1. Free As Sons
   
2. Does "Go Ye" Mean "Go Me?"
   
3. Are We Really Born Again?
   
4. The Sacrifices of Cain and Abel
   
5. Silence Says Something
   
6. Body Language
   
7. Repentance Before Faith
   
8. I Wonder
   
9. Can I Know?
   
10. Ultimate Logical Conclusions
    
11. Errors in Peter's Sermon
    
12. Did Timothy Need Admonition?
    
13. Jesus' Youth Sermon For Adults
    
14. Why Didn't Paul Reform?
    
15. Christmas
    
16. Let The Unmarried Marry
    
17. A Dialect of Division
    
18. Our Traditions
    
19. Adding Our Safeguards
    
20. According To The Pattern
    
21. A Creed In The Deed
    
22. Samuel Did Not Know The Lord!
    
23. Response From Our Readers
    
24. Cries Of A Troubled Church
    
25. Sharing Without Fellowship
    
26. I Joined A Church
    
27. Open Membership
    
28. Another Last Will And Testament
    
29. Sad Thoughts About Church Growth
    
30. My Four Retirement Homes
    
31. Hook's Points: A Potpourri
    

HOOK'S POINTS: A POTPOURRI

How I missed the meaning of this comforting scripture: "It is appointed for men to die once, and after that comes judgment" (Heb. 9:27)! Countless times I used this passage to warn listeners of the awesome certainty of death and judgment, without giving any attention to the "so Christ" clause that followed.

Let us read the rest of that sentence: "So Christ, having been offered once to bear the sins of many, will appear a second time, not to deal with sin but to save those who are eagerly waiting for him."

Jesus came to be our substitute, to stand in our place; so, Christ died in our place and met the demands of judgment for us. The Word became a man, accepting our appointment of death and judgment. If we will believe in him, he will give us life and account us as righteous in the judgment. He is to come again, not to deal with sin, but to save from death those who eagerly await his coming.

What a consolation to know that our death and judgment have been experienced for us already by our proxy, Jesus Christ!

To misuse this passage to induce the feel of the thorns of death and judgment is to fail to enjoy the fragrance of hope and assurance Jesus put into it. Turn loose of the thorns and smell the rose.

The Scriptures speak of the day of judgment several times. It seems that most of us have some mental picture of the great throng of risen humanity gathered before an awesome throne occupied by God in his glory. One by one, we are called to stand in his majestic presence to give account of our earthly conduct and to hear our sentence.

There may be some accuracy in such an imagined scene, but I would like for you to think about the "day." That "morning of the resurrection and day of judgment" may be stretched out a bit. If, in such a judgment scene, God gives each of us one short minute, how long would it take? Now, arithmetic is not my long suit, but, if I figure correctly, it would require 9,512 years to judge the 5 billion people on earth today. If there are as many as 20 billion to be judged, that day would stretch out to 38,051 years. Even if that judgment process began when Jesus ascended, that waiting line is growing faster than you can count.

Don't misunderstand me. I am not making light of the judgment or of our accountability. God can handle the matter without my help. The point that I wish to make is that we cannot afford to be too literalistic about some of the things that even seem to be stated definitely. Literal interpretations often miss the larger picture.

Some years ago I received a church bulletin with a sheet of paper inserted which bore the above heading. From it one might get the idea that this was a copy of God's own ledger for keeping individual records.

The recipient was supposed to keep his own record by filling the blanks through the year. It was mailed at the beginning of the new year and consisted of a listing of the fifty­two weeks with an appropriate place to check one's attendance on Sunday mornings and evenings and Wednesday nights and a space to fill in the amount of contribution each week.

By keeping this record, a person could determine his current righteousness at a glance! Why hadn't someone come up with this handy form before?

Anxieties concerning the judgment would be dispelled by such a simple procedure. "'Tis in heaven!" There would be no surprises in the judgment. Perhaps, you should take your copy along, just in case the Lord got his records mixed up.

If the preacher who produced that form were challenged about these matters being the extent of the Lord's concern, I am sure that he would add a thousand things that are important in our spiritual life. This bulletin insert, however, illustrates the undue emphasis that many of us have given to attendance and giving. A living relationship with Jesus, spirituality, morality, service to others, and the fruits of the Spirit in general have been left as distant runner­ups to attendance and giving.

