sense. Can we rightfully call a person a fisherman if year after year he never catches a fish?

Can a person really be following Jesus if he is not fishing?

Royce’s "Moral of the Story"

You know, folks, I am not going to belabor this excellent parable by trying to preach to preachers. Let it suffice to say that if a preacher is not producing results from his efforts, he should not be calling himself a preacher. He might be producing results in baptizing people, or in building up the local church, or perhaps his best talent is in "on the road" evangelism. Whatever the venue and however the results are measured, he must be catching fish or be otherwise engaged in the work of a fisherman. Otherwise, he is no fisherman.

Preacher, preach! It’s not your job to "eld" – that’s the job of the elders. It’s not your job to "deac" – that’s the deacons’ job. Your job is to "preach the word; be ready in season and out of season; reprove, rebuke, exhort, with great patience and instruction" (2 Timothy 4:2). Do it here. Do it there. Do it wherever you are. But, for crying out loud, preach!

The Moral of the Story - 1

Or, What I’ve Learned from Email

Computers are marvelous! One of the things I enjoy most about them is the ability to save the 33 cents I would otherwise give to the U. S. Postal Service – instead, I just send email (that is a contraction of electronic mail, which is really quite a simple matter of me writing a note and "addressing" it to someone’s unique electronic identification on a large computer system that serves as an electronic Post Office).

The greatest feature of email is that it is (generally) very fast [usually under 30 minutes to literally circle the globe, although it did take about a week for Lee Wolf to get a recent message from me and he lives just across town. It probably got stuck in China, somewhere], and allows us to almost instantaneously contact our loved ones, such our son and his wife, who have been stationed in Germany for over a year. Now that he is going to Kosovo, we will communicate with him via email and his Trans-European cellular phone (ain’t technology great?).

Another feature of email is the ability to send "mail" to large groups of people (similar to a mailing list to which you mail out say, 50 copies of something you want them all to read). Of course, you have heard about all the trash that is also sent by email, but that is no more a condemnation of email than the junk mail in your mailbox is a condemnation of your mailman.
Over the next few weeks, I plan to share some of the great things I have received. This is the first installment, and I hope you will like it:

The Biggest Mathematical Miracle in the World!
With Slight Editing

Moses and the people were in the desert, but what was he going to do with them? They had to be fed, and feeding 2 or 3 million people requires a lot of food. According to the Quartermaster General in the Army, it is reported that Moses would have to have had 1500 tons of food each day.

Do you know that to bring that much food each day, two freight trains, each at least a mile I in length would be required! Besides you must remember, they were out in the desert, so they would have to have firewood to use in cooking the food. This would take 4000 tons of wood and a few more freight trains, each a mile long, just for one day. And just think, they were forty years in transit.

They would have to have water. If they only had enough to drink and wash a few dishes, it would take 11,000,000 gallons each day, and a freight train with tank cars, 1800 miles long, just to bring water!

Another thing! They had to get across the Red Sea at night. (They did?) Now, if they went on a narrow path, double file, the line would be 800 miles long and would require 35 days and nights to get through. So, There had to be a space in the Red Sea, 3 miles wide so that they could walk 5000 abreast to get over in one night. But then, there is another problem.

Each time they camped at the end of the day, a campground two-thirds the size of the state of Rhode Island was required, or a total of 750 square miles long...think of it! This much space, just for nightly camping.

Do you think Moses figured all this out before he left Egypt? I think not! You see, Moses believed in God. God took care of these things for him. Now do you think God has any problem taking care of all your needs?

Royce’s "Moral of the Story"

You and I spend far too much time worrying about how we are going to do what we must do and whether we will have what we need each day. Yet, Jesus told us that each day has sufficient problems without our worrying about it. It’s going to be there, so why worry about it? We cannot change it; we can only react to it.

The scriptures teach that God will care for His people. David said, "I have been young and now I am old, Yet I have not seen the righteous forsaken or his descendants begging bread" (Psalm 37:25). Every provision we have in this life has come from God; He is the giver of every good thing that is given (James 1:17).

