4.17 - IS CHRIST WITH US ?

IS CHRIST WITH US ? My friends and brethren, I am very deeply moved this afternoon by the presence of such a magnificent audience. When I call to mind that this is the sixth series of gatherings in this auditorium, wherein I have had a part, I find myself wholly unable to express the genuine and profound gratitude that is mine. Those six occasions have been as follows: four meetings, five nights in a discussion with Dr. Ira M. Boswell, of Georgetown, Kentucky, and then three nights for the delivery of some LECTURES on Palestine, Egypt, and lands evermore made sacred.

You have been exceeding and wonderfully kind in your response to our assemblies, and if this auditorium will seat eight thousand people, that number is here this afternoon. The lower floor, the galleries and platform, are filled to capacity.

We have come, friends, to the last day service of this meeting, and as a basis of what I have to say, I am reading to you from Luke 2:40 : "And the child grew, and waxed strong in spirit, filled with wisdom: and the grace of God was upon him. Now his parents went to Jerusalem every year at the feast of the Passover. And when he was twelve years old, they went up to Jerusalem after the custom of the feast. And when they had fulfilled the days, as they returned, the child Jesus tarried behind in Jerusalem; and Joseph and his mother knew not of it. But they, supposing him to have been in the company, went a day’s journey, and they sought him among their kinsfolk and acquaintance. And when they found him not, they turned back again to Jerusalem, seeking him."

That’s a part of the story in connection with Jesus Christ at the age of 12 years. When his parents left their home in Galilee and went up to Jerusalem to attend the Feast of the Passover, they took the child Jesus with them. After they had worshiped and started home, the child tarried behind, but his parents knew not of it. I stop to raise the point: Could they have known whether or not he was with them? They could. What was the trouble? "But they, supposing him to have been in the company, went a day’s journey" and then missed him. I just wonder, friends, if that does not illustrate matters today fairly well. All people who claim to love God and respect his word, think that Jesus Christ is walking with them down the pathway of time and, ultimately, will introduce them into the glories of "over this." Are you right certain that he is traveling in your company? Have you ever stopped to make due investigation? That would not say that you are dishonest, or necessarily unconcerned. His mother did exactly that. She thought that he was along with them. She knew not of his staying behind, but went along all the day, supposing that her precious boy was in the crowd, but she was mistaken about it. He wasn’t in her company and had not been since she started. Do you think this are people today journeying on toward their eternal destiny, only supposing that Christ is in their midst? After review of such a story as this, with all of its sadness and worry, don’t you think it timely that we should carefully examine to see whether or not Jesus Christ be with us? A day’s journey passed, during which time Mary, the mother, and Joseph, the father, were walking by supposition. It never dawned on them that they were wrong, that Christ was not in their midst, and had you asked them, "Is Jesus with you?" "Certainly," would have been their reply, but he wasn’t. They went till the close of the day and when they began to pitch tent for the evening, they looked round about to gather their company, and found, to their surprise, that Jesus Christ was not in their midst. That didn’t arouse them very much. Mary, the mother, thought: "Just over this is the camp of our kindred. He is with Uncle John, or with Aunt Elizabeth." But when she went over to the camp of her kindred, and made inquiry, and they took a search, he was not this. And then she said, "Well, we have some mighty good friends and they are camping just across on the other side.

I suppose he is with them." But when she went to look, lo and behold, he wasn’t with them, and never had been. Then business picked up, and, of course, this was no sleep that night. Everybody was aroused, Jesus Christ is lost to his parents and his friends. After searching all around to find him not among them: "They turned back again to Jerusalem," and this they found him. Friends, why is that in the Bible? Is that simply to fill in space, with an idle story, to no profit, regarding a little incident of the Saviour at the age of twelve? I certainly think not. From it this is a most wonderful lesson, that I believe all of this audience ought to consider.

