In Romans 1:17, where the apostle Paul continues his discussion from verse 16 of the basic theme he seeks to develop in the course of this inspired epistle, "we encounter a much litigated phrase. Indeed, according to several commentators it seems to mean almost anything or nothing; while according to others, it means one thing about as well as another" (Moses E. Lard, Commentary on Paul's Letter to the Romans, p. 44). Our late, lamented brother Lard has correctly observed that one phrase in particular in this passage has been the source of considerable confusion among Christ's disciples. Indeed, it has been debated for centuries, and the interpretations proffered are legion.

Paul declares, "For I am not ashamed of the gospel, for it is the power of God for salvation to everyone who believes, to the Jew first and also to the Greek. For in it the righteousness of God is revealed from faith to faith; as it is written, 'But the righteous man shall live by faith'" (Rom. 1:16-17, NASB). The phrase in question is -- "from faith to faith." In the original Greek text this is -- ek pisteos eis pistin. Yes, "this clause has caused much discussion" (Dr. B.W. Johnson, The People's NT with Explanatory Notes, vol. 2), or, to use the wording of the Expositor's Bible Commentary, "Somewhat baffling is the twofold reference to faith" (vol. 10, p. 20). Baffling is an understatement! Not even the translators of the text agree on how this phrase should be worded in English. Notice the following remarkably varied renditions (the NASB has already been provided above):

• "For in it God's righteousness is revealed from faith to faith" (Holman Christian Standard Bible). In a footnote, this version suggests -- "revealed out of faith into faith."

• "God's way of making people right begins and ends with faith" (Easy-to-Read Version).

• "For therein is the righteousness of God revealed from faith to faith" (King James Version).

• "God's way of putting people right shows up in the acts of faith" (The Message).

• "For in the gospel is revealed the justice of God which begins and ends with faith" (New American Bible, St. Joseph edition).

• "In it the righteousness of God is being disclosed by faith into faith" (Bro. Hugo McCord's NT Translation of the Everlasting Gospel). This beloved brother, prior to his recent death, had been a subscriber to these Reflections. His life and studies have been a genuine blessing to countless disciples. He'll be missed!

• "For in the gospel a righteousness from God is revealed, a righteousness that is by faith from first to last" (New International Version).

• "Here is revealed God's way of righting wrong, a way that starts from faith and ends in faith" (New English Bible). In a footnote, this version suggests -- "It is based on faith and addressed to faith."

• "This is accomplished from start to finish by faith" (The Living Bible).

• "For in the good news God's Way of man's right standing with Him is uncovered, the Way of faith that leads to greater faith" (Charles B. Williams, The NT in the Language of the People).

• "The good news tells how God accepts everyone who has faith, but only those who have faith" (Contemporary English Version). In a footnote, this version suggests -- "...and faith is all that matters."

• "For in it God's righteousness is being revealed by reason of faith and toward faith" (New World Translation).

• "For in it the righteousness of God is revealed through faith for faith" (Revised Standard Version).

• "I see in it God's plan for imparting righteousness to men, a process begun and continued by their faith" (J.B. Phillips, The NT in Modern English).

These many references (and more could easily be provided) illustrate the problem quite well, I believe. There is tremendous diversity of opinion regarding this phrase; not only as to how it should be translated, but also as to how it should be interpreted. Some have actually suggested that "we shouldn't worry about it; just jump over it and keep reading." Yet, it seems to me, that this would constitute an unconscionable omission in our effort to fully perceive the authorial intent of Paul's theme for the rest of the epistle to the Romans. If we fail to grasp a central element of that theme, will we truly appreciate the fullness of his teaching in the remainder of the work? Paul obviously felt the phrase in question was important, as did the Holy Spirit, or it wouldn't be included in the inspired text. Therefore, it behooves us to at least make an effort to grasp the thought Paul sought to convey. Ignoring a passage simply because it requires us to think is poor hermeneutics.

Proposed Interpretations

A great many interpretations of the Greek phrase ek pisteos eis pistin have been proposed over the centuries. Some border on the bizarre, and thus we won't bother with such in this study. Moses Lard said of such views, "I regard them as radically erroneous, some of them as fanciful, and therefore reject them" (A Commentary on Paul's Letter to the Romans, p. 44). On the other hand, there are several suggested interpretations that are very well thought out and presented by those scholars who embrace them. These all certainly bear mentioning.