Praise the Lord, there is widespread recognition of that misdirection now. We are accepting righteousness by faith and praising God for his grace by worship, service, and clean living.

We preachers have given Demas a bad time. While it is admitted that what Paul wrote about him is far from flattering, we have tended to be unmerciful in our judgment of him.

While Paul was in prison and his execution seemed imminent, he wrote, "For Demas, in love with this present world, has deserted me and gone to Thessalonica" (2 Tim. 4:10).

When someone fails us in time of spiritual crisis, we tend to think that he has deserted the Lord. Paul said that Demas had deserted him, not the Lord. Being in love with this present world might indicate spiritual abandonment, but it might not mean that. The axe was about to fall on Paul. Epaphras was imprisoned with him also. Demas, being involved and implicated with Paul, possibly was in immediate danger of receiving the same sentence with Paul. Demas loved this world and was not eager to leave it. So, he made a "strategic withdrawal" ahead of any arrest warrant.

I cannot prove my point any more than I can prove that he forsook the Lord. Rather than just being the Devil's advocate in this case, I hope to make you aware of how we tend to make the worst case that we can against a brother rather than to offer gracious sympathy to a faltering brother in order to strengthen him.

You are familiar with the beautiful analogy that Paul makes of the relationship of husband and wife to that of Christ and the church recorded in Ephesians 5:21­33. In verse 31 he states, "For this reason a man shall leave his father and mother and be joined to his wife, and the two shall become one." Paul is alluding to the relationship established between Adam and Eve, but he is not applying the point to the husband­wife relationship of disciples, as I so long supposed.

Paul makes a different application. He concludes with, "This is a great mystery, and I take it to mean Christ and the church."

Jesus fulfilled the analogy when, as the eternal Word becoming flesh, he left his Father and became a man. Then, on the cross he left his mother, commending this "woman" to the care of John.

The church is composed of humans, all aliens from Jesus' divine heritage. He became one flesh with sinful humanity, one flesh with a bride lacking the sanctity of his divine Father and virgin mother. He had to leave his mother at Golgotha in order to sanctify his bride so he could become one with her.

Christ has removed the spots and wrinkles of his bride making her holy and without blemish. Does that describe the church you know? It does not picture the outward features of the church I know, but it identifies the grace I know! The love of Christ is the cosmetic of grace which covers her spots and blemishes by accounting her as clean and beautiful. Our beauty is in the eye of the Beholder.

We should be able to find more profitable things to do than to teach our children to sing, "If the devil doesn't like it, he can sit on a tack!"

Perhaps, we have more insolence toward the devil than the archangel dared to have. In a passage of some mystery (Jude 9), Jude informs us, "But when the archangel Michael, contending with the devil, disputed about the body of Moses, he did not presume to pronounce a reviling judgment upon him, but he said, 'The Lord rebuke you'."

If Michael did not presume to pronounce a reviling judgment upon the devil, surely we should have fear about pronouncing reviling judgments upon fellow disciples with whom we differ.

Evolutionists tell us that, while we were evolving, our bodies adapted according to our needs causing us to gain some functions and to lose others. For example, they explain that, when we came down out of the trees, we no longer needed a tail; so, it disappeared, except for the vestigial tailbone.

That just could not be right. If we adapted according to need, then, because we have need of a more versatile eye, instead of the tail disappearing, it would have developed an eye on the tip of it. Just think how handy that would be. It would enable one to dodge while in full retreat. A fellow could peek around a corner without exposing himself. It would relieve the problem of finding the quarter that rolled under the dresser. And, especially of value to me with such poor memory, I could place my sermon script in the pulpit stand and read it while looking my listeners straight in the eyes.

In his promise to forgive our sins, God has assured us that he will remember our sins no more. He forgives and forgets. From this thought, some lofty­minded teachers have concluded that, for us to truly forgive someone, we must actually wipe their offense from our memory and forget that it happened.

Can you willfully forget something? Decide to forget the name of your grandfather. Can you do it? The harder you may try to forget something, the more indelibly it will remain in the memory. Of course, we forget loads of things that we try to remember.

The demand that we erase from memory the offense committed against us before we can forgive and be forgiven is absurd, impractical, and guilt­inducing. In forgiving, we must be able to accept a person again as though the offense had not occurred, but we cannot deliberately erase it from our memory.

When God forgives, remits, covers, washes away, or blots out our sins, he accepts us as though the offense were erased from his memory.