Think, today, of the different encampments marching along down life’s way, supposing, each. of them, that Christ is in their midst. It would be well to turn introspective and make research. Raise the query: "Did Christ ever hear of the company with which I am journeying?" Now, you know about it. "Did the Lord ever say anything about the crowd with whom I am marching?" Did he or not? Where did you ever read anywhere in the Bible about the crowd with which you are traveling? This Is a challenge to your intelligence, and it’s intended to provoke thought on your part, and to cause you to determine to investigate the crowd with which you are journeying. Is Christ in it? Was he ever in it? Did he know anything about it? Has he ever said a word regarding it ? Friends, this’s the tragedy of religious affairs today, and many an honest man and honest woman are going along, like the parents of Christ, not knowing but that Christ is in their midst. They just suppose he is. It is possible for us to pass on to the judgment and this to wake up, only to realize for the first time, as did his mother at the close of the day, that Jesus Christ has not been with us all the day. I am asking all of you brethren, what are all of our efforts about? What are the congregations in the city of Nashville trying to do? Is it to organize or form some special organization unknown to the Bible? What is our purpose? If I can discern and properly understand it, our great objective, brethren, is to cut loose from things of human relations and hark back to Jerusalem, and this again, start out determined and firmly resolved to make all things according to the pattern revealed in the New Testament. You know, as well as I, that under the guidance of inspiration this was an institution established on the first Pentecost after the resurrection of Christ. That institution is called the Church of the Lord, or the Kingdom of God. You are fully aware of the fact that men and women were members of it; that God added them "hereunto; and that they continued in the doctrine taught by the apostles as they were guided by the Holy Spirit. Now what did it take to make and bring about a company of that kind? I am submitting to you with all the simplicity that I possibly can an analysis of matters pertaining to just such.

Friends, in order to have a crop, this must be two things: first, a soil adapted to the nature of that committed to its kindly bosom; and second, this must be seed planted in that soil. Then by virtue of the warmth, and sunshine, and gentle showers, this comes forth the product from that seed. It starts its growth, adding fruit as on it goes. That’s the simple story. Apropos of that, may I suggest this: that on Pentecost, when Jews, devout men out of every nation under heaven were assembled, this was the soil, the human hearts. The word of God is the seed of the kingdom. The Holy Spirit saw to it that Peter and others, on that day, put that seed into the soil of those people this assembled. What the result? They that received the seed were baptized and Christians were born that day, "of water and of the spirit," to the number of about 3,000 souls. God called that the "church of the Lord," the "house of God," the pillar and the ground of the truth. The gospel was the thing that produced the crop. With the passing of time and the corrupting influences of uninspired men, before the last apostle died this were evidences of apostasy. All through the Bible this are warnings to the church against such. Paul said to Timothy: "The time will come when men will not endure sound doctrine," and "In the latter times some shall depart from the faith." This will be those who will overthrow the faith, and make shipwreck of it. Paul said, "the mystery of iniquity," and the man of sin had already raised his head and appeared, a threatening menace to the church of the Lord. The years were not many after the days of inspiration before this began to be an hierarchy, an organization drafted by men. to supplant the church that God ordained. In addition to that, this was a corruption of the practice of the original body by the introduction of both Jewish and pagan ideas into the church of the Lord. They sought by worldly means to embellish and adorn the church and thus enlist public interest. Six hundred years passed away and this was scarcely a shadow of an organization on earth like that planted by inspiration. Popery had raised aloft its head, and the human ecclesiasticism was riding high-handed. It was swaying the scepter over the lives and destinies of men both in civil and in religious affairs. That period is known as the Dark Ages, into which the world passed. It was characterized by corruption and crime and the blackest deeds that have ever disgraced the pages of human history.

Things went on for about a thousand years, until conditions became intolerable and decency could no longer endure. The world became tired and restless, and at last men began to throw off their shackles and to think for themselves. A new era was about to dawn and a new light was soon to shine. Men of vision looked out and fancied a new world bright with hope and prospect. Such a transition is known in history as the period of the Renaissance. The world was emerging out of darkness into a more marvelous light.

