"When Jesus came into the coasts of Caesarea Philippi, he asked his disciples, saying, Whom do men say that I, the Son of man, am? And they said, Some say that thou art John the Baptist; some, Elias; and others, Jeremias, or one of the prophets. He saith unto them, But whom say ye that I am? And Simon Peter answered and said unto him, Thou art the Christ, the Son of the living God. And Jesus answered and said unto him, Blessed art thou, Simon Barjona: for flesh and blood bath not revealed it unto thee, but my Father which is in heaven. And I say also unto thee, That thou art Peter, and upon this rock I will build my church; and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it. And will give unto thee the keys of the kingdom of heaven: and whatsoever thou shalt bind on earth shall be bound in heaven; and whatsoever thou shalt loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven."—Matthew 16:13-19.

It goes without saying that I believe the Bible is a Baptist book—that it was written by Baptists, for Baptists, and to Baptists; and it will make Baptists of any who will read it with an unbiased and unprejudiced heart.

A man asked me one time with regard to the church, "Brother Cox, if you had not been a Baptist, what would you have been?" I said, "I would have been ashamed."

Therefore, I am a Baptist, warf and woof, filling, inside, outside, upside, down-side, t’other side, too.

I believe that anybody who will take an open Bible and will prayerfully read it, will be driven irresistibly to the same conclusion. If I didn’t believe that with all my heart, then I would not be a Baptist.

We are living in a modern and materialistic age in which we are being told that one church is as good as another and that all churches are working for the same place; that Heaven is like a giant hub in a giant wheel and all the spokes are the churches that Christ established. I tell you in the beginning that I don’t believe that Christ established all these various and sundry religious denominations and organizations.

I take the position that Christ established His church during His personal ministry and that it was a Baptist church, and that she is the mother of us all in the sense that from her came the missionaries that spread throughout the earth and established other churches of like faith and order.

I say the Bible teaches us in no uncertain terms that not only did Christ establish His church, but even the name Baptist is Scriptural in every sense of the word. Why people shy away from the name Baptist and deny our own heritage is beyond me; why, when interrogated regarding their religion, they ashamedly finally say, as if apologetic, "I’m a Baptist."

I say we have the truth, and we only have the whole truth. I say that each Baptist church is a foundation, pillar and ground of the truth. We are under divine marching orders to propagate the truth to every nook and corner of this earth.

"But if I tarry long, that thou mayest know how thou oughtest to behave thyself in the house of God, which is THE CHURCH OF THE LIVING GOD, THE PILLAR AND GROUND OF THE TRUTH."—1 Timothy 3:15.

Certainly every man who visits a Baptist church has every right to expect to hear the truth, for unto her, and unto her only, has the truth been committed, and unto her only has the commission been committed. Therefore, a man who calls himself a Baptist preacher and will not preach the truth dishonors the name that he wears, and certainly dishonors the Christ whom he professes to serve. He compromises the truth and denies it.

We must, therefore, in this modernistic age lift high the banner of Christ. While we exalt and magnify His glorious, matchless Name, we must see to it that His church is on the march until her message is heard around the earth—until all the nations have heard the Baptist message and the clarion call of the Gospel of Christ.

With those things before us, let us examine the origin of the Lord’s church.

I take the position that Christ established His church when here in the flesh, and that it was not established on Pentecost, nor anytime since; and that any organization that had its beginning since, cannot be Christ’s church. If a church were established on Pentecost, it couldn’t be His church, for He wasn’t there. You say that the Holy Spirit did it. I didn’t know that the Holy Spirit had a church. What the Bible teaches is that the Holy Spirit is the administrator of the Lord’s church—that He leads, guides, directs, energizes, and empowers the Lord’s church in her activities. You ask me when and where did the church begin. May I direct your attention to the Gospel of Luke:

"And he shall go before him in the spirit and power of Elias, to turn the hearts of the fathers to the children, and the disobedient to the wisdom of the just; to make ready a people prepared for the Lord."—Luke 1:17.

I want you to note two things: first, that John the Baptist was to come in the spirit and power of Elijah, and second, that his mission was to make ready a people for the Lord. John preached, men believed and were baptized upon their profession of faith in Christ. John the Baptist demanded "fruits for repentance" before he would baptize them.

"Bring forth therefore fruits meet for repentance."—Matthew 3:8.

I say, therefore, that the material which Jesus used was material which had been prepared by a Baptist preacher.

