Introduction (III) by John Mark Hicks, Ph.D.

Historical Interpretation

        On January 24, 1946 the Gospel Advocate published a lengthy article by Roy Key entitled "The Righteousness of God".¹⁵⁹ Key articulated the themes of Moser's The Way of Salvation without mentioning Moser by name. Indeed, in a letter to G. C. Brewer in 1955 Key acknowledged his indebtedness to Moser.¹⁶⁰ He argued that the righteousness of God revealed in the gospel is the gift of God's righteousness through faith. Faith-righteousness is a divine righteousness which God gives to the one who trusts in Jesus as Savior whereas works-righteousness is a human righteousness which one earn for himself through obedience to law. For members of the Church of Christ, according to Key, the tendency is to "trust in the law for salvation." It is possible, he wrote, "to reject the righteousness that God offers through faith in Jesus as Redeemer and look to a plan or system of justification, rather than to the one who died on our behalf."¹⁶¹ He feared that many had placed their hope in the system or the plan instead of Christ. The plan is, indeed, "God's revelation of man's true way of responding to the offered grace," but "if this 'law' becomes foremost in our minds and affections, then true faith as personal reliance upon Christ is weakened. This leads more and more to legalistic Pharisaism."¹⁶² Key believed this is what had happened in the light of calling repentance, confession and baptism "steps" of salvation in a "plan of salvation." "The personal element [became] overshadowed by the legal."¹⁶³

        Apparently, Key's article shocked some readers of the Advocate. G. C. Brewer received several letters questioning the article.¹⁶⁴ It promoted "some ideas," one reader said, "that I have not been accustomed to hearing." In response, Brewer commended the article as substantially summarizing the Pauline teaching of the "righteousness of God." The phrase "not been accustomed to hearing" caught Brewer's attention since it was his own experience that many were "astonished at this teaching" and others were "offended by it at first." Indeed, Brewer was anxious about both the ignorance and the "false teaching" that prevailed concerning Paul's gospel of God's righteousness.

        As a younger preacher Brewer was influenced by ministers who denied the concept of imputed righteousness. He summarized the teaching of one of these ministers, whom he highly respected, as this:

You hear people talk about God's righteousness or Christ's righteousness being imputed to man--of the righteousness of Christ covering a man like a garment, etc. This is all false doctrine. The Bible says, 'He that doeth righteousness is righteous, even as he is righteous' (1 John 3:7); and David says, 'All thy commandments are righteousness.' [Psalm 119:172, JMH.] So you see that a man who does the commandments of God is righteous--no one else is. You can have no righteousness except the righteousness that you do.¹⁶⁵

In his youngest years Brewer embraced this teaching. He taught the same message and used the same Scriptures to defend it.

        However, he "learned the truth on this point" when he began to study Romans to see what it teaches rather than studying "to find something to offset what someone else teaches."¹⁶⁶ Brewer underwent a theological shift from a legalistic concept of faith--a faith where we have no righteousness except our own so that we contribute to the righteousness that achieves for us a righteous standing before God--to an affirmation of the divine righteousness which is given to us through faith. It was a change from the legalism of works-righteousness to a Pauline doctrine of salvation by grace through faith.

        One of Brewer's consistent themes was salvation by "faith" and not by "doing." This was his primary point at the 1952 Abilene Christian College Lectureship.¹⁶⁷ God's part is giving, not selling; and man's part is believing, not doing. Salvation is "not a matter of law;" a matter of doing or achieving or working.¹⁶⁸ We are free from law, any law, because God has "offered us a righteousness which comes to us on account of our faith in Christ Jesus."¹⁶⁹ To affirm otherwise is to render void the grace of God in Christ. If "we are just as righteous as we do--that is, if we have no righteousness but our own, which we achieve by doing the commandments--by observing laws--we make the death of Christ unnecessary."¹⁷⁰

        Further, in his commendation of Key's article, Brewer noted that many of his contemporaries had made a similar change. They had begun in legalism but now teach a doctrine of righteousness by faith and "not by doing." To counter the charge that his teaching was innovative, Brewer reminded his readers that J. W. McGarvey, E. G. Sewell, T. W. Caskey, David Lipscomb and James A. Harding "knew the truth on this great question and taught it faithfully." "Harding," he added, "was especially strong on this doctrine."¹⁷¹ He recalled that on one occasion he saw "tears flow down [Harding's] cheeks and his countenance brilliant with the very thought as he shouted the story of the rich provision that God had made for our salvation."¹⁷² Brewer saw himself in continuity with the Lipscomb-Harding segment of the Churches of Christ. He believed that "our brethren had always taught the truth upon this point . . . but some of us may have given so much attention to certain errors that are connected with the subject that we only refuted the error and didn't make the truth plain."¹⁷³ Because of this claim of continuity, it is important to take a closer look at our history here.