While one of our local funeral homes was constructing a nice, modern facility, I had several funerals in association with the owner. He was fuming, "up to here," with governmental regulations. The government dictated details that I had never dreamed of before.

All of this was impressed upon me quite unexpectedly when I had my first funeral in the new facility. I was ushered to take the seat behind the speaker's stand near the deceased. There it was, bracketed inside the speaker's stand-a fire extinguisher!

Do you suppose-?

"You cannot legislate morality! " is the scream that we hear each time that effort is made to curb public profanity, nudity, or pornography.

I don't know how I came to be so warped in my understanding of things, but I was under the impression that we have always had laws governing morals. We have laws against assault, murder, theft, robbery, embezzlement, impure foods, dope, public drunkenness, driving while intoxicated, rape, slander, perjury, child abuse, child labor, and many other such immoral actions. These are all dealing with morals. In fact, I would judge, a greater part of our laws regulate the relationships of persons. That is what morality is all about-a person's relationship with fellow human beings.

It is true that one cannot be forced to become moral by legislation, but our laws are meant to protect society from immoral persons. To give the individual license under the guise of personal rights is to violate the rights of others. That is immoral. Our obsession with individual rights which violate the rights of the general public is undermining the basic structure of our society. It is incumbent upon the individual to defer to society rather than the society having to try to conform to each erratic individual.

"Will you walk into my parlour?" said a Spider to a Fly; "'Tis the prettiest little parlour that ever you did spy." In this manner, Mary Howitt begins her portrayal of the universal enticement to sexual immorality.

Here comes the carefree fly: "And I have seen among the simple... a young man without sense, passing along the street near her corner, taking the road to her house." (Read Proverbs 7 ­ RSV).

The lurking spider appears: "And lo, a woman meets him, dressed as a harlot, wily of heart." She spins her web: "She seizes him and kisses him." "With much seductive speech she persuades him; with her smooth talk she compels him."

Behold her sensuous parlour: "I have perfumed my bed with myrrh, aloes, and cinnamon. Come, let us take our fill of love till morning; let us delight ourselves with love." The temptress disdainfully mislabels sexual sin as "love" and the satisfaction of lust as "making love," declaring such action to be clean and wholesome, for "with impudent face she says to him: I had to offer sacrifices, and today I have paid my vows.' " A pretty little parlour with the stench of death!

This "liberated woman" declares that there are no entanglements in her web, assuring, "My husband is not at home." "Stolen water is sweet, and bread eaten in secret is pleasant. But he does not know that the dead are there, and that her guests are in the depths of Sheol" (Prov. 9:17f). The pretty little parlour is the trap of death. "All at once he follows her, as an ox goes to the slaughter… as a bird rushes into a snare; he does not know that it will cost him his life." The "safe sex" will not prevent the loss of the soul, physical death through AIDS or other disease, or being killed by a jealous husband or lover.

"Be not deceived," God pleads, "neither the immoral, nor adulterers, nor homosexuals will inherit the kingdom of God" (l Cor. 6:10). The fornicator's lot will be in the lake that burns with fire and brimstone (Rev. 21:8). A pretty little parlour, indeed!

"Let marriage be held in honor among all, and let the marriage bed be undefiled; for God will judge the immoral and adulterous" (Heb. 13:4).

"And now, O sons, listen to me,

and be attentive to the words of my mouth.

Let not your heart turn aside to her ways,

do not stray into her paths;

for many a victim has she laid low;

yea, all her slain are a mighty host.

Her house is the way to Sheol,

going down to the chambers of death."

Since I was a teenager half a century ago, I have heard preachers define joy, using the acrostic to explain that, in order to have true joy, one must put Jesus first, others second, and yourself third. That always sounded so pious, holy, and idealistic-until I tried to teach some practical application of it.

If by putting Jesus first, we mean to try to understand and do his will in every matter of life, that is fine. But what does it mean to put others before ourselves? Must we feed everyone else before we eat? Must we pay the debts of others before we pay our own? Must we love others more than ourselves. Jesus told us to love our neighbor as ourselves, not more than ourselves. If a person does not provide for his own needs first, he is unable to care for the needs of others. Jesus did not prescribe a life of depriving of ourselves, but of sharing. His way is practical.