What on earth are we thinking when we feel we must worry about whether God will do what He has promised to do? Jesus said,

"…do not be worried about your life, as to what you will eat or what you will drink; nor for your body, as to what you will put on. Is not life more than food, and the body more than clothing? 26"Look at the birds of the air, that they do not sow, nor reap nor gather into barns, and yet your heavenly Father feeds them. Are you not worth much more than they? 27"And who of you by being worried can add a single hour to his life? 28"And why are you worried about clothing? Observe how the lilies of the field grow; they do not toil nor do they spin, 29yet I say to you that not even Solomon in all his glory clothed himself like one of these. 30"But if God so clothes the grass of the field, which is alive today and tomorrow is thrown into the furnace, will He not much more clothe you? You of little faith!" (Matthew 6:25-30)

Our problem, unlike Moses, is the lack of faith. Believe that God will do what He said He would do!

Musings on Y2K...Back Then

Well, it’s finally here. Either I am writing this to those who, overnight, have been vaporized by some great Power beyond our capacity to understand (in which case, there is no one to read what I am writing) or we have all survived the promised "Millenium Bug."

So here we are, "The Day After", secure in our spiritual environment and in the company of one another. Isn’t it great to be alive and in the service of God?

We have all been told about all of the great things in the past year / century / millenium (1999 was all of those!), but what are we going to do in Y2K? This may be Year 2000, but it is also…

Y2-KNOW

This is an excellent opportunity for you to acknowledge the place of God in your deepest longings. There is within normal man, a deep and insatiable desire for the knowledge of God.
It is only when men have seared their consciences by their denial of Divine rule and their obstinate choice of sin’s pleasure that God releases us from His providential Hands. Never forget that your refusal to have God in your knowledge compels His withdrawal from our lives. Where then will you go?

Y2K is the time to know God and His will for your life.
Y2K is the time "to know the love of Christ which surpasses knowledge, that you may be filled up to all the fullness of God" (Ephesians 3:19, cf. vss. 17-18).
Y2K is the time to know how to live in holiness. This means "that each of you know how to possess his own vessel in sanctification and honor" (1 Thessalonians 4:4). Without holiness as a daily characteristic in your life, you will not see God (Hebrews 12:14).

Y2-KNOCK

"Ask, and it will be given to you; seek, and you will find; knock, and it will be opened to you. For everyone who asks receives, and he who seeks finds, and to him who knocks it will be opened." (Matthew 7:7-8, NASB)

If you know God, you already know how great is His love and mercy. The great blessing of Divine forgiveness is ours because of "the riches of His grace which He lavished on us…according to His kind intention which He purposed in Him" (Ephesians 1:7-9).

Surely, we who have been so greatly blessed cannot fail to see just how great is the Divine desire for our every need. Whatever we may confront, it is God’s will that our needs be supplied. Take a few moments to consider the context of the passage cited at the beginning of this section, always remembering that this is exactly how God feels about YOU:

"Or what man is there among you who, when his son asks for a loaf, will give him a stone? Or if he asks for a fish, he will not give him a snake, will he? If you then, being evil, know how to give good gifts to your children, how much more will your Father who is in heaven give what is good to those who ask Him!" (Matthew 7:9-11).

Is it possible that you have forgotten how important it is that you daily knock upon the door of the Divine storehouse? Hear the prophet:

"‘…test Me now in this,’ says the LORD of hosts, ‘if I will not open for you the windows of heaven and pour out for you a blessing until it overflows’" (Malachi 3:10).

Indeed, so great is the mind of God toward His people that He has explicitly promised,

"For I know the thoughts that I think toward you, saith the LORD, thoughts of peace, and not of evil, to give you an expected end. Then shall ye call upon me, and ye shall go and pray unto me, and I will hearken unto you. And ye shall seek me, and find me, when ye shall search for me with all your heart. And I will be found of you, saith the LORD" (Jeremiah 29:11-14).

Beloved let this be the year you knock!

Y2-KNEEL

We have now come full circle. Isn’t it interesting that the thing that brings you to God also keeps you there? No man ever came to God standing before Him in obdurate arrogance, and no Christian stays in His presence without bowing before Him.

Just recently, Lee and I attended a showing of the acclaimed movie, Anna and the King (the politically correct and refreshingly moral remake of Anna and the King of Siam and The King and I), and we were reminded that some cultures expect honor to be shown to dignitaries. In one scene, as Anna wondered why she was being addressed as "Sir", she was told "Because no woman stands in the presence of His Majesty, the King." At every turn in the story, we encountered honor: Children bowed before their teacher and the king, and no one stood in the presence of the king without his explicit permission.

Sometimes people wonder why we insist on order and decorum in worship, and why we expect that every Christian will offer to God the very best of his life, his dress and his words. Quite frankly, it is because God is worth it!