Nashville Bible School and the Theology of Grace

        David Lipscomb and James A. Harding began the Nashville Bible School with nine students on October 5, 1891; one hundred years ago today. This institution, now known as David Lipscomb University, has had a profound influence on the history of Churches of Christ in the twentieth century. My interest here is the doctrine of grace present in the school in the last decade of the nineteenth century.

        In 1968, at the age of 91, Stanford Chambers recalled his days at the Nashville Bible School in the mid-1890s. He remembered that Harding proclaimed an especially powerful doctrine of grace. "To Harding," he recalled, ". . . the Holy Spirit was a personality and His help in our infirmities was real. Salvation 'by grace . . . through faith' rather than by 'works' or deeds of merit was a cherished truth."¹⁷⁴ The students, he remembered, were divided into two camps on the issue, but that the leaders of the institution were strong advocates of grace. This can be confirmed by looking at their writings of the period.

        David Lipscomb believed that there are two kinds of righteousness. There is a righteousness which God gives through his gracious imputation of the righteousness of Christ--a righteousness from above, and there is a righteousness which we possess by our obedience to law--a righteousness from below. Imputed righteousness, the righteousness from above, "comes only when a man trusts Jesus and does what he can to obey him."¹⁷⁵ While one is required to live "a life like that of God," this is done "by faith" as the medium through which God imputes righteousness. Lipscomb's doctrine of grace is well illustrated in the following paragraph:

Even when a man's heart is purified by faith, and his affections all reach out towards God and seek conformity to the life of God it is imperfect. His practice of the righteousness of God falls far short of the divine standard. The flesh is weak, and the law of sin reigns in our members; so that we fall short of the perfect standard of righteousness; but if we trust God implicitly and faithfully endeavor to do his will, he knows our frame, knows our weaknesses, and as a father pities his children, so the Lord pities our infirmities and weaknesses, and imputes to us the righteousness of Christ. So Jesus stands as our justification and our righteousness, and our life is hid with Christ in God.¹⁷⁶

        James A. Harding began a new paper in 1899 entitled The Way. In its second issue, Harding commented that it is "right and appropriate" that The Way should discuss "grace through faith" at the beginning of its publication.¹⁷⁷ This signals the centrality of the theme for Harding. He rejected any law principle as the means of justification. "There is no hope," he wrote, "that any of us can be justified by the deeds of the law (whether Gentiles under law in the heart, Jews under law of Moses, or Christians under law of Christ)."¹⁷⁸ Rather, it is on the basis of grace, not law, that "wherever an [immersed believer] is, if he is daily, diligently seeking the truth, if he is promptly walking in it as he finds it, we may expect him to be saved. . . But for the man who is contentedly abiding in error there is no such hope."¹⁷⁹

        J. N. Armstrong, who was the son-in-law of James A. Harding, was a teacher at the Nashville Bible School and later President of Harding College.¹⁸⁰ "Doing right," he wrote, is not the "admission fee" of entering the eschatological kingdom "or else none could enter."¹⁸¹ No one can enter on their own righteousness. Who, then, can enter? According to Armstrong, there are two groups of people: "those against whom God does not count sin and those against whom he does count sin." The former are under grace and can enter, but the latter are under law and cannot. The one under grace "has forsaken his old way and turned to God and is humbly submitting to him, bending his energies to do all that God requires;" but the one under law "is following his own way, has not turned to God, but is living in rebellion in his heart and life."¹⁸² The ground of salvation, according to Armstrong, is that "I accept the life (blood) of Christ as a sacrifice for my sins" when I believe, repent and am baptized.¹⁸³ F. W. Mattox remembers that he learned his view of grace from Armstrong and the biblical roots of this view were later confirmed through his friendship with Moser.¹⁸⁴