Somebody said, "Brother Cox, there never was but one Baptist on this earth." Well, I say that there was one Baptist. You can’t find a Methodist, a Presbyterian, a Holy Roller, a Campbellite, a Roman Catholic, or anything else, but you can find a Baptist.

The objector says, "Why, did you not know that Baptist was his name?" No, I did not know that. The angels, the devils, and the Holy Spirit did not know that. God did not know that. It took some heretic to start that.

The Gospel of John tells us that his name was John, and not "John the Baptist."

"There was a man sent from God, whose name was JOHN."—John 1:6.

In Luke 1, when the angel appeared to John’s father, he did not at first believe. He was skeptical and asked for a sign. He was speechless until John was born. Notice that the angel said his name was to be John and his father said his name was to be John. His mother said, "Give him some paper to write upon," and he wrote "John," not Baptist.

Therefore, when God got ready for a Baptist, He made one, just as when He got ready for a man, He made Adam.

He or she that would deny that there have never been any Baptists since John would deny the law of reproduction. He might as well say that there has not been man upon the earth since Adam, because Adam died; but there have been billions since.

Thus we establish the fact that is undeniable and indisputable, that his name was John, that his title was Baptist, and that he baptized because he was a Baptist and not vice versa.

Sometimes even Baptists slip a cog right here. They say he was a Baptist because he baptized. That isn’t so; in Matthew’s Gospel he was called the Baptist before he ever baptized a single soul. We read:

"In those days came John the Baptist, preaching in the wilderness of Judea."—Matthew 3:1.

I might add that the only baptism that Christ ever had was Baptist baptism, and that the only baptism that the apostles ever had was Baptist baptism.

"Wherefore of these men which have companied with us all the time that the Lord Jesus went in and out among us beginning from the baptism of John, unto that same day that he was taken up from us, must one be ordained a witness with us of his resurrection."—Acts 1:21, 22.

No man, therefore, could be one of the original twelve unless he had first been baptized by John the Baptist. Christ required Baptist baptism before He ordained any of the apostles. We have nothing to be ashamed of; we have a wonderful heritage. We have something that we can be everlastingly humbly grateful for—our Baptist heritage.

It almost breaks my heart and drives me to my knees to think that there are folk who would for one moment deny the fact that they are Baptists, and be almost apologetic that they are Baptists. Let us, therefore, determine in our hearts that we will not only be grateful that we are Baptists, but that the world will hear from us the glorious message which is Jesus Christ the Lord.

Notice that one could not be an apostle without Baptist baptism.

But somebody has said, "Are you sure John’s baptism was Christian baptism?"

Isn’t that a "foolish" question?

We have enemies on every hand who take the erroneous and unenviable position that the baptism of John was not Christian. They are accusing Christ of having unscriptural baptism, the apostles of having unscriptural baptism, and every baptized person who has lived since then of having unscriptural baptism.

Let us examine the Word of God to see whether or not the baptism of John was Christian or Scriptural. When John baptized our Saviour, it was the only time that all three Persons of the blessed Trinity were in evidence. There was the Son being baptized, the Holy Spirit in the form of a dove, and the voice of the Father in thunderous tones saying:

"THIS IS MY BELOVED SON, IN WHOM I AM WELL PLEASED."—Matthew 3:17.

It pleased God the Father for Christ to have Baptist baptism; it pleases God when you and I have Baptist baptism.

Acts 19:5 is the key text that Campbellites and others use to deny that Christ had Christian baptism, because of the fact that Paul baptized those twelve there at Ephesus. But let us examine to see whether John’s baptism was Scriptural, or whether they had been baptized with proper authority.

No doubt they were baptized by Apollos (Acts 18:24—19:1) who did not have church authority. Apollos never met John the Baptist.

"Then said Paul, John verily baptized with the baptism of repentance, saying unto the people, that they should believe on him which should come after him, that is, on Christ Jesus."— Acts 19:4.

They had not heard about the Divine Spirit of God. How in the name of common sense can you preach the Gospel of Christ and men’s hearts be opened and the Holy Spirit not be present or even mentioned? It is utterly ridiculous to assume that such could happen. Apollos baptized without Scriptural authority; that is to say, no church authorized him. Therefore John’s baptism was Scriptural. Consequently, it was their lack of faith in Christ, and their ignorance of the Holy Spirit, and Apollos’ lack of authority that rendered the baptism of the twelve at Ephesus null and void.