Although we preachers feel compelled to appear humble, most of us have a healthy pride which sometimes betrays us. When a certain preacher was called to appear as a witness in a court trial, one of his deacons went along with him as a spectator. As the minister took the stand, the attorney began with some introductory questions.

"What is your profession?"

"I'm a preacher."

"How would you describe yourself as a preacher?"

"I am the best one in the state of Texas," he declared rather hesitantly.

The dumbfounded deacon could hardly believe his ears. He knew that the preacher had won no blue ribbons for his efforts. Pink slips, but no blue ribbons.

Immediately after the preacher was dismissed by the court, the deacon joined him in the hall and blurted out, "Why in the world did you tell those people that you are the best preacher in Texas?"

"I had to tell them," he confessed; "I was under oath!"

The paid minister gives a part of his paycheck back into the collection in order to help pay for his next one. Now, think about that strange practice for a minute. If his life is committed to the serving of the congregation, why should he be expected to give money into it? Maybe, we have missed the difference in being hired and being devoted. A devoted person, like a Catholic priest or nun, is supported, but not hired. He or she does not pay for his or her own support. Why pay the preacher an extra $50.00 per week so he can put it back into the treasury? That is more than a little foolish. By letting the church deduct the $50.00 off the top by agreement, the minister will have to pay taxes on $2,600 less each year.

I give credit to an amiable critic and friend of mine for causing me to become more aware of the value of man­hours relating to my work. If I speak to 360 people for thirty minutes, I have used 180 man­hours of the time of my listeners. If I do not deliver a relevant, worthwhile lesson, I waste the equivalent of 22.5 workdays of their time. Eight hours of preparation is little if it is to involve 180 hours of their time. If I keep my audience waiting one minute, I waste six hours. When I waste the time of an assembled group, I waste opportunity-and fast! So, I have always tried to be relevant, punctual, and brief!

Notice that I just said that I have tried. That has not kept me from hearing such smart aleck remarks as:

"You give us lots of food for thought, but I prefer fast foods!"

"Preacher, don't feel bad that my husband got up and walked out during your sermon; he wasn't angry at you; he often walks in his sleep! "

"A preacher ought to be as smart as my wife's washing machine. When it spins dry, it cuts off!"

"For a sermon to be immortal, it is not necessary that it be eternal!

In earlier years it afforded me much delight to see a building bearing our "Church of Christ" designation, or to visit another of our congregations. My pride was inflated if it was a nice, large building in a good location.

That innocent joy is diminished now. Now, I am aware of the work, struggle, tears, tensions, discouragements, power struggles, and misdirections represented by that building. It required a generation or two or three for the congregation to grow to the present size of a few dozen or a few hundred members. And they feel that they are the misunderstood, self­congratulated chosen few of the one, true church.

Do you suppose that Jesus shares some of my sadness and disappointment as he looks at that building?

"I have the right to do as I please with my own body" is the often heard catch­line of the abortionists. Liberationists have repeated that expression so often that they have actually come to believe that it is true.

Does a woman have the right to her own body? She does, but only in a limited sense. She has not the right to house her body in my garage, to let it scream in her neighbors' windows in the night, to march it into a men's public rest room, to present it unclothed in public, to use her body for prostitution, to engage it in homosexual activities, to practice drunken driving, or to feed her body while letting her child starve. These actions of her body would be immoral because they violate other persons.

Does a woman violate another person when she aborts her own child by choice? Such "pro­choice" is the choice to destroy the life of her unborn child for her own selfish interests. No one has a right to be selfish.

Our "liberated" people cry out in holy horror against killing a chimpanzee in a useful medical experiment or executing the most hardened criminal while, at the same time, adamantly demanding the legal right to terminate the lives of countless thousands of human beings!

The attending angels who stand in God's presence in behalf of the little ones must look in horror. God must weep!

(There is an inconsistency in our reasoning as to when life begins. We declare that the fetus is a living being; but, we deny that the spiritual life, which is analogous to birth, begins until a person is brought forth from the baptismal birth.)

A chigger bite (I know, they are chigoes, not chiggers; and they raise welts, not whelps; a whelp is a young carnivore such as a cub or pup) can just about drive you crazy. It can do so if you have nothing more important to occupy your attention. However, if your child is in danger or your house is on fire, you forget about chigger bites, the blister on your heel, the headache, and all other annoying irritations.

There ought to be some sort of lesson there somewhere for grumblers and excuse makers, but I don't feel up to preaching tonight.