FIRST --- Some believe the two "faith statements" (out of faith -- into, unto faith) have reference to the OT writings and the NT writings. Thus, the faith of the disciples in Christ Jesus, especially during the time of Paul, was drawn not only from the writings being produced in their own day (some of which were perceived as Scripture -- 2 Pet. 3:16), but also from the OT Scriptures. It was a revelation of God's righteousness that was initially out of one's belief in the OT documents, and then founded upon the greater light provided in the NT documents. Paul, for example, told the young evangelist Timothy, "from childhood you have known the sacred writings which are able to give you the wisdom that leads to salvation through faith which is in Christ Jesus" (2 Tim. 3:15). Paul then immediately declares, "All Scripture is inspired by God" (vs. 16). Earlier, in Romans, Paul had stated, "For whatever was written in earlier times was written for our instruction, that through perseverance and the encouragement of the Scriptures we might have hope" (Rom. 15:4).

• Some try to link this with the parable of old and new wine, and old and new wineskins (Luke 5:36-39), or with the parable in which Jesus spoke of a householder who "brings forth out of his treasure things new and old" (Matt. 13:52). They would regard the "new and old" as being references to the NT and OT, within which the righteousness of God is revealed and from out of which we are to draw and dispense to those seekers of Truth. Some also see the fact that after using this phrase -- "from faith to faith" -- Paul then immediately quotes from Habakkuk 2:4, which "proves," they say, that he had in view a reference to the Scriptures.

Thus, God's righteousness is revealed unto man "from faith to faith" -- through the medium of "All Scripture," which would be both OT and NT documents. The phrase in question, then, is clearly tied, by those who promote this interpretation, to the action of God's revealing of His righteousness, rather than man's acquisition of that righteousness. This view especially appeals to those who suggest that the ONLY way men may come to any awareness of their God and His righteousness is through the written Word. They argue it is in the "gospel" that God's righteousness for mankind is revealed to us. And where is this gospel to be found? In the OT and NT Scriptures, they say. Thus, it is made known to us "from faith" (the OT writings) "to faith" (the NT writings). Although there is obviously some truth contained in this theory -- God's righteousness, after all, is revealed in both OT and NT writings -- nevertheless, this seems a bit far-fetched, at least to my way of thinking, as a possible explanation of what Paul sought to convey in Rom. 1:16-17. Those who embrace this particular theory are very, very few.

SECOND --- Somewhat of a modification of the above is the view that the two faith statements refer not to the inspired writings of the OT and NT, but rather to the old and new covenants themselves. Thus, the righteousness of God is revealed in the covenants He has made with mankind, whether they be in past covenants, or in the present covenant through Christ Jesus. "And thus the faith of the old covenant led on to the faith of the new covenant, which shows that salvation has been by faith from the call of Abraham to the present time" (Adam Clarke, Clarke's Commentary, vol. 6, p. 40). Like the above mentioned interpretation, few scholars embrace this view.

THIRD --- Another far more popular interpretation is that the phrase "from faith to faith" signifies a maturing process. God reveals Himself and His righteousness to us in the gospel, to which we respond initially with the most basic of faith ... a faith which then grows and matures over the course of our walk with Him. The first faith would then be our receiving faith; the second would be a view toward our increasing faith. Dr. William G.T. Shedd, in his very in-depth, classic analysis of the Greek text of Romans, suggests that the preposition eis in the phrase is "telic: one degree of faith is in order to a succeeding greater degree" (A Critical and Doctrinal Commentary on the Epistle of St. Paul to the Romans, p. 18). In other words, "faith upon faith" would be a suggested alternative translation. He likens this to the "law of spiritual increase" which many feel is to be found in a similar phrase in John 1:16 -- "For of His fullness we have all received, and grace upon grace."