"The baptism of John whence was it? from heaven, or of men? And they reasoned with themselves, saying, If we shall say, From heaven; he will say unto us, Why did ye not then believe him?"—Matthew 21:25.

The Bible teaches that John’s baptism was of Heavenly origin.

"And I knew him not: but he that SENT ME TO BAPTIZE (Greek: "in") WATER, the same said unto me, Upon whom thou shalt see the Spirit descending, and remaining on him, the same is he which baptizeth with the Holy Ghost."—John 1:33.

In John 1:31, John said that he knew not Christ, but that Christ might be manifested to Israel as the Divine Son of God. Therefore, he came baptizing in water. Likewise, every believer is supposed to be baptized for the same purpose—that he might manifest unto the world that he is a son of God. Brother, if you are baptized for any other reason, then your baptism is not valid, and certainly not Scriptural.

May I say again: Anyone who denies or refuses Baptist baptism, rejects the counsel of God, and the judgment of God is upon him.

You say, "You are going too far." Listen: "But the Pharisees and lawyers rejected the counsel of God against themselves, being not baptized of him."—Luke 7:30.

It is evident that anyone who refuses Baptist baptism and by the authority of a Baptist church is open to scorn, and the anger of God is upon that person.

There is no need to sing, "Oh, how I love Jesus," if we don’t do what He says.

"A good man out of the treasure of his heart bringeth forth that which is good; and an evil man out of the evil treasure of his heart bringeth forth that which is evil: for of the abundance of the heart his mouth speaketh. And why call ye me, Lord, Lord, and do not the things which I say?"—Luke 6:45, 46.

Now when did the church come into existence?

"And Jesus, walking by the Sea of Galilee, saw two brethren, Simon called Peter, and Andrew his brother, casting a net into the sea; for they were fishers. And he saith unto them, Follow me, and 1 will make you fishers of men. And they straightway left their nets, and followed him. And going on from thence, he saw other two brethren, James the son of Zebedee, and John his brother, in a ship with Zebedee their father, mending their nets; and he called them. And they immediately left the ship and their father, and followed him."—Matthew 4:18-22.

I understand that the word "ecclesia" is used 115 times in the New Testament, and that 112 times it is translated "church"—"a called out assembly."

Had these apostles been baptized of John? Certainly. They were the first members of His church—that is, Christ’s church.

"Why, Brother Cox, I thought that when Christ prayed all night (Luke 6), that was when He started His church."

I do not accept that theory in the least. Baptists have been driven off of that by the cold hard facts of truth.

If you will go back and reappraise particular verses, you will notice that it was an ordination service. There were many members at this time. In Mark 3 we have an account of the same service as is recorded in Luke 6, and it is called an ordination service.

"And he ordained twelve, that they should be with him, and that he might send them forth to preach."—M ark 3:14.

Matthew 4:18-22 tells us when the church had its birth, for He called them out and said, "Follow me, and I will make you fishers of men."

Notice that on Pentecost three thousand people were added to the church. For those who take the Pentecostal theory of the church’s birth, how can you add to something that does not exist? They were saved and "added to them." "Them" refers to the church. Therefore, the church was in existence then, and had 120 members. (Cf. Acts 1:15.) After that service was over, they had 3,120 members.

On the shores of Galilee Christ called men together and the church had its birth. But you say, "That’s a mighty small number." In Matthew 18:20, we read:

"For where two or three are gathered together in my name, there am I in the midst of them."

I don’t care how few in number the members of a church may be, Christ has never had a little church. Every church of the Lord Jesus is a great church, because it has a great Head—the Lord Jesus Christ.

"He that hath the bride is the bridegroom: but the friend of the bridegroom, which standeth and heareth him, rejoiceth because of the bridegroom’s voice, this my joy therefore is fulfilled."—John 3:29.

Brother, how could a man have a bride if no such thing existed?

"For I am jealous over you with godly jealousy: for I have espoused you to one husband, that I may present you as a chaste virgin to Christ."—2 Corinthians 11:2.

But you say, "What is the bride?" The bride is the church. Therefore, He had a bride. He has not married her yet because she is in her virgin state and will not be married until the Lord splits the skies asunder and calls for His own. Then the multiplied billions of earth, shall be caught up together to meet Him in the air. Then the church will be married to the Lord, and everyone who was not affiliated with the Lord’s church on this earth will be on the sidelines at the wedding.