        Robert. H. Boll enrolled in the Nashville Bible School in 1895 and eventually came to lead the premillennial segment of the Churches of Christ. In the early 1900s, however, he was a close associate of Harding and Armstrong, and he reflected their doctrine of grace, just as he had sided with them on the issue of grace while at the Nashville Bible School.¹⁸⁵ He believed that God demanded that "man must be righteous" and that no one could "stand before God, except on the ground of true, absolute righteousness."¹⁸⁶ Because of sin, God made a new way, a "way of clothing man in a new righteousness, a righteousness not their own, but freely given to them from God." It is a "gift of righteousness" from above where we are "clothed in [God's] righteousness."¹⁸⁷ We accept this gift through faith, but the righteousness is not our own. It is the righteousness of Christ, as reflected in the old evangelical hymn, "My hope is built on nothing less than Jesus' blood and righteousness."¹⁸⁸ In the context of this perspective on grace, Boll asked, "How much imperfection will God tolerate?" He believed that no one can look into the heart of the Almighty, but quoting 1 John 1:7, he wrote, "if we aim high and fall below the mark, there is honor" and if we "fall below the mark, there is grace and forgiveness, for we have followed Christ" by aiming high.¹⁸⁹

        R. C. Bell was a student at the Nashville Bible School, and later a teacher with Harding and Armstrong at Potter Bible College, and then with Armstrong at Western Bible and Literary College and Cordell Christian College. He would later become President of Thorp Springs Christian College, Dean of Harding College, and a teacher at Abilene Christian College.¹⁹⁰ Bell was one of Moser's teachers and his ally throughout the years.¹⁹¹ Both J. D. Thomas and F. W. Mattox testify that Bell's friendship with Moser was long-standing, and that their views on grace were exactly the same.¹⁹² One of Bell's favorite quips is said to have been, "If you get Romans, God gets you," which was also one of Moser's favorite proverbial sayings.¹⁹³ The righteousness of God, according to Bell, is God's gift of righteousness by which he justifies the sinner through faith.¹⁹⁴

        G. C. Brewer also studied at the Nashville Bible School (1905-1911). His emphasis on the crucified Christ is apparent in a series of sermons he delivered in Ft. Worth, Texas in the fall of 1927.¹⁹⁵ All the sermons were Christ-centered messages, and reflect the Lipscomb-Harding tradition. For example, commenting on Galatians 2:21, he proclaimed: "There you are, my friends. Righteousness is not by the law--is not by any law of works, either human or divine--that is, the righteousness that commends us to God, that saves--is from Christ. The song of every real Christian--everyone who knows the Bible--is:"

My hope is built on nothing less
Than Jesus' blood and righteousness;
I dare not trust the sweetest frame
But wholly lean on Jesus' name.¹⁹⁶

The gospel of grace through the imputed righteousness of Christ is clear in this series of sermons. "Only through the righteousness of our Redeemer," Brewer preached, "shall we see the face of God . . . You cannot be saved by a legal system."¹⁹⁷

        Interestingly, in 1927 Brewer had already experienced and was concerned about what would come to be called the "Man or the Plan" controversy. He tells this story:

        A preacher once preached two or three sermons on the love of God and of his gracious provisions for man's salvation when a brother approached him and asked: "When are you going to begin to preach the gospel?"
        He meant, of course, when was the preacher going to preach on the things man must do to be saved--faith, repentance and baptism. He wanted the preacher to prove that he--the brother-- was right in his claims, and that his neighbors were all wrong. Simply a partisan desire to establish his creed. May the Lord have mercy on such brethren.
. . .this obedience must come as a result of hearing and believing the sweet old story of Jesus and his love. The word gospel means "good news" or "glad tidings." In what does the good news consist? Is it not, beloved, in the fact that man was lost, perishing, without God and without hope, and that God saw him "plunged in deep distress" and loved him to the extent that he sent Jesus to the earth and to the cross to redeem man? That is the gospel--the power that attracts men.¹⁹⁸