Moses Lard speaks of this as a movement "from a lower to a higher degree of belief" (Commentary on Paul's Letter to the Romans, p. 44). "Perhaps what it conveys is the necessity of issuing a reminder to the believer that justifying faith is only the beginning of Christian life. The same attitude must govern him in his continuing experience as a child of God" (Expositor's Bible Commentary, vol. 10, p. 20). In other words, we must begin with faith, but it must not end there; faith must increase throughout our lives. Peter spoke of things that must be added to our faith, and "if these qualities are yours and are increasing, they render you neither useless nor unfruitful in the true knowledge of our Lord Jesus Christ" (2 Peter 1:5-8).

• This is certainly the view taken by some of the Bible translators. Charles Williams, in his translation of the passage, for example, renders it this way -- "For in the good news God's Way of man's right standing with Him is uncovered, the Way of faith that leads to greater faith." There is certainly no question that the Scriptures do indeed urge disciples to grow in their faith. Thus, this is an interpretation that has gained some degree of acceptance among scholars.

FOURTH --- Another interpretation, though not held by too many, is that the phrase suggests the following -- "from the faith of the preacher to the faith of the hearer" (Expositor's Bible Commentary, vol. 10, p. 20). A good many others modify this somewhat, changing the emphasis from a preacher or evangelist to any Christian who shares his faith with others who are truly seeking. "The duty of the believer is to extend the gospel, or to extend the faith" (The People's NT with Explanatory Notes, vol. 2). Thus, from out of our faith must flow faith to those about us -- i.e., "from faith to faith." Although it is certainly true that we who have believed should seek to bring others to that same faith, one is still left wondering if this is really what Paul had in mind in this statement. Most scholars feel it was not.

FIFTH --- A rather popular interpretation, especially among the Faith Only adherents, is the view that Paul is simply emphasizing that God's righteousness and justification are acquired only through faith ... from first to last, beginning to end; that nothing further is required. R.C.H. Lenski suggests that Paul's intent in using this phrase is to emphasize "the central doctrine of the Christian Faith: Justification by Faith Alone" (The Interpretation of St. Paul's Epistle to the Romans, p. 78). "God's righteousness is revealed in the gospel from faith unto faith. The gospel tells us all about this righteousness which has nothing whatever to do with works, neither springs from (ek) works of ours, nor aims at (eis) such works, but has its source (ek) only in faith and thereby is intended only for (eis) faith" (ibid).

• I believe most disciples would tend to agree with this statement IF the word "alone" were left out of the theory. To suggest, however, that God's righteousness is acquired by faith ALONE is to gravely understate the overall teaching of Scripture. The notion of faith alone would exclude such factors as God's grace, love and mercy, as well as our own response to such, which is indeed prompted by faith, but a visible, demonstrated faith. Faith alone, without any response, is dead (James 2).

SIXTH --- A far more biblically accurate view, though quite similar to the former, and a view that a great many disciples seem to feel is the actual authorial intent here, is that Paul is emphasizing the fact that our reception of God's righteousness is NOT works based, but rather faith based. In other words, there is nothing mankind can do to earn this righteousness or justification. It is a gift for those who have faith. From beginning to end, from first to last, it has nothing whatsoever to do with works. Many translations opt for a reading that reflects this theology: "God's way of making people right begins and ends with faith" (Easy-to-Read Version) .... "For in the gospel is revealed the justice of God which begins and ends with faith" (New American Bible, St. Joseph edition) .... "For in the gospel a righteousness from God is revealed, a righteousness that is by faith from first to last" (New International Version) .... "This is accomplished from start to finish by faith" (The Living Bible).

I believe this interpretation has much to commend it. It certainly is consistent with the overall teaching of Paul with regard to faith versus works of law, and it is clearly consistent with the teaching of the epistle to the Romans, of which Rom. 1:16-17 is a brief statement of his thematic purpose. Indeed, Paul seems to make this very clear in what many regard as a "commentary" on this passage -- Rom. 3:20-22. "By the works of law no flesh will be justified in His sight .... But now apart from law the righteousness of God has been manifested .... even the righteousness of God through faith in Jesus Christ for all those who believe." One cannot help but notice that the key phrases in Rom. 1:17 are also found in 3:20-22 --- it is the righteousness of God revealed from faith to faith. The additional insight in chapter three is that the emphasis on faith is to the exclusion of meritorious works of law. "For we maintain that a man is justified by faith apart from works of law" (3:28).