"And he saith unto me, Write, Blessed are they which are called unto the marriage supper of the Lamb. And he saith unto me, These are the true sayings of God."—Revelation 19:9.

Brother, the bride will not have to be invited; she will know her place.

Then I come to 1 Corinthians 12:28:

"And God hath set some in the church, first apostles, secondarily prophets, thirdly teachers, after that miracles, then gifts of healing, helps, governments, diversities of tongues."

Now when were the apostles set in the church? They could not be set in a church that did not exist. Brother, He had a church, and He set them in as first officers and they were the apostles.

"And it came to pass in those days, that he went out into a mountain to pray, and continued all night in prayer to God. And when it was day, he called unto him his disciples: and of them he chose twelve whom also he named apostles."—Luke 6:12, 15.

Thus we have established that the church had its birth during the personal ministry of the Lord Jesus Christ.

One of the most dangerous and damaging doctrines is the unscriptural, heretical universal, invisible church theory.

When the word "ecclesia" comes from the word "ek kaleo," meaning "a called-out assembly," how can a universal, invisible thing ever assemble?

Somebody says, "Don’t you know that the Holy Spirit by baptism puts you into that invisible body?" I want to show you the fallacy of such as that. Let me ask you, how many of you have been baptized in the Holy Spirit? You say, "All of us have." You have not.

Don’t jump on the Holy Rollers if you claim for yourself baptism by the Holy Spirit. Don’t you say that you were baptized in the Holy Spirit the day that you believed. Brother, there is not one word in the Scripture that teaches that.

There have been only two baptisms of the Holy Spirit: on the day of Pentecost (Acts 2) and when the household of Cornelius was .saved (Acts 10). From that day it has not been repeated. The idea that men are put into an invisible body by Holy Spirit baptism doesn’t have a leg to stand on. It is rotten to the core. It will destroy the Lord’s church. It will destroy true missions and it will destroy everything that we hold dear to our hearts. We need to rise up with all the force of heart and soul and expose this heretical thing and tell the people the truth about it.

"Now ye are the body of Christ, and members in particular." 1 Corinthians 12:27.

The church at Corinth was the body of Christ at that place.

The church that Christ established was a visible church. Even the word itself means that. In Romans 16:16, they have more than one, for it means "ownership." He bought His church, His blood washed His church, and He’ll present His church, holy and unblameable, before God.

I do not hesitate when I say that any church which becomes affiliated with any ultra-scriptural, anti-scriptural organization loses that much of her independency.

Secondly, she admits that the thing she joins is bigger than she is, else she couldn’t have joined it. I hate to see these people of ultra-religious organizations stand up and say, "I’m an independent fellow," because they are not.

I’ll tell you how much freedom you have if you belong to any other than the church. You have about as much freedom as a frog in a snake’s belly. You can move around but you can’t get out.

"But be not ye called Rabbi: for one is your Master, even Christ; and all ye are brethren."—Matthew 23:8.

The Southern Baptist Convention has organized the clergy in one group and the laity in another. They are exercising authority over the heritage of the Lord. They and other organizations do this.

Where you have a head, a president, you do not have independency. You have somebody to come between you and the Head of your own church, which is Christ,

"Far above all principality, and power, and might, and dominion, and every name that is named, not only in this world, but also in that which is to come: And hath put all things under his feet, and gave him to be the head over all things to the church."—Ephesians 1:21, 22.

In Acts 1, independency was practiced. The church in conference that chose the deacons got the instructions from the church and not from headquarters (Acts 6). In 1 Corinthians 5, Paul said to exclude the man. In 2 Corinthians 2:6-8, he is talking about the same fellow. Punishment had been meted out by the majority. How can you get the consensus of the people without a vote. That’s a democracy, the vote of the people.

A man said to me, "I’d belong to a Baptist church if they didn’t vote on members." I said, "If I were to read that to you in the Bible, would you believe it?"

"Him that is weak in the faith receive ye, but not to doubtful disputations."—Romans 14:1.

I repeat, the Baptists are the only recognized missionaries. They are to do the work that the church is supposed to do. It doesn’t have a board; the church does that.

"Go ye therefore, and teach all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost: teaching them to observe all things whatsoever I have commanded you: and, lo, I am with you alway, even unto the end of the world."—Matthew 28:19, 20.