According to Brewer, when we exemplify our trust in Jesus as Savior through baptism, we are thereby perfected through the imputation of Christ's righteousness. Indeed, "this same soul is continuously perfect by imputation as long as that soul walks in the light and has a connection with God through Christ".¹⁹⁹ This is true despite our weaknesses and our faults, and "in some respects," he says, "we are still more in need of the mercy of God than we were in the beginning." Yet, "if we continue to rely upon him and to serve him, we have the promise that we shall be presented faultless before his throne."²⁰⁰ Brewer viewed baptism as the moment of entrance into Christ through faith in Christ as Savior. It was an act of faith which hopes in the "merit of Christ." Once "committed to Christ, [the Christian] continues to obey him as best he can, not because his salvation depends upon his perfect obedience, but because he is committed to the Saviour and because he loves him and therefore keeps his commandments. Failure to reach perfection will not mean a failure to reach heaven."²⁰¹ Thus, after baptism, while we continue "to be obedient and submissive," our salvation "does not depend upon the amount of work done or the number of acts performed."²⁰²

        My point here is not to give a thorough theological analysis of each of these men's positions. Rather, it is simply to indicate that Moser's doctrine of grace has historic roots. He reflected a doctrine of grace that was especially, though not exclusively, associated with the Nashville Bible School in the last decade of the nineteenth century. Exactly how Moser came to stand in that same tradition is a matter of supposition, but it may have been through his teacher R. C. Bell at Thorp Springs Christian College or he may have been, as his life-long friend F. W. Mattox remembers, self-taught from Romans.²⁰³

Opposition to Moser

        Despite these theological roots in the Nashville Bible School, Moser was seen as the epitome of a denominationalist both in Texas and east of the Mississippi. His writings were dismissed, and he was condemned as a Baptist by his opponents. This reputation continues today. For example, a recent that K. C. Moser in his The Way of Salvation "formulated a concept of conflict between law and grace which the restorationists had not dreamed would ever be a doctrinal problem among brethren."²⁰⁴ Still others regard his views as "Calvinistic"²⁰⁵ or "marred by the phobia of every denominationalist."²⁰⁶ Sixty years after it was published, The Way of Salvation is still the object of attack.²⁰⁷

        Showalter, along with R. L. Whiteside, was one of the first public opponents of Moser. When Moser's article "Can the Gospel Be Obeyed?" was accidentally published in his absence, the next week Showalter gave it a harsh reply. Moser had written that the gospel consisted in "a person, and not mere facts." The gospel is the death of Jesus for our sins and his resurrection for our justification. "The gospel is not simply facts about Jesus," but is the good news of salvation through grace. "The gospel consists in a person in which to trust . . . Commands are not the gospel. The gospel is appropriated by means of obedience to commands, but commands are no more the gospel than eating is food." Since faith is the principle of salvation, the acceptance of the gospel is through faith, and "faith that saves means trust" so that "to believe the gospel is to believe in, trust in, Christ crucified, buried and raised for our justification." "To believe the gospel," then, "is to obey the gospel," but that faith must be expressed in the required manner.²⁰⁸

        This article was more than Showalter could take. He understood Moser as denying the ancient gospel itself. "Brother Moser," he wrote, "does not believe that obedience is necessary to salvation or that baptism is for the remission of sins." According to Showalter, Moser means that "responsible beings are saved by faith alone."²⁰⁹ Moser replied that he had been misunderstood.²¹⁰ He explained that his purpose was to exalt faith so that its proper relation to baptism might be understood. He feared that many preachers were isolating baptism from the principle of faith as if baptism is the actual thing that "changes [the] state" of a sinner to a saint.²¹¹ He contended that it is faith that does this, but God requires that one express that faith in baptism before he bestows his mercy.