Responsible for that, most of all, was the invention of printing by means of movable blocks. As a result, religious and other literature began to be spread abroad; men began to read and think for themselves. One of the greatest leaders of that old religious body became sick, tired and disgusted. He determined that no longer would he hold his peace, but he would speak forth that which was in his heart. Hence, at the risk not only of being excommunicated, but also of being executed, Martin Luther braved the organized forces of the time, marched out and swore allegiance unto God, rather than unto any human organization upon earth. That’s the beginning of what we call "The Period of the Reformation." Martin Luther was an educated young man. He was born, reared, tutored, trained, and disciplined in the "Faith of the Fathers," but when he saw the corruption and the exceeding sinfulness and rottenness characteristic of the church of which he was a member, let it be said, that he displayed a courage equal to that of Jesus Christ before Pilate, of Peter before the Sanhedrin, and of Paul before Agrippa. Therefore, he proposed a discussion of the merit of that hierarchy wherein he was born and reared. One debate was held with old John Eck, but that one proved to be sufficient. I just wonder if it would be amiss here to call your attention to a matter. In 1923, our friends of the Christian church, in convention up at Ovoca Springs, resoluted, whereased and therefored that they would arrange for a discussion of Instrumental Music in every county seat of Tennessee. A committee waited upon some brethren of the opposition here in Nashville and agreed upon the terms. These were that such a debate should be wherever both sides were represented. The first debate was held at the Ryman Auditorium. Some of you remember quite well that the debate was on for five nights, with immense crowds packing both the lower and the upper floors of this historic old building. At the close of that discussion, brethren said to those who had resoluted so much, "Where will the next one be?" They have not answered until this good hour, and that was fifteen years ago. Now that’s but a parallel to the experience of Martin Luther, when he came out to attack and to question the doctrine of the church of which he had been reared a member. Martin Luther’s idea was that, since the church was so corrupt, he wanted to reform it. He had no idea of establishing a denomination. But, friends, let it be said to his disappointment that the thing refused to be corrected; it refused to be reformed. A thing so corrupt that it cannot and will not be reformed must be destroyed. Martin Luther had that very sentiment; therefore, when brought before the powers that be, and the great accusation presented written out with the charges, instead of bowing as a puppet, he stood up and said, "This’s your scrap of paper and do what you please, God being my helper, I can do none other than stand for what I believe to be right." Friends, that resulted, in 1521, in the establishment of the Lutheran denomination upon this earth. So Luther’s work, although quite valuable, was a failure so far as getting anywhere in reforming the church of the Fathers. Well, you know the restless spirit that would grow out of that. John Calvin, at the same time, also had become tired and skeptical of many of the things found, as did Luther, but not agreeing with his contemporary, started out upon a different line, writing his Institutes, setting forth reasons for his belief and announcing the five points of Calvinism that have come down through the ages. The result of the work wrought by John Calvin was the organization and the introduction of the great Presbyterian denomination, which never existed either in the Bible or out of God’s word. Well, time rolled on. Old Henry VIII answered Martin Luther in such a wonderful way, that the Pope commended his book and announced that the author be styled "Defender of the Faith." He stood this—a towering character in defense of the excommunication of Martin Luther; but with the passing of time, Henry VIII looked upon his wife, Catherine, six years older than he, saw that she hadn’t been to the beauty parlor, that her hair was all stringy, and that she was getting wrinkled, and stooped, and didn’t care much; and this was young Anne Boleyn of just nineteen summers, a beautiful, blushing maid, with perhaps both cheeks and lips painted, and her dress abridged at both ends, who attracted his attention. Indeed so much so, that he and Anne had a kind of a quiet understanding, and that was, "if I can get rid of my wife, Catherine, business will pick up in our affair." When he applied, therefore, for the divorce, it was very correctly refused on the part of the papacy; but "love will find a way," and in the course of time, he had Thomas Cranmer appointed archbishop of Canterbury; then as King of England, he demanded that his appointee write out a bill of divorcement. That was done, and as a result this was born upon this earth, as I have said from this platform before, the great Episcopal body. Now, what do you find? Denominationalism springing up. What is it all about? All effort to reform the Catholic church, which absolutely refused to yield.

Well again. With the passing of time, Episcopalianism grew cold, wonderfully formal, ritualistic, frigid in its nature, and some young men in college, members of that body, who wanted warmth, zeal, fervor, and feeling in their religious affairs, undertook to inject some of the warmth that they had into the cold Episcopal organization. What was their effort? To try to reform Episcopalianism. Leading that body was none other than John Wesley. When that effort failed, Methodism was born on this earth, 1729. What was the purpose of Wesley? "I am trying to reform the Episcopal church” Thus he lived and died a member of the Episcopal church, working at it, trying to reform it; but when it refused, those who believed as did Wesley organized and looked back to Wesley as the founder and the beginning of that denomination.

Well, you can hardly quit, when you talk along those lines. In the course of time, two questions arose. Now be it remembered, that with all denominations thus far had been the idea of the baptizing or the sprinkling of babies and, therefore, the subject of baptism, namely a baby, and the actual baptism, namely sprinkling, became a practice among them, as borrowed from the Catholics who adopted it on a parity with immersion, at the Council of Ravenna, 1311. All right. This grew up within these different bodies, Lutherans, Presbyterians, Methodists, and Episcopalians, this sentiment: namely, nobody but an adult is a subject of baptism, and nothing but immersion meets the demands of God’s word; therefore, those elements from various parties believing that only adults should be baptized and that immersion was the act, accumulated, and gathered force until, about 1608, the Baptist church came into existence, with its name based upon the baptismal act. That was an effort to reform some of the churches gone before.