Although we do not use that word much any more, in my youth worldliness was a popular topic for preachers. Usually, the definition included the sins of youth, dancing, new fads, new styles, movies, and forms of recreation other than those which the speaker engaged in. The definition and denunciations changed constantly due to the change in acceptance of new things in our society.

Since worldliness is a threat to our souls, we need to know more specifically what it is. My definition must be objective rather than an expression of my prejudices and fears. John elaborates on this subject, and his explanation of worldliness may take us by surprise. In First John 2:15­16, John analyzes "the love of the world" as (l) the craving for physical satisfaction, (2) the fondness for aesthetic things, and (3) the concern for status. Consider these separately.

1. Craving for Physical Satisfaction. It is normal for us to desire comfortable surroundings for the body, to enjoy good food, to crave sexual fulfillment, and to protect our bodies from external irritations and dangers. There is no special merit in depriving the body of these satisfying things. But to make one of these things our chief concern in life is to become materialistic, or worldly minded. This is the lust of the flesh.
2. Fondness For Aesthetic Things. God gave us a sense of appreciation for the beautiful, for all the arts, for tasteful appointments in our surroundings, for the enhancement of our personal and bodily attraction. If music, art, learning, drama, beautiful house, or clothing become the great thing in your life, then the lust of the eye is your sin.
3. Concern For Status. All of us want to be noticed, to be loved, to be accepted. This is a useful yearning that God put into our nature to make us compatible social beings. If this concern becomes an overpowering drive in you expressing itself in pride, hypocrisy, extravagance, social climbing, or joining the rat race in general, then the vainglory of life has become your goal. Status seeking is worldliness.

Satan's appeal to us is through good things. Every good impulse could lead to sin. God's hold on us is through self­control. God wants us to use all of our instinctive drives and the materialistic things which fulfill them for eternal goals. It is when we forget the eternal aim of life and all that pertains to it that we become worldly.

Paul wrote that "all things are lawful for me; but I will not be brought under the power of any" (I Cor. 6:12). The world is ours for use and enjoyment with self­mastery. Sin is not in things, but in people when they abandon self­control. Loss of temperance results in a shift in our sense of values. Over­evaluation of temporal things is worldliness.

I suppose that there is still some good purpose fulfilled by our highway signs, but my heart no longer leaps up when I see one, as it tended to do in times past.

Those roadside signs usually advertise the Church of Christ rather than Christ.

They speak of our obscurity because of our lack of numbers and the poor locations of our building. The larger denominations seldom advertise by such billboards.

Those signs are an expression of our legalistic beliefs about the necessity of meeting thrice weekly even when we are on a journey. The schedule of services is there as a reminder of that duty.

Our signs reveal our exclusivistic stance. They do not encourage attendance in any general way, but only with the group doing the advertising. Usually, they don't even list other congregations of the Church of Christ.

Many of the signs were put up as a part of an ambitious project several years ago. Then they were forgotten, and the deteriorated sign advertises that disinterest to every passerby.

Paul tells us that the Christian widow is free to marry "only in the Lord" (I Cor. 7:39). Generally, our people have concluded that Paul means that she must only marry a Christian, that is, a member of the Church of Christ. That is thought to be a lawful restriction. If it is a legal prohibition against marrying a non­Christian, then it raises some very troublesome questions.

Must the man whom she marries have proven himself to be a faithful disciple? How zealous must he be to qualify? Who is to judge him? What if he renounces his discipleship after marriage? If he is baptized and attends services only so that she will marry him, how does that affect the validity of the marriage?

Is marriage to an unbeliever sinful? If so, how does one repent of it and make correction? Suppose that he is converted after the marriage; is it still a sinful relationship? Is such a marriage adultery? If so, does repentance demand divorcement? If she recognizes her sin and divorces her husband because he is not a Christian, is she free to remarry?

Does this same restriction of marrying only a believer apply to widowed men also? If so, why did Paul not say so? Does this restriction apply to all marriages, to both men and women, whether they are single or widowed? If so, why did Paul only apply it to widows? Have you the right to make wider application than Paul made?

When we approach this statement of Paul as a lawful prohibition, we find ourselves entangled in many unanswerable questions and possibilities. Since some of Paul's teachings in this chapter express his own opinion, judgment, and advice of expediency, we may consider this as a part of it. While it may not be best to marry an unbeliever for a number of reasons of expediency, it cannot be classed as a sinful defilement to do so.