        Moser illustrated his meaning by noting that he had read many sermons in the Firm Foundation which Showalter would call "gospel sermons," but they do not have "as much as one single reference to the blood of Christ . . . Indeed," he wrote, "I have heard sermons delivered through a three Sunday meeting without a single emphasis on the grace of God, the blood of Christ, but with baptism held constantly before the people."²¹² Thus, he wrote, "I am accused of belittling baptism because I affirm that faith in Christ has a place in obedience to the gospel as well as baptism."²¹³

        Showalter, however, was incredulous. He did not accept Moser's explanation and claimed that his reaction indicates that he "simply hit the nail on the head and drove home a solar plexus blow--making clearly apparent to the reading public what Brother Moser would fain have kept concealed."²¹⁴ Further, Showalter thought Moser had incorrectly perceived the teaching of the brethren. They do not believe "baptism alone constitutes obedience," but "they teach that faith, repentance and baptism are all commands of the gospel and must be obeyed in order to the remission of sins."²¹⁵

        This exchange in 1934 is significant for several reasons. Theologically, it is one of the first exchanges between Moser and one of his detractors on the subject of grace. While the discussion reflects some semantic confusion, it also points to the important question of whether faith saves or whether faith and baptism save. Are we saved by faith when we are immersed or are we saved by faith and baptism when we are immersed? In other words, are we saved by a faith that works or are we saved by faith and works? The critical issue is the relationship between faith and baptism and their connection with salvation. Historically, it reflects the negative response Moser received to his ideas. Showalter regarded him as a traitor who had surrendered to Baptist theology.²¹⁶ Further, it molded public opinion in Texas about Moser for the next few decades. Moser no longer published in the Firm Foundation, and was excluded from the ACC annual lectureship. Showalter was the opinion leader in Texas churches. He had the mantle of Austin McGary, the founder of the Firm Foundation, and Texas would not receive Moser after the Firm Foundation had condemned him.

        Despite historic roots in the Nashville Bible School, the climate in the east was changing. Foy E. Wallace, Jr. was appointed editor of the Gospel Advocate in 1930, and though he resigned in 1934, his replacement was John T. Hinds, another Texan. Both Wallace and Hinds were regular contributors to the Firm Foundation in the 1920s. Hinds himself was the front page editor of the paper. As a result, Wallace and Hinds brought Texas attitudes and convictions to the Tennessee paper. They represented the tradition of Austin McGary and J. D. Tant.²¹⁷ Many Texans were even afraid that Wallace had gone soft when he went to the Advocate,²¹⁸ but he demonstrated otherwise in the premillennial controversy. At bottom, in the 1930s, the Texans moved into Tennessee and turned the Advocate toward a more conservative approach. As a result, the influence of the Nashville Bible School, especially on the doctrine of grace, was curtailed though not extinguished. While Moser was permitted to publish in the Advocate, presumably because of his relationship with Brewer,²¹⁹ he was regarded with suspicion by Wallace, Whiteside and Hinds.

        Because the Advocate was now a mixture of Texan conservativism and the Lipscomb-Harding doctrine of grace, the Advocate reflected both sides of the dispute, which it still does. Moser and Brewer would publish articles that reflected the Nashville Bible School tradition. Others, such as R. L. Whiteside and Guy N. Woods, would reflect the more conservative tradition that is today reflected in the Firm Foundation.²²⁰ The difference between the two traditions is illustrated by the way the doctrine of the imputation of Christ's righteousness is treated.²²¹ Lipscomb, Harding, Boll, Armstrong, Brewer and Moser all believed that this was the teaching of Scripture. However, Wallace, Whiteside and Woods all rejected it as denominational and Calvinistic.²²²

        I believe there was a shift in the east which was introduced by the west. When Wallace came to Tennessee, the Texas conservativism of the late 19th century moved the Advocate from a moderate to a more conservative position. This involved a shift on the doctrine of grace as well as shifts on other issues such as rebaptism, pacificism, and personal indwelling of the Spirit.