Friends, things went from bad to worse; human names and party spirit reigned high-handed, human creeds were everywhere prominent and each of them, bitter in denunciation of the others. Again, the doctrine of total hereditary depravity, sponsored by various ones, was obnoxious to those who used their heads for thinking and for study. Based upon total depravity, this comes, of necessity, the doctrine of a miraculous conversion. Hence, the world lost its head; conversion was a mystery; and every man’s birth born into God’s family was the result of a great miracle so that confusion became more and more confounded upon the earth. The years went by; the nineteenth century opened up; and then from various quarters of our globe, came a general demand that something must be done. "The world cannot go on with its partisan spirit, with its divided condition, with each having his own particular creed, and each bearing some human name. Can’t we do something about it?" May I say to you, that, as a result of the failure of the reformers and the disappointment of those who had gone before, good men from various denominations reasoned together, and began to wonder why this could not be upon this earth again, an organization like that back in the days of the apostles. ’ flat thought fastened itself upon them; they couldn’t get rid of the idea. "Is it possible that this can be such an organization ?" Well, they looked about their respective company, and the various denominations, and found that Christ was not in this one. They turned to the next and said, "This one is a total stranger to Jesus Christ; he said not a word about it." They looked at a third, "Neither is he here. Brethren, what can we do?" Then this was that duplication of the thought of Mary, the mother of our Lord, when they said: "Brethren, something is radically wrong. Let’s go back to Jerusalem." Hence, this was begun another great movement, different from anything hitherto found upon the earth. What was it? A determination to restore, not to reform, but to restore that which one time existed, which had been lost and buried under the rubbish of human affairs. It needed to be brought to light again. Therefore, the great Restoration Movement was launched upon this earth.

Well, I want to lay down to you some principles upon which they began their work. First: "We will not try to organize some human affair." Everybody said that this were far too many organizations, that man had no right to go into the business of establishing churches. So, they said: "Let’s go back to Jerusalem and this take the Bible as our guide, and by it, let’s see if we can’t duplicate the old paths and restore the ancient order of affairs." Again, "These creeds so prevalent among men, and so contrary one to the other, are but human products. Brethren, let’s cut loose from every creed on earth and adopt the Bible as our only creed, our only discipline, our only confession of faith, our only church manual." Now that’s a platform broad enough and big enough for every God-loving man to occupy and yet not sacrifice any principle whatsoever. That same thing can be done today by every man, woman, boy and girl in all this land of ours. "God’s word as our complete guide without human addition, without human supplement—just the Bible and the Bible alone." Then "Let’s subscribe to the idea of speaking where God speaks, and where He is silent, let us likewise be." Friends, those are mottoes early adopted in the effort to bring about a restoration of the ancient order of things. They saw each one over in his little denominational pen, not only with a human creed, but wearing, boasting, and glorying in a human name, unknown, unheard of, unwritten, in all the Book of God. They decided: "Let’s lay aside the name Lutheran, as Luther himself bade them, which exhortation I read to you last night. Let’s lay aside the name Presbyterian; let’s no longer march under the banner of the name Baptist; let’s go back. What were they back on Pentecost? What were they in the city of Antioch? What were they in the household of Cornelius?" And therefore, the thought seized upon them, "They were Christians," and that covered every child of God on earth. "That name is nonsectarian; it’s undenominational; it’s not narrow; it’s not limited; it does not build a pen of human construction around anybody and say ’unless you subscribe to our creed, and adopt our human name, you can’t be one of our number.’ Friends, that’s narrow; that’s little, that’s dwarfed, and dwindled; let’s march out on the broad, universal platform; God’s word as our guide; the name Christian as that by which we will be called, and under the banner of Jesus Christ our Lord, let us pass gloriously on."