A person once told me of attending a Baptist service in which the preacher's subject was "Jonah Was A Baptist!" The preacher would elaborate on a particular wrong attitude or misconduct of Jonah and then apply it pointedly by asking, "Isn't that just like a Baptist?"

I find two things objectionable to that sermon: (1) I did not think of it first, and (2) Jonah must have been one of my persuasion instead of a Baptist!

The truth may be that Jonah was one of our preachers. He was the cause of the entire problem. When the mariners threw him overboard, the storm subsided. It is worth a try, for we sorely need the calm.

When we got our first poodle we had a back yard in which to keep her which was walled with a five­foot concrete block fence. As we let her out of the house, there was little worry about her safety. No training was needed to keep her in the yard. But one day she did slip out and, due to her lack of experience outside, she became totally disoriented and was even afraid of me when I found her.

We moved to our present residence where we have no fenced yard. She was unaccustomed to such freedom. In spite of our precautions when we let her outside, she did not last long. She was soon killed by a car.

Then we got another poodle. Having no fenced yard to contain her, we trained her to keep away from the street. We would let her go outside unwatched whenever she wished for as long as she desired, and we had little anxiety about her safety. She survived twelve years with no fateful accident.

The first dog had a fence which kept her from developing responsibility, a fence of external forces. The second had a much better and stronger fence-training which made her responsible.

Sincere parents often seek to protect their children by making all their decisions for them and by building the fence of their own consciences around them. Then as the children go out on their own, they often disappoint their parents by irresponsible conduct because they were never trained and trusted to make responsible decisions. Enforcing parental fences does not always develop responsibility. Forced conduct is not effective training because it provokes resistance and anger.

"Fathers, do not provoke your children to anger, but bring them up in the discipline and instruction of the Lord" (Eph. 6:4).

In my first book, Free in Christ, I stated that I was brought up in the "strictest sect of the Pharisees." A reader wrote to advise me that I had made an error in the book. He explained that my claim to having been brought up in the strictest sect of the Pharisees was wrong. After he went through the list of all the things that the congregation of his youth was against, I wrote him a letter confessing that I was wrong!

"Then shall the dust return to the earth as it was," Solomon explains concerning the body after death. We are made of dust, that is, of the elements of this earth which we eat and drink. God begins this formation in the womb from the substances in our mother's body. In that manner, he creates, forms, and makes us through a process.

God made Adam of the dust from the ground. First, in the process, God formed man. Then God breathed in this created man the breath of life which resulted in the man becoming something that he had not become until that time-a living soul.

Did God form man by a process? As much as we have resisted such a conclusion, it seems evident from the record that he did. Are we limited to the concept that God scooped some soil and patted it together(with spiritual hands?) into a sort of mud man, and then he breathed life into it, all in a few moments time? Why should it be considered as a threat to our faith to admit that we do not know all of the time and process that God used? Any way that you picture it, God is still the Creator.

With spices to perfume Jesus' dead body, the women came to the tomb that Sunday morning. Although we are touched with the love demonstrated by the two Marys, we are disappointed also. Why take embalming spices to an empty tomb? They should have expected to find an empty tomb.

Their attachment to him was sufficient to bring forth a loving service, but it was lacking in a real faith in his resurrection.

We can bear spices of homage also each Sunday morning without really expecting to find an empty tomb. Darkened by materialistic concepts, our convictions about eternity are shaded. This world is too much with us. We live too much for the now and not enough for the then. We may accept some standards of conformity without true dedication to a conviction. In so doing, we may be only a step ahead of admitting that Jesus still needs our spices in the tomb.

Our underlying doubts may betray us like those of the little girl whose cat was killed. Seeking to console the distraught child, the mother explained, "God loves cats too. He saw what a lovely Kitty you had and took her to his beautiful home so she can be his own Kitty." "Don't be silly, Mother," the girl protested indignantly, "What would God want with a dead cat!"

What real difference would it make in your life if you should learn that Jesus did not rise from the dead? What change would you make if you really believed that he arose?

The plastic flower is a symbol of our age, an artifact of our culture. More colorful than the real, it is an exaggeration, a flattery of truth. Behold the bouquet, a beautiful arrangement of artificialities!