Outline of Introduction
Next

Endnotes

159 Roy Key, "'The Righteousness of God'," Gospel Advocate 88 (24 January 1946): 74-75, 78-79.[back]

160 Under a section entitled "Let Us Beware of the Mistakes of the Jews," Key specifically reflected the language of Moser. For example, in The Way of Salvation, 114, Moser uses the heading "The Fundamental Mistake of the Jews." In a telephone conversation on August 18, 1993, Roy Key recalled that he was particularly influenced by S. H. Hall and K. C. Moser on the doctrine of grace though he attributes the major thrust of his thinking to the apostle Paul. In an undated letter to Brewer in 1955, which Key shared with me, he acknowledged his debt to Lipscomb, Brewer and Grubbs and added that he was indebted to Moser for his view of salvation by grace; letter to John Mark Hicks of Memphis, TN from Roy Key of Rogers, AR, dated August 16, 1993. The S. H. Hall influence is interesting, and, like Moser, was through his writing, particularly Studies in Scripture (Nashville: Gospel Advocate Co., 1931), 99-107, 122-130. Hall graduated from the Nashville Bible School in 1906 and while there he experienced a "second conversion" under the influence of Lipscomb, Harding and Larimore as he was was exposed to a tradition different from the Firm Foundation. See Hall, Sixty-Five Years in the Pulpit, or Compound Interest in Religion (Nashville: Gospel Advocate Co., 1959), 13-16. This is yet another confirmation of the historical interpretation offered in the text.[back]

161 Key, 78.[back]

162 Ibid.[back]

163 Ibid.[back]

164 Brewer, "'The Righteousness of God," Gospel Advocate 88 (7 March 1946): 224.[back]

165 Ibid., 224.[back]

166 Ibid.[back]

167 Brewer, "Grace and Salvation," in Abilene Christian College Bible Lectureship (Austin, TX: Firm Foundation Publishing Co., 1952), esp. 112-4. This speech also appeared in the Advocate, "Grace and Salvation," Gospel Advocate 96 (30 December 1954): 1029-31 and 97 (17 February 1955), 124-5.[back]

168 Ibid., 115.[back]

169 Ibid., 116.[back]

170 Brewer, "Righteousness," 224.[back]

171 Ibid., 224. Brewer also calls attention to T. W. Caskey and James A. Harding in his 1952 ACC lecture, "Grace and Salvation," 112-4 and Advocate, 1029-30.[back]

172 Brewer, "Grace and Salvation," ACC, 103.[back]

173 Ibid., 102.[back]

174 I am dependent here upon the forthcoming book by Richard T. Hughes, The Churches of Christ to be published by Greenwood Press.[back]

175 David Lipscomb, "God's Righteousness Saves," Gospel Advocate 38 (29 October 1896): 692. See also Lipscomb, "Righteousness Can Come Only Through Christ," Gospel Advocate 32 (8 October 1890): 648.[back]

176 Lipscomb, "Righteousness Saves," 692. This quotation is also found in David Lipscomb, Ephesians, Philippians and Colossians, A Commentary on the New Testament Epistles, 4, edited, with additional notes, by J. W. Shepherd (Nashville: Gospel Advocate, 1957), 205-06.[back]

177 James A. Harding, "By Grace Through Faith," The Way 1 (23 February 1899): 18. For biographical information and some of the history of the Nashville Bible School, Potter Bible College and The Way, see L. C. Sears, The Eyes of Jehovah: The Life and Faith of James Alexander Harding (Nashville: Gospel Advocate, 1970).[back]

178 Harding, "Grace," 19. Cf. p. 18: "The writer of this believes that the justified are justified by grace through faith apart from works of law; that they are not in God's sight, justified by deeds of law--of any law, ancient, or modern, human or divine; that this is a 'wholesome doctrine and very full of comfort'."[back]

179 James A. Harding, "Questions and Answers," The Way 4 (17 July 1902): 122. In the same article he stated that he could "extend no hope" to the unimmersed.[back]

180 For biographical information, see L. C. Sears, For Freedom: The Biography of John Nelson Armstrong (Austin: Sweet Publishing Co., 1969).[back]

181 J. N. Armstrong, "Who Then Can Be Saved?," The Way 3 (15 August 1901): 155.[back]

182 Ibid., 156.[back]

183 J. N. Armstrong, "The Blood of Jesus," The Way 1 (1 August 1900): 123. See also his "The Faith that Saves," Gospel Herald 1 (25 September 1913): 2-3.[back]

184 Interview with F. W. Mattox, August 2, 1993.[back]

185 Hughes, Churches of Christ, forthcoming.[back]

186 R. H. Boll, "Word and Work," Gospel Advocate 56 (14 March 1914): 513. During his editorship of Word and Work, Boll authored many articles on grace. See, in particular, "Grace and Works," Word and Work 25 (August 1932): 196-8; and "God's Part and Man's Part," Word and Work 25 (November 1932): 266-7. He also published a series on Romans in 1937-38 which was reprinted in 1952-53. It is interesting that these publication dates coincide with Moser's own pamphlets in 1937 and 1952.[back]