My argument has always been, and is now and shall always be, that the church has no right to re-delegate its power to any agency or board or committee, that the church and the church alone has the right to send out missionaries under the direction of the Holy Spirit. In the eleventh chapter of Acts and the nineteenth verse through the twenty-second verse we read:

"Now they which were scattered abroad upon the persecution that arose about Stephen traveled as far as Phenice, and Cyprus, and Antioch, preaching the word unto the Jews only, (or to none but unto Jews only), and some of them were men of Cyprus and Cyrene which, when they were come to Antioch, spake unto the Crecians preaching the Lord Jesus and the hand of the Lord was with them, and a great number believed and turned unto the Lord. Then tidings of these things came unto the ears of the church which was in Jerusalem; and they sent forth Barnabas that he should go as far as Antioch."

From these Scriptures we notice that the church there in Jerusalem sent Barnabas, and that no board or committee sent him out, but that the church and the church alone sent him to Antioch. We notice that word "they," they sent him. Now they who? The church in Jerusalem. They, that is the church, had heard how the Greeks had received the word of the Lord, and they sent out Barnabas.

In Acts 13:1, 2, 3, 4 we read:

"Now there were in the church that was at Antioch certain prophets and teachers; as Barnabas, and Simeon that was called Niger, and Lucius of Cyrene, Manaen, which had been brought up with Herod the tetrarch, and Saul for they ministered to the Lord and fasted, the Holy Spirit said, separate me Barnabas and Saul for the work whereunto I have called them. And when they had fasted and prayed, and laid their hands on them, they sent them away. So they, being sent forth by the Holy Spirit, departed unto Seleucia; and from ihence they sailed to Cyprus."

So we can readily see from these verses of Scripture that it was the church at Antioch that sent out these two missionaries under the leadership of the Spirit of God, and we notice further that even the church does not have a right to tell the missionaries where to go, that that is left entirely to the direction of the Holy Spirit. We notice that He said "for the work whereunto I have called them," and also the expression, "and they being sent by the Holy Spirit."

From these verses we can readily see that the church sent them out under the leadership of the Holy Spirit, that it was not a foreign mission board, neither was it a missionary committee but it was the local church. And when Paul and Barnabas had completed this particular missionary tour they returned to the church that sent them out and gave a detailed report of all that they had accomplished.

"And thence sailed to Antioch from whence they had been recommended to the grace of God for the work which they fulfilled. And when they were come and had gathered the church together they rehearsed all that God had done with them, and how he had opened the door of faith unto the Gentiles."—Acts 14:26, 27.

They were genuine missionaries, and did as they should have, they made their report to the home church, the church that had sent them out, but this is not the procedure today. Oh, no, the missionaries of today are sent out by the foreign mission board, and this unscriptural board tells them where they can go and where they cannot. Now if that is taught in the Word of God, I am unable to find it. This is a direct violation of the Word of God, and also the destroying of the sovereignty, and independency of the local church.

The church exercising her God-given right in sending out and supporting missionaries under the leadership of the Holy Spirit.

Now let us notice Paul’s second missionary tour. Who sent him out, and who accompanied him?

"And Paul chose Silas, and departed being recommended by the brethren to the grace of God."—Acts 15:40.

Thus we can see that it was the church there at Antioch that sent them out on this second missionary journey. Now the question will naturally arise as to how the Apostle Paul was supported? He was sent out by one church, but supported by others, especially those that he had organized. Paul with other missionaries was sent out by one church, and other churches accepted them as their missionaries, and supported them as such. Paul, in his letter to the Corinthian brethren, states as much.

"I robbed other churches, taking wages of them, to do you service."—2 Corinthians 11:8, 9.

In this particular verse we notice two things: first, Paul said that he had received wages from other churches, and second, he did the Corinthian church service, or that is, he labored among them while other churches supported him as we notice in the ninth verse:

"And when I was present with you, and wanted, I was chargeable to no man; for that which was lacking to me the brethren which came from Macedonia supplied."

And so we can see that other churches supported Paul. These brethren from Macedonia were sent by the churches of Macedonia with offerings to help the Apostle Paul. In his letter to the Philippians, Paul commends them for their help.

"Now ye Philippians know also that the beginning of the Gospel, when I departed from Macedonia, no church communicated with me as concerning giving and receiving, but ye only, for even in Thessalonica ye sent once and again unto my necessity."—Philippians 4:15, 16.