It can be bought. No effort of cultivation is needed. It is carefree. What if it is phony, void of fragrance? We become content with the emptiness.

We strive to buy fine houses that we don't take time to live in, period furniture to share with no one, stereos whose incessant music we have little ear to appreciate, televisions whose fascination fails to satisfy, and luxurious automobiles which scurry us about to nowhere.

We are striving after the wind, purchasing mass produced, artificial happiness at the discount store.

We rob mission fields to provide impressive houses of worship, then make them empty shells by our lack of devotion. They stand as symbols of artificial religion. The building can be bought; religion is harder to come by.

We pay preachers to minister, personal workers to convert, singers to revive, teachers to instruct, missionaries to evangelize, and house parents to care for the orphans. This is better than nothing. Plastic flowers are better than none.

Is it purchased? Then where is the fragrance?

While, helpless and hopeless, his people wept,
When enslaved in misery,

God looked on their tears and his promise kept,
Sending one to set them free.

They sprinkled the blood of the lamb they shared,
And, in haste, not waiting morn,

The captor God spoiled and the firstborn saved,
And a nation that night was born.

"What meaning has this?" would their children say,
Through the years as they would eat.

"The meaning is clear: We recall the way
In which Pharaoh met defeat;

God led us all out by a mighty hand,
Spared our lives, and set us free;

We praise him with wine, bitter herbs, bread, and
The lamb slain for you and me."

Our Lord, in the night when his hour had come,
Gave the bread a truth to teach:

"This bread is my body; let each eat some;
There's a share of me for each.

This cup is my life in my blood, I give;
Drink you all for you're set free;

One day I'll return and take you to live
In eternal peace with me."

So, Lord, as your chosen, redeemed, as one,
As your nation, now we share:

In grateful remembrance, we praise your Son,
For he took our sins to bear.

In bread and the cup we discern today,
Our atonement paid for sin;

One voice we lift up to sing praise, and pray,
"Let your Spirit live within."

­­Cecil Hook

Against the darkness of life's sky,

Three crosses stand through history;

Despair on one, another hope;

The third holds lasting victory.

His cross gave hope to him who cried,

"In life to come, remember me!"

Today, in clearer light I view

Another cross-a cross of praise.

I'm crucified to self with Christ;

From death to life he did me raise.

Anew, I'll live by faith in him,

Both now and through unnumbered days.

His cross atoned, but mine I lift

In praise for all to hear;

By bread and wine, I now proclaim,

With all who now in him draw near,

His death for me, until he comes,

My painless cross gives hope and cheer.

With saints I thank you, Christ, my Lord;

On your cross you remembered me.

The penal cross I cannot bear;

My cross is light; it lifts me free;

From sin released, I thank you for

That cross of praise you gave to me.

-Cecil Hook

I worked so hard for God's acclaim,

To lay in heav'n a treasure store;

But then I learned to my deep shame

That only filthy rags I wore.

No worthy record could I claim

To open wide salvation's door;

The deeds I did to remove my blame

Were just as filthy rags I wore.

I saw in Christ the only right;

He opened heaven's treasure store,

Gave me his robe so clean and white,

And my old filthy rags he wore.

A hungry pauper, weak and lame,

For crumbs of grace, I did implore;

He gave a ring, a robe, his name!

Yes, then my filthy rags he wore.

He gave me life-his own, to me;

Through death's dark veil he went before;

I praise again his memory;

Praise him, my filthy rags he wore!

In bread and wine. as one, we all

Commune with him, and still adore;

We all, as one, on God may call,

Because our filthy rags he wore.

­­Cecil Hook

Our older grandson, Daniel Hook, obeyed the gospel last year at the age of eleven. He represents the sixth generation of three branches of our family of the Stone­Campbell heritage. I shared this information with him in a letter the next day.

Dear Daniel,

Because of your lovely attitude and your upbringing in a devoted and spiritual family, I fully expected you to become obedient to the gospel; yet, it came as a pleasant surprise when you called to tell us that you had made your commitment to God on June 29, 1986. It brought me much joy.

If you can always remember and frequently recall how happy your baptism made you feel, it will be a great encouragement for you to continue in your life­long profession of discipleship, even in times of doubt, temptation, and opposition. You have learned that doing right makes you happier. Your faith will become more precious to you than your life. In our world of upheaval and change, you may be called upon to choose between your faith and your life.