187 Ibid., 514.[back]

188 Ibid.[back]

189 R. H. Boll, "Babes & Hypocrites," The Way 3 (25 April 1901): 26.[back]

190 Young, History, 75, 113, 118, and Sears, For Freedom, 75ff, 110ff.[back]

191 Hughes, "Are Restorationists Evangelicals?," 134. Bell was President of Thorp Springs Christian College during Moser's first year, and a teacher during the 1917-1918 academic year while Moser was still a student. In Bell's autobiography "Honor to Whom Honor is Due," Firm Foundation 68 (6 November 1951): 6, he emphasizes the tremendous impact Harding had on his life and thought that the church as a whole needed the kind of life-changing experience of Harding's teaching to revive it. For example, he believed Harding's doctrine of special providence, personal indwelling of the Spirit and empowerment of the Spirit as a divine-human encounter are "needed to save the church from changing divine dynamics to human mechanics." As with R. H. Boll and S. H. Hall, Harding's influence on R. C. Bell was transformational.[back]

192 Interview with J. D. Thomas, August 2, 1993, and interview with F. W. Mattox, August 2, 1993. See also J. D. Thomas, "Law and Grace (2)," Firm Foundation 100 (23 August 1983): 579 where he notes that R. C. Bell and G. C. Brewer were among the few who had a "good comprehension of grace" in the mid-twentieth century.[back]

193 J. D. Thomas, Romans (Austin: Sweet Publishing Co., 1965), 3. This was also a favorite quip of K. C. Moser, according to Times 5.17 (2 May 1971), a bulletin of the Burke Road Church of Christ in Pasenda, Texas, and former students, including Evertt Huffard.[back]

194 R. C. Bell, Studies in Romans (Austin: Firm Foundation Publishing House, 1957), 8, 30. See also his Studies in Galatians (Austin: Firm Foundation Publishing House, 1954), 27, 31, 35.[back]

195 Brewer, Christ Crucified: A Book of Sermons Together with a Lecture on Evolution (Nashville, TN: Gospel Advocate, 1959; reprint of the 1928 edition).[back]

196 Ibid., 144-5.[back]

197 Ibid., 145.[back]

198 Ibid., 46-47. Of interest are two articles by Brewer on this subject in 1930. "What Shall We Preach to Make Men Cry, 'What Shall I do to be Saved'?," Gospel Advocate 72 (18 September 1930): 890-1; and 72 (25 September 1930): 914-5. Brewer believed that we should preach the "holiness and majesty of God" in conjunction with the "goodness and love of God." In other words, we need to exalt God so that we might see our sinfulness, and then to exalt Christ as the remedy to our sin. Then, when they are driven to Christ as Savior, we will be able to tell men what to do to be saved.[back]

199 Brewer, "How We Reach Perfection," Gospel Advocate 97 (10 November 1955): 1012.[back]

200 Ibid.[back]

201 Brewer, "Grace and Law: Liberalism and Legalism (No. 8)," Gospel Advocate 97 (21 July 1955): 633.[back]

202 Brewer, "Grace and Salvation," ACC, 127. Perceptively a questioner noted that this implies the "security of the believer," to which Brewer responded, yes, "the believer is secure," but "if he becomes an unbeliever--has his faith overthrown or denies the faith--he will be lost."[back]

203 F. W. Mattow believes it was self-taught. Interview with F. W. Mattox on August 3, 1993.[back]

204 Oran Rhodes, "The Law-Grace, Doctrine-Gospel Controversy," The Church and the Restoration Movement: The Fifth Annual Southwest Lectures, edited by Bill Jackson (Lebanon, TN: Sain Publishers, 1986), 396.[back]

205 Robert F. Turner, "Theology and the Gospel Preacher," Vanguard 2 (9 September 1976): 15. See also Gary Workman, "Grace and Law, Faith and Works in Galatians," in Studies in Galatians, edited by Dub McClish (Denton: Valid Publications, 1986), 290.[back]