Another key passage that bolsters this interpretation is Philp. 3:9, in which Paul desires to be found in Christ, "not having a righteousness of my own derived from law, but that which is through faith in Christ, the righteousness which comes from God on the basis of faith." Again, we see that the basis for receiving this righteousness which comes from God is through FAITH, not through WORKS performed under some system of law. "For by grace you have been saved through faith; and that not of yourselves, it is the gift of God; not as a result of works, that no one should boast" (Eph. 2:8-9). Thus, I am convicted that Paul, at least in part, sought to convey to his readers that the righteousness of God was faith based, not works based.

SEVENTH --- Another explanation of Paul's statement, one which builds directly upon the previous point, is that our God has revealed unto mankind in various ways and times that His righteousness is acquired by faith, and this message is imparted unto us in order to generate the appropriate response of faith within our hearts. This is the interpretation held by Moses E. Lard, and I believe he states it quite well in his Commentary on Paul's Letter to the Romans. Notice the following -- "In the gospel is revealed God's justification by belief; it is revealed for, or to induce, a certain end: to induce belief. As a motive to induce men to believe, God reveals to them that if they will believe He will justify them" (p. 45).

Bro. Lard cites Gal. 2:16 -- "Knowing that a man is not justified by works of law, but through faith in Christ Jesus, we have believed in Christ Jesus, that we may be justified by faith in Christ, and not by works of law, since by works of law shall no flesh be justified." This passage not only shows faith over works as the basis of justification, but also clearly states that Paul and others responded in faith because they had come to understand that the gift of God was through faith. Thus, the righteousness of God was revealed "from faith to faith" -- i.e., He revealed to man that the gift was only to be acquired through faith, and, this being so, we believed. "Knowing that a man is justified by belief in Christ, even we have believed in Him. We have believed in Him -- why? Because we know that he who believes will be justified. This we know, because it has been revealed to us; and our knowledge so obtained becomes the motive to believe" (Lard, p. 45).

Romans 10:1-17 is a passage that some who hold this view believe supports this interpretation. Paul has great concern for his fellow countrymen, for they are seeking to establish a righteousness of their own, one based on works of law, rather than acquiring the righteousness of God, which is based on faith. He connects this all with the importance of revealing this faith-based righteousness of God through the preaching of the gospel, which, once understood, will lead one to believe. Paul speaks of his gospel message as being "the word of faith which we are preaching" (vs. 8), and states, "for with the heart man believes, resulting in righteousness" (vs. 10). How do we become aware that this righteousness of God is faith based? We become aware by having it revealed to us in the preaching of the Word. It is proclaimed unto those with a seeking faith, so that they might embrace this righteousness with a receiving faith. Thus, the righteousness of God is revealed "from faith to faith." It is a righteousness of God that is revealed within the gospel message, a righteousness that is proclaimed to man to be based on faith, and it is for all who believe (who have faith). Moses Lard says, "Surely there is nothing difficult here. This is simple and clear. I cannot see why the clause has been thought so perplexing" (Lard, p. 45).

EIGHTH --- Another possible interpretation for the perplexing phrase "from faith to faith" is that the first "faith" has reference to the faith of Jesus, whereas the second "faith" has reference to the faith of man. Thus, the righteousness of God is revealed within the gospel message, which is the proclamation of the perfect faith of His Son Jesus; indeed, Jesus IS that divine Word become flesh (John 1:14). Thus, the righteousness of God is truly presented in its most perfect form IN HIM. The "faith OF Christ," therefore, is man's ultimate depiction of the righteousness of God the Father. God, according to this view, reveals His righteousness to mankind "from faith" (the faith OF Christ) "to faith" (to those of us who believe in Him).

Frankly, I find there is much to commend this interpretation. This especially becomes evident when certain key passages are correctly translated. For example, notice the following passage -- "...the righteousness of God through faith IN Jesus Christ for all those who believe" (Rom. 3:22). Actually, there is no preposition before the words "Jesus Christ," and the latter phrase appears in the genitive case. Thus, this is more accurately translated "...the righteousness of God through faith OF Jesus Christ," which, by