Paul wrote to Timothy: "1 am reminded of your sincere faith, a faith that dwelt first in your grandmother Lois and your mother Eunice and now, I am sure, dwells in you" (2 Timothy 1:5). I have no means of tracing the roots of your faith back through your ancestors; however, your heritage in the Church of Christ comes through the families of both your father and your mother.

So far as I know, through my side of the family, it began before the Civil War in Kentucky with the L. A. McAlisters. Their son, I. B. McAlister, married Alice Olive Hanks whose daughter, Lydia Emily (Emma), married George Washington Moore. He was an illiterate and rough character. She taught him to read and write using the Bible as her textbook. In time, he was converted and did some preaching through the years, but never as a professional preacher.

Lora Dean was the oldest of eleven children of George and Emma Moore. She refused to marry her prospective husband, Solomon S. Hook, your great grandfather from whom you got your first and last names, until he agreed to be baptized. Of the six children of Sol and Deanie (one died in infancy), the two sons, George and I, and one son-in-law, Owen Aikin, were vocational ministers; and two other sons­in law, Fay L. Wilson and Herman (Tiny) Charles, gave limited service in preaching.

On Lea's side of the family, two of your great, great, great grandfathers, Jim Pace and John Moye, were zealous members of the church in the piney woods of Southeast Texas. John's son, George Moye, who married Jim Pace's daughter, Flora, was the leader in the little church in Votaw, Texas for many years. Your great grandmother, Elma Rosie Belle, their oldest child, married Thomas Watson Holladay. Watt did not become a Christian until Elma Lea, their only child, was married, but then he became the leader in the little church in Daisetta, Texas.

So, you can see that you are of the seventh generation to serve God in the Restoration Movement dating back through about three quarters of the history of the Movement, and back before the beginning of the Church of Christ as a separate church in the Stone­Campbell Movement.

Although it enriches us to know of our heritage, it does not mean that we can depend upon inherited religion. You must develop your own faith and convictions, establish and maintain your own relationship with God, and serve in the ministry that God gives to you individually.

It is my prayer, my hope, and my confidence that this will be accomplished happily in your spiritual life.

I love you.

Grandpa

(No kin; just trivia: An ancestor of Johnny Carson, Dr. Daniel Hook, mayor of Savannah, Georgia, was a leader in starting a Restoration church there in 1835. Alexander Campbell visited there in 1838.)

To think that you might read all three of my books amazes me. I suppose it is because of my insecure nature that I feel both flattered and embarrassed about it. I am flattered that you would consider it worth your time, but I am embarrassed at the lack of sophistication of my material.

I know that my writings serve a need for only a limited segment of people at this particular stage of our development as a religious body. I trust that the Spirit is directing them to the earnest, open­minded pew-people among us. Because my children have been brought up in a changing time, they have not needed these messages like my generation has. And I trust that, due to redirection affected in the church as a whole, my grandchildren will see little that is surprising or unorthodox about my writings.

Neither of these volumes has the customary page of dedication. Such a dedication would necessarily be to Lea, my wife of forty­two years, because of her many lovable and virtuous qualities. Really, instead of dedicating the volumes to her, I have considered her as co-producer of them. Although I have been the spokesman while she has filled the endearing role of wife and mother, our lives and efforts have been inseparable, mutually dependent, and mutually supportive. So, I consider her as an equal partner in all of our ministry. She has given input, evaluation, and proof­reading to all of my writings-except this page.

A dedication would have to include our children, who have always given us cause to be proud. And we are blessed with the choicest daughter­in­law and son­in­law who both come from solid, Christian families. Sol and Linda (Williamson) Hook, with their children, Daniel, Ryan, and Hayley, live in Vivian, Louisiana. Paul and Mira Prince live in Palo Alto, California. They all are very much involved in spiritual life and are blessed to enjoy the good things of life. My thoughts of them are all happy thoughts.

Although I intend to study and write as long as the Lord gives me the ability, it is unlikely that I shall publish another book, for I am sure that I have already extended myself beyond my qualifications.

Our widened acquaintance through the writings has enriched our lives. Thank you for the many letters, calls, and visits by which Lea and I have been so encouraged. Thank you for the many enabling donations and the purchases of books. We live only a few seconds off Interstate 35. Stop by for a Texas "howdy."

May your life be filled with such simple pleasure and peace as I am enjoying this exquisite, fall morning, October 7, 1987.