206 Ron Halbrook, "Antidote to K. C. Moser's Views on Romans 4," Preceptor 31 (March 1982): 136.[back]

207 In 1976 Fanning Yater Tant, editor of the Vanguard, asked Robert Turner to writer a response to Moser's The Way of Salvation. This testifies to the enduring nature of his book, its use among the non-institutional segment of the Churches of Christ, and their unrelenting opposition to it. See "Theology and the Gospel Preacher," 1, 14-5; "Theological Coloring Book," Vanguard 2 (24 September 1976): 1, 14-5; "The Sinful 'Nature' of Man," Vanguard 2 (18 October 1976): 1, 18-9; "Wrestling with the 'Law of Sin'," Vanguard 2 (28 October 1976): 1, 11, 14; "System of Law and Faith," Vanguard 2 (11 November 1976): 1, 14-5; "The Imputation of Righteousness," Vanguard 2 (25 November 1976): 1, 14-5; and "What Must I Do To Be Saved," Vanguard 2 (9 December 1976): 1, 14-5. [back]

208 Moser, "Can the Gospel Be Obeyed?," 2.[back]

209 Showalter, "Obedience and Salvation," 5. Two other writers would eventually respond to Moser's article. Logan Buchanan, "Is It by Faith Alone: Review of K. C. Moser's Article," Firm Foundation 51 (3 April 1934): 8 objected to Moser's contention that commands are not part of the gospel, and contended that "my brethren are the only people in the world that do understand the doctrine of salvation by grace through faith, and the only people that preach it as the Bible teaches." J. W. Chism, "Can the Gospel Be Obeyed?," Firm Foundation 51 (3 April 1934): 8 contended that obeying the gospel includes more than "first principles." It includes "all the commandments to be obeyed as Christians."[back]

210 Moser, "Reply to Brother Showalter," 8.[back]

211 Moser, "Saving Faith," 4. This point was made in the following context: "Some have dissected the 'plan of salvation' and attempted to define the spiritual state of the one who has believed, but who has not repented, and one who has believed, repented and confessed but who has not been baptized. This attempt was begotten of the erroneous idea that faith, repentance, confession, and baptism are four unrelated steps toward God. . . e.g., faith changes heart; repentance changes life; baptism changes state. They must be related as to the order of occurrence, but not necessarily so as to their significance."[back]

212 Moser, "Reply to Brother Showalter," 8.[back]

213 Ibid.[back]

214 Showalter, "'Faith Alone'," 4.[back]

215 Ibid.[back]

216 Ibid. This is demonstrated by his comment on Bogard. See footnote 52.[back]

217 The series of articles in the Vanguard by Robert Turner were prompted by Fanning Yater Tant, the son of J. D. Tant and editor of the Vanguard. Cf. Robert Turner, "Theology," 1.[back]

218 J. D. Tant, "In the Lower Rio Grande Valley," Firm Foundation 50 (21 March 1933): 2: "I feared when he went to Nashville that he was wandering from his earlier training. But Foy tells me he still holds the Bible ground he always has held. . . Since C. R. Nicol, R. L. Whiteside, and John T. Lewis have been added to the staff--men who have always stood firm against sect baptism--it may be they will yet bring the Advocate out on Bible Ground along all lines."[back]

219 As far as I have been able to determine, Moser did not publish any articles in the Advocate after Brewer's death.[back]

220 There was a period, of course, where the Firm Foundation changed directions in the mid-seventies through the early 1980s. But the paper was purchased by a conservative group and has returned to the original McGary-Tant tradition. H. A. (Buster) Dobbs and William Cline purchased the paper and began editorship on August 30, 1983.[back]

221 It is unnecessary to think specifically about the doctrine of "Christ's righteousness." The difference is illuminated if we understand what each tradition means by "God's righteousness": is it God's gift of his righteousness to us (a divine righteousness), or is it God's plan for making us righteous through obedience to his new law (plan)? The specific issue of the righteousness of Christ is, in some sense, superfluous, but it is an indicator.[back]

222 Whiteside, Commentary, 98-9; Guy N. Woods, "Righteousness," Gospel Advocate 104 (29 November 1962): 758-9 and "Transferred Righteousness?," Gospel Advocate 119 (1 November 1979): 675, 689.[back]