Bow before Him in respect
Bow before Him in obedience
Bow before Him in prayer

There is little you or I can do to change the day or date that now is. Indeed, in this exciting time, why on earth would you want to change it? This is our day! Then, carpe diem, "seize the day."
Hear and heed the words of Paul,

"But since we are of the day, let us be sober, having put on the breastplate of faith and love, and as a helmet, the hope of salvation. For God has not destined us for wrath, but for obtaining salvation through our Lord Jesus Christ, who died for us, so that whether we are awake or asleep, we will live together with Him" (1 Thessalonians 5:8-10).

How Sweetly I Sleep

Recently I was reading some posts on one of the Internet email lists, and the discussion turned to spiritual songs that deal with death. Of course, there are many ways in which we deal with our emotional connections with death. Weeping. Singing. Meditation. Each of these has its place in our grieving process.

One of the ways Christians cope with the realities of death is summed in the words of Paul, who wrote,

"But we do not want you to be uninformed, brethren, about those who are asleep, so that you will not grieve as do the rest who have no hope" (1 Thessalonians 4:13).

The point is not that we do not grieve, but that we do not grieve as the rest. Some grieve in hopelessness; others grieve in hope.

Whether we grieve in hope or hopelessness is dependent upon one factor, as Paul continued,

"For if we believe that Jesus died and rose again, even so God will bring with Him those who have fallen asleep in Jesus" (1 Thessalonians 4:14).

Frankly, there are some whose passing I mourn as those who have no hope, for I know the kind of life they have lived and the wasted opportunities for serving God they have allowed to pass. This is what I feel when I am called upon to assist a grieving family upon the death of a family member who has lived-and died-outside of saving grace.

However for others, some of whom I have laid in the ground during our short time in San Bernardino, I have the highest sense of joy and gratitude for the character and ongoing testimony of their lives, even as Revelation 14:13 declares: "And I heard a voice from heaven, saying, "Write, ‘Blessed are the dead who die in the Lord from now on!’" "Yes," says the Spirit, "so that they may rest from their labors, for their deeds follow with them." Death can be beautiful.

On her album, "Sweet Rivers" Jean Ritchie sings a song that seems appropriate at this point in our study. One verse of the song is given below:

I came to the place where the white pilgrim lay,
And pensively stood by his tomb.
When in a low whisper I heard something say,
"How sweetly I sleep here alone."

Of the origins of the song, she says, "This is a very well-known and popular hymn in our region [the mountains of Kentucky]. I used to think that the patriarch and founder of the Little Zion Church, Uncle Ira Combs, with his flowing snow-white hair and beard, was the original White Pilgrim, but he assured me that the White Pilgrim had gone a long time before and that he was only following in the Pilgrim's footsteps."

Don’t misunderstand the meaning of whiteness in the song. It has nothing to do with race or gray hair, nor does it have anything to do with Plymouth Rock or painted church buildings. It’s a way of living, "walking in the light as He is in the light" (1 John 1:7).

May God help us all to walk in the steps of the white pilgrim so that ours will be a joyful death.

Some People I Have Known In Christ

Paul wrote an interesting section of scripture in 2 Corinthians 12:2 that gives pause to reflect on some special people I know in Christ. He said,

"I know a man in Christ who fourteen years ago—whether in the body I do not know, or out of the body I do not know, God knows—such a man was caught up to the third heaven."

Without taking the time to exegete the context, I will simply affirm that the "man in Christ" Paul speaks of is himself. He was the one who was "caught up to the third heaven" – a figurative way to refer to the Spirit’s revelatory works in Paul, an apostle of Jesus Christ (see also Galatians 1:11-12).

Given the context of Paul’s writing, it would be obvious for me to say that one of the special people I know in Christ is me, myself. Of course, one should tread softly on the ground that threatens to swallow him in self-deceit, so it will have to suffice to acknowledge that though I know Royce, there are things about him I do not like.

I want to tell you about some other people I have known in Christ.

A. A. McInroe

Unless you were raised about the cattle range regions of Hereford, Texas or roamed through the churches of West and North Central Texas, you’ve probably never heard of A. A. McInroe. He was my mentor in the pulpit.

