The Christian Chronicle and the Holy Spirit

The Christian Chronicle certainly does things that few other of "our" publications do. In fact, it would be improbable that anyone, after reading it, would conclude, "Say, that publication is way too conservative." The opposite reaction, however, frequently occurs.

Two recent articles will clarify the point that The Christian Chronicle is not "chronicling" what they ought to be. The first one is from August of last year. At the top of the page, it says above the line (where the date and the name of the publication is given) "OPINION." One might expect a letter to the editor, therefore, to follow on a particular subject, but, no, it is a personal reminiscence. The title of the piece is: "A Spirit-Led Stop at My Father's Grave" (they were too lazy to capitalize anything but the A and Spirit). What does this description suggest? Exactly.

Before getting into the content, it might be interesting to explain the way the Chronicle describes the author, Wendell Edwards. He co-anchors a morning news show in Birmingham. "He and his family attend the Riverchase Church of Christ in Birmingham." How interesting—that they are not called members of that congregation—it is only reported that they attend it. So, the article may or may not be written by someone who is a Christian.

Underneath the title is Galatians 5:16—from the New Living Translation. Having noted that, the reader should be prepared for an awful rendering of the verse, and he will not be disappointed: "So I say, let the Holy Spirit guide your lives. Then you won't be doing what your sinful nature craves." Sorry for having to quote those words which The Christian Chronicle prominently displayed. It might prove therapeutic to read what the verse actually says: "I say then: Walk in the Spirit, and you shall not fulfil the lust of the flesh."

First, the word translated (correctly) as "walk" is used 96 times in the New Testament and is invariably translated "walk," as in the lame man being exhorted to walk (Mark 2:9) or Jesus walking on the sea (Matt. 14:26). Never is it translated "guided."

Second, the subject of the sentence is you—not the Holy Spirit. Letting the Holy Spirit guide one's life is a totally inaccurate rendering—one which switches the individual performing the action of walking to allowing the Holy Spirit to be the active participant in guiding his life.

Third, the Holy Spirit is not in the nominative case; it's dative and cannot be the subject of the sentence, which is the reason that real translations do not attempt to arbitrarily make it the subject of the sentence.

Fourth, prior to the and, there are only four Greek words, translated "now," "I say," "you walk," and "in the spirit." Could it be much simpler? Walk is in the indicative, not the subjunctive. You is the subject, not the Holy Spirit, and the words your lives are not in the Greek. They were made up to fit the sentence's new configuration.

Fifth, you shall not fulfil the lust of the flesh is accurate and literal. Doing what your sinful nature craves is not. If man has "a sinful nature," where did he get it? Either God formed him with it, which is impossible, since when God completed the creation, all was "very good" (Gen. 1:31). The only other explanation is the Calvinistic one which says that when Adam and Eve sinned, mankind became totally depraved from then on—even before being born. The words sinful nature convey a totally wrong impression, and genuine translations do not get to use it.

The Content

The author talks about debating to stop and visit his father's grave on a trip from Abilene to Birmingham. "I felt obligated. Perhaps it was the Holy Spirit telling me I'm too close not to stop" (27). Really? On what basis is that conclusion drawn. He was debating with himself, which he admits. If he had decided not to stop, would the Holy Spirit have told him that? How did the Holy Spirit communicate with him? Did He say, "Stop, Wendell! Right now! I mean it!" Or did He gently tug on the steering wheel in that direction? People assign their own thoughts and actions to the Holy Spirit.

While at the graveside, he notices some rust-colored streaks across the bottom of the stone and felt compelled to do something about it. As it turned out, the groundskeeper recognized the marks as being made by the mower. The man promised to fix the problem and send him a picture of the cleaned-up stone, which he did. The story is told well, and it would have left the reader with a great feeling—knowing that those who tended to the graves were willing to do whatever they could to fix a problem, but instead Edwards concluded with the following words.

…I'm glad we stopped in the middle of our 14-hour drive home. I'm glad I was there. It was a debate within myself, and I'm glad the Holy Spirit won.

Here's some news: The Holy Spirit was not part of the debate! For someone to conclude an article in this fashion means that this is the point he is trying to make—overshadowing the poignant story about him and his father. And The Christian Chronicle knew that when they published it.

Also, Dallas is nowhere near the middle of a drive between Abilene and Birmingham. The cemetery he stopped at is less than three hours from Abilene.