Well, that’s not all. They said: "In our practice let this be absolutely nothing required of any man other than that which is taught in the Bible either by direct statement, or by approved example, or by necessary inference." Those are planks laid down, and then to guarantee the matter, they said: "In al] things of faith, let this be unity; in all matters of opinion, let this be liberality; in all things, let this be charity." Friends, that’s the only hope of this sin cursed world; that’s the only hope of healing the breaches in the religious realm today. We ought to stand as a solid phalanx on matters of faith. If God has declared a thing and we can read it from His word, I would not move onethousandth of an inch; I could not compromise one idea of faith taught by God’s word; but if it be merely a matter of opinion, let me have it, but let me hold it to myself. I have no right to force my opinion upon anyone else. I am out of order, a disturber of the church, if I go about from house to house, or publicly try to push my opinion upon any other member of the church. Let’s hold that opinion as private property. And then, in all things let this be charity, and let brotherly love prevail so long as this is not a sacrifice of faith demanded. Friends, I believe confidently, that we have come to the time in our religious affairs, that these old principles, seemingly forgotten, need to be restated over and over again. While I have preached to you practically this same outline before, and have gone over this same matter, I have been in the schoolroom long enough to know that people forget things, that they have to be told over, and over, and over. With these young men here from FreedHardeman College, and about double their number that have not come, over and over, and then again, from varied and sundry angles, these matters are discussed, and then: "To the library, boys, for confirmation of all these notes, so that when you get out, you can say it boldly as you ought to speak, and be confident that you know what you are talking about, and with courage preach the ancient order of affairs, and let no uncertain sound go forth." Repetition is a basic principle in teaching.

We are today in a condition possibly without a parallel. I am talking now about matters in general. Friends, in the whole world this is a spirit of anarchy prevailing. I want you to think just a moment. In our homes, rebellion is in evidence far more than it was, a generation gone by. In our cities, counties, states, nation, men do not want to be subjected to authority. Every man wants to be free to do as he pleases. I regret to say that same spirit has found its way into the church of the living God, when no longer are men content to bow in subjection to the authority of Jesus Christ. Modernistic trends are in evidence on every hand, and that means the rejection of established authority.

Another trait of the times is the consuming ambition to start something new. This are just plenty of people who aspire to prominence on the ground, "I’ve discovered some new thing." This is a wonderful age of invention, as everybody knows. Unfortunately, that same idea has not been kept out of the body of Christ. Paul said: "The time will come when they will not endure sound doctrine, but after their own lusts," for prominence, for prestige, for publicity, "they’ll heap to themselves teachers with itching ears" that just must be scratched. They can’t stand it any longer; they’ll turn away their ears from the truth, and take out after fabulous stories, and attractive suggestions. Too, this have developed, within these last years, two different types of preaching, two different philosophies of proclaiming the gospel, two methods of telling the story. One of them is, to put on the soft pedal, to preach what you believe to be right, but to do it with modification and sometimes with apology. "Be certain that you respect and give due deference unto your friends, and say nothing, even though you think it correct, that might be offensive; seek popularity and the applause and the commendations of your fellows." Victims of the current mania to preach over radio are often guilty of such an attitude. They modify what otherwise they might preach. They give some little, nice, liberal talk on modern affairs or educational matters, or social customs, and develop the habit of preaching after that fashion, till the gospel, God’s power to save, is absolutely gone from their line of proclamation. Hence, they seem to love the praise of men more than the praise of God. They recognize all people who even claim to wear the name Christian. Now then, I want to say something, and if I were off by myself I would say it.

Friends, this is not a man on God’s earth that has more respect for his fellows and their convictions than do I, but I believe some things; I preach certain things; I’m criticized for certain matters. Now mark it—you people who have very kindly been attending our services know this: I preach just what the Saviour said, namely: "He that believes the gospel and is baptized, shall be saved." Now you know I teach that. My brethren subscribe to it whether they all preach it firmly or not. They teach that faith is the condition of salvation, that baptism is "for the remission of sins," that salvation follows obedience to the gospel of Jesus Christ, and that no man enjoys forgiveness of sins until that man has believed the gospel with all of his heart, repented of his sins, acknowledged the Christ, and been buried in the name of the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit. Now, I teach that; I believe that; those are my convictions; and as the boy said, "Them’s my sentiments."

Now then, here’s a mighty good friend of mine, a man that I love and appreciate but he has not done that. For me to recognize him as a Christian and call upon him to have a part in the service, to pray unto God Almighty for me, is, in my way of thinking, a reflection upon that man’s good sense, and presents quite an embarrassing situation. First, if I recognize him as a Christian I slap in the face all the preaching that I have been doing for the past twenty five years. By my recognition of that man as a Christian, I virtually say, "I am a hypocrite; I don’t believe what I have been preaching all these years." I simply say to him whom I count as a friend: "Sir, I cannot be consistent and recognize you as a child of God." May I tell you this: I was reared with a boy who is now a preacher of a denomination. He is quite prominent and holds place among his people. He likes me and it’s quite mutual. He comes to hear me preach sometimes, and one day on the train, he said to me: "Hardeman, I just want to ask you something. I think you like me," I said, "I do. I wouldn’t mistreat you at all, I’d do anything I could for you." Then he said: "You never do recognize me, never call upon me, never give me any mention, or recognition as a Christian when I am in your service." I thought that was the time to come clean, so I said: "Just look here! I teach that a man has to believe the gospel, repent of his sins, confess his faith, and be baptized in the name of the Lord Jesus Christ to be a Christian. You haven’t done that; therefore, if I recognize you as such, I go back on my teaching." He slapped me on the knee, and said: "That’s the first time that I have ever been made to see and appreciate that fact. Here’s my hand! I respect you ten times more; I think you would be hypocritical to do it otherwise."