In these Scriptures we find a church supporting Paul on the mission field. Now how did this church do this? Well, we find the answer in the second chapter of Philippians and the twenty-fifth verse:

"Yet I supposed it necessary to send to you Epaphroditus, my brother, and companion in labor and fellow-soldier, but your messenger, and he that ministered to my wants."

There are two or three things that are brought out in this text: first, Paul said that he was his companion in labor, and also that he was the messenger of the church and that he ministered to Paul’s wants. Here is that which is taught in this text. The church there at Philippi raised a monetary offering, and sent Epaphroditus as a messenger of the church with the offering to Paul.

Now let us notice how the churches determined to send relief to the poor saints in Jerusalem in 1 Corinthians 16:1, 2, 3:

"Now concerning the collection for the saints, as I have given order (or instruction) to the churches of Galatia even so do ye, upon the first day of the week let every one of you lay by him in store as God has prospered him that there be no gatherings (or collections) when I come, and when I come whomsoever ye shall approve by your letters, them will I send to bring your liberality unto Jerusalem."

And thus we understand from these Scriptures that the church at Corinth with the churches of Galatia were to elect messengers and instruct them as to their message, and too, they sent letters of recommendation by them, so that the brethren at Jerusalem would know that they were bona fide messengers. We notice again in 2 Corinthians 8:19 something else along this line:

"And not that only but who was also chosen of the churches to travel with us with this grace which is administered by us to the glory of the same Lord, and declaration of your ready mind."

Now notice that they were chosen by their respective churches as messengers, and we have already seen what a messenger was; thus we see that even the brethren that carried the offerings of the churches to the poor saints in Jerusalem had to be chosen by the churches, and properly instructed by their respective churches. But someone will say that the word messenger is not used in 2 Corinthians 8:19. Granted, but Paul, in speaking in the same chapter in verse 23 uses the word messenger in discussing the same subject, and the same people:

"Whether any do inquire of Titus, he is my partner and fellow-helper concerning you; or our brethren be inquired of, they are the messengers of the churches, and the glory of Christ."

Now in this same manner were ‘the missionaries elected, and sent out under the leadership of the Holy Spirit, and also in this same manner they were supported.

Now let it be further noticed that it is the Holy Spirit that calls and sends missionaries, but not independent of the church, but the Holy Spirit sends through the church, as we have already seen in the thirteenth chapter of Acts.

We are hearing much about expediency; expedient means the best means to an end. In short, it means that the results justifies the means employed whether they are Scriptural or not. This I wish to deny, for the Lord gave the commission to the church, and the church has no right to change that which Christ has commanded, and that is this: "Co and make disciples of all nations." So it is the church and the church alone under the direction of the Holy Spirit that is to send out missionaries, the Holy Spirit does not use any other agency but the church in sending forth missionaries. He sends through the church.

The Lord told His church to go and make disciples, and baptize them and teach them the "all things" which He had commanded, and those all things which He commanded are found in the Word of God, and let us be careful to observe that which He has commanded, and cease trying to make the Bible say something that it does not say, such as expediency, or the end justifies the means employed whether they be Scriptural or not. No, no, the end does not justify the means employed unless the means are in harmony with the Word of God.

The greatest and grandest institution on earth is the church that Jesus established and commissioned, and this church and this church alone (and I mean a local congregation) has the right to send out missionaries under the direction of the Holy Spirit; this is what the New Testament teaches and what was practiced in New Testament times and what our forefathers believed and practiced; may the day hasten when we, as members of the church that Christ built, return to the plain teaching of the Word of God. Relative to this important matter, may we lay aside every pre-conceived idea and notion and gladly and courageously turn back to the "thus saith the Lord." The time has come for action and for much study, and thus may we search diligently the Word of the Lord that we may be fully equipped for the action that must inevitably come.

Who did God promise to be with throughout the ages? The church that was to preach, baptize, and indoctrinate—those who had been made disciples.

I say that a church that does not do something for missions is doomed to failure, everlasting destruction, and the removal of the last candlestick. No church can long survive who does not do something for missions or who loses the missionary vision.

So the church is, by its nature, visible, independent, missionary, and indestructible.

A man said to me, "The way things look, the church can’t long survive." Brother, nearly two thousand years have passed and it’s still here. Let communism overrun the world and Christ’s church will still survive. Let all the forces of evil seek to destroy, but the gates of Hell shall not prevail against it.

I praise God I am a member of His church. Amen.