Brother McInroe came to work with the church just a few years after my dad died. Brother "Mc", as he was lovingly known by the saints, was a powerful preacher of the gospel. He was the man who first took me under his wing, saying, "Look son, if you’re going to preach, you’re going to have to get some things straightened out. And, you’re going to start by memorizing scriptures. Here’s the first one…"

When I think of A. A. McInroe, I think of the one thing that, in my estimation, makes one man stand head and shoulders over his peers. Brother McInroe truly lived the gospel he preached. He was immeasurably filled with the grace of God, and was a man of strength and forcefulness tempered by kindness and mercy.

If there was only one thing to commend brother McInroe it would be this: Out of the almost 45 years of my knowledge of the faithful church in one West Texas city, only one young man came out as a preacher, and brother McInroe was his mentor.

Judd Strother

You may not realize it, but I’ve told you about Judd Strother many times. Oh, I don’t always mention his name; I just mention the wonderful influence he had on me as an elder of the church where Lee and I were serving God.

Judd Strother was a quiet man. He spoke very little. Some even thought him to be dull (geniuses are that way, you know). Even in meetings of the eldership, he would say very little. He might nod his agreement, or make a stilted and clipped comment, but he was never vocal in the sense that others are vocal.

Like E. F. Hutton, when brother Strother spoke, people listened. His words were filled with the rich insight of a man who has drunk deep of the wisdom of God. When the ship of the Lord was headed for the sandbar of destruction, he would calmly take the helm and steer her back into the safety of the deep. Along the way, all of us who were already writing our spiritual Last Wills and Testaments came to know the assurance of Divine calmness manifest in the words and actions of brother Strother.

Judd Strother is gone now. My last memory of him is from within a few months of his death. He had suffered for years with the ravages of Alzheimer Syndrome and when we last saw him, he was curled up in a fetal position. His precious wife, Minnie (herself sticken with severe rheumatiod arthritis) was always there with him, gently brushing away the hair from his forehead or placing a cool washcloth around his neck. He’s gone now, but I knew him: a man-a real man in Christ.

Dearl Tucker

Several years ago, I was really hurting. I had been in three successive local works that were difficult and disappointing. In one, I had been summarily fired by an eldership that had a corrupting, malignant disease in one of its three legs. The other legs were unable to stand by themselves, so the entire stool fell. My greatest regret is that my own mistakes contributed to the burden that pressed upon that stool, but when it fell, it fell hard.

Leaving there, we went to a place we hoped would help us raise our young children in the Spirit of Christ. Little did I realize just how debilitated I was by that time, and in a short time it was evident that a great cataclysmic event was shortly to take place, an event I was not capable of resolving. I was low and getting lower. I was hurting and feeling every fiery dart from the Evil One.

Then, God brought me Dearl Tucker. I would like to say that God brought me to Dearl Tucker, but Dearl might argue with that!

I first met brother Tucker when I got off the airplane with my new tan slacks thoroughly soaked with the coffee stains from a jostled coffee tray in the hands of a harried stewardess. She had profusely apologized, and we tried to soak up the wetness with three dozen napkins, but the damage was done. When I exited the plane, there against the wall in his khakis, cowboy boots, straw hat and belt-buckle was Dearl Tucker. He chuckled when he saw the stains on the pants of that dude-of-a-California preacher.

By the time we had driven the 53 miles home, we had talked in depth about the needs of the church. Somewhere close to St. Mary’s Cemetery jet lag would not let me continue any longer, so as Dearl drove across the coastal bend of Texas toward his home, I drifted into the land of dreams and sugar-plum fairies.

Thus, began almost nine years of deep, Divinely-provisioned healing. The loving demeanor of good people who loved one another, but loved God more, worked the magic of profound healing in my soul.

It should have been evident that was my destiny, at least for some period of time, after I had told the brethren about every recent trial we had endured and supplied names within the troubled churches of our past. If at that early point in time I ever doubted this countrified "hick", he quickly brought it all to an end when he gathered the church and informed them, with me there, that he had called every person on the list I gave him. He reviewed his notes for the church and then gave his judgment, "In my opinion, brother Bell has told us the truth. He has even told us things that we would never have been able to know without him telling us. I’ve talked with these people, and I can tell you that the Devil is alive and well in California, today."

He never faltered. He never wavered. He never raised his voice. He never shrank from his duty. But, he did tell me off a couple of times. He did straightforwardly rebuke those who deserved it. Most importantly, almost singlehandedly, his were the hands God used to heal my hurting spirit.
I've always thought of Dearl Tucker as the Gamaliel of Refugio, Texas. I was a mess when I got there, but Dearl Tucker helped me become the man to assume the work in San Bernardino, the most important work of my life.