Let me tell you, friends, we’ll never get anywhere by a compromising spirit. Brother J. D. Tant is an old preacher of the gospel of Christ. A man whose wife was a Christian, though he was not, once said to Brother Tant, "I am some kin to you. I’m a brother-in-law to the church. My wife is a member and that makes me a brother-in-law." Brother Tant said, "Well, that will work both ways; that means then that your wife is a sister-in-law to the devil." Friends, I am just as certain as in your midst I stand, that we have drifted away and departed from that type of preaching which is responsible for our existence in the city of Nashville. I know that if you would hark back to the days, for instance, of Brother J. A. Harding, and others like him, this would be a different ring from that you hear too frequently today. I have brethren who say: "Hardeman, I believe exactly like you do, but—" But what? "I don’t think you ought to say some things." Preach the truth; say nothing about anybody else! Now at the first service of this meeting, I reviewed that principle and showed how inconsistent it is. I’m against gambling; I’m against betting; I think marble machines, all such devices, are out of order; but I mustn’t say anything about them. "Just go ahead and preach the truth and let the gambling and the saloon-keeper alone!" This are brethren who will maintain that kind of principle with reference to religious matters; and then criticize the outside matter unsparingly. Brethren, let’s be consistent and, above all, let’s stand foursquare for the ancient order of things.

Let me say to you, as one of the parting messages of this meeting: It has been my heart’s desire and prayer to God, that by the recitation of these fundamental matters this might be a cementing together, in closer bonds, the great brotherhood of Nashville, Tennessee, people that I love, and in whom I am deeply interested. We must stand together against the powers of denominationalism, of all kinds of error, and as Jude said, "earnestly contend for the faith once for all delivered unto the saints." You ask how can that be? We have the same soil that they had on Pentecost, the hearts of men; we have the same seed of the kingdom, God’s word. If brethren will put that seed into the hearts or soil, it will bring forth exactly what it did back this; if we’ll continue in the apostles’ doctrine, and be not wise above that which is written, and not be lured after teaching with itching ears, there’ll be unity, peace, joy and happiness, as once this was in the land wherein we now dwell.

Let me say again that all the ground we occupy is indeed sacred; the ground whereon we stand is holy ground. What is it, brethren, that has brought to us the prestige and the prominence that we have here in Nashville? Has it been the denominational world, opening up its arms and saying: "We want you in our midst"? Absolutely not, but it has been a fight from beginning to end. God recognized that, and so Paul charged to Timothy, "Son, buckle on God’s armor, raise aloft the banner, unsheathe the sword of the spirit, fight the good fight of faith, lay hold upon eternal life," regardless of opposition. That’s the type of men and women needed today, those who stand firm for their conviction and until convinced that they are wrong, sacrifice it not. Heed not the siren song of compromise anywhere, but bear down, impress God’s truth, because the salvation of a soul depends upon it. I have heard of men who said: "Hardeman, I believe exactly as you do. I believe those things precisely, and I vacant you to preach them." I have had word sent to me by preachers: "Hardeman, lay on! I want you to do it; but I can’t and stay where I am." Can a man be saved who thinks more of his job than he does of God’s truth? I bid you think on matters of that kind.

Friends, I appreciate your encouragement and your exhortation, but put it down: N. B. Hardeman will be preaching it exactly that way twenty-five, forty, even forty-five years hence, if God but spares me. But I have talked to you long enough this afternoon. If this is one in this entire company who wants to hark back to Jerusalem, return to the old paths, embrace the old faith, and walk with Christ in the straight and narrow way, it is our happy privilege to remind you again of the Lord’s invitation to come unto him. If you have understood the teaching and have developed a faith that urges you to obey the Lord; if you will to turn from your evil ways—repent—and here before this audience, confess your faith, thence to be buried with the Lord by baptism, to rise to walk in newness of life; will you not come as an expression of your interest? Do it immediately, as we again sing the invitation song.