Pat Boone

Many younger people have no idea who Pat Boone is. He rivaled Elvis in popularity in the 1950s and in fact probably still holds the record for having one or more hit records on the Hot 100 for more than a four-year stretch. Neither Elvis nor the Beatles can make that claim. Of his 38 songs charting on the Top Forty from 1955 until 1962, six of them hit number one (for a total of 21 weeks), and ten more wound up in the Top Ten. He also starred in sixteen movies, including God Is Not Dead 2, made in 2016. What makes all of this interesting is that Pat Boone was a member of the church. Many brethren were proud to claim him as a member. In 1954-55, he attended school at North Texas State University and led singing at Pearl Street in Denton, Texas.

Of course, that all changed when, in the 60s, he became enamored with the charismatic movement, began "speaking in tongues," and otherwise mis-crediting the Holy Spirit with various things He was not actually involved in. The Christian Chronicle converses with and quotes Richard T. Hughes about Boone. They mention that he is a Restoration Movement Scholar. Perhaps he is, but his perspective is colored by the fact that he is a professor at Abilene Christian University with a decided liberal bent. However, he was correct in giving an assessment of the problem. The Chronicle describes it.

According to Hughes' book, Boone created a "storm of controversy within Churches of Christ when he revealed that he had received the Holy Spirit and now spoke in tongues" (4).

The Chronicle goes on to add that James D. Bales wrote a book dealing with the situation, which was titled, Pat Boone and the Gift of Tongues. It is reported that Bales "sought to expose Boone's errors" (4). No, he didn't seek to expose them; he succeeded. Thoroughly!

Once again, the Chronicle chooses another liberal professor to comment on the situation—John Mark Hicks (an actual Calvinist) at the equally apostate David Lipscomb University. He affirms that Boone was fellowshipping on television Pentecostal preachers such as Oral Roberts and Rex Humbard. Members of the church will find Hicks' description of what happened next interesting.

"By the middle of 1970, Boone was essentially 'disfellowshipped' (or blackballed) among Churches of Christ by the major editors and powerbrokers," Hicks said. Boone and his wife, Shirley, "were officially excommunicated from the Inglewood Church of Christ (in California) in 1971."

Well, isn't that special? Most Christians familiar with the Scriptures never realized we blackballed or excommunicated members—or that we had powerbrokers among us! Is that what Paul meant to say in Titus 3:10? The Greek translates into: "Reject a divisive man after the first and second admonition." Did Paul actually mean such an individual should be blackballed or excommunicated? None of those terms show up in reliable translations. The fact is that all Christians are in fellowship with each other unless a brother or sister goes beyond what is written—like Hicks and Hughes (2 John 9-11). Brethren have no choice but to withhold fellowship from them then unless they repent.

Or maybe Hicks was thinking of Romans 16:17, where Paul said to "mark" or "note" those "who cause divisions and offenses contrary to the doctrine which you have learned, and avoid them." Of course, Paul addressed these remarks to all the powerbrokers in the church at Rome. No, but the church needs to be warned about men like Boone, Hughes, and Hicks, who have departed from the faith, lest they ensnare others with their false teachings.

Bobby Ross wrote this article about Pat Boone for The Christian Chronicle. He personally interviewed Boone, who told him: "I credit my days in the Church of Christ, a cappella, with a major influence on my singing career," and he cited singing in worship, as well as gospel meetings (4). He won some highly publicized talent shows and skyrocketed to "star" status. In the movies, he refused to kiss a woman that was not his wife—a rare sentiment for Hollywood. Boone commented further about his enchantment with the charismatic movement:

It was kind of an awakening through Christendom that so much of the churches ruled out the supernatural, which was very much a part of the first-century Christianity, because miracles were happening everywhere (4).

Apparently Boone has never considered that they needed inspiration and miracles in the first century to prove they were preaching a gospel inspired of God, whereas, we have the full revelation of God (2 Peter 1:3; Jude 3) and the Word already confirmed by miracles (Mark 16:20; Heb. 2:1-4).

Even though Boone has been blackballed by powerbrokers (to quote Hicks), he claims he has remained an active supporter of "our" Christian universities (at least the liberal ones). He continues to subscribe to The Christian Chronicle—probably because he finds nothing objectionable in it. In the final quote in the article, he says:

There's only one church. I never left. Some disfellowshipped me, but I never disfellowshipped them. There's only one church, one Lord, one baptism. So I've never left anything (4).

Does this statement sound confusing? Yes, it does. Perhaps comments are necessary, but for now, we simply ask—Why does the article end this way? Is it to engender sympathy for Pat Boone? Only Bobby Ross knows, but if so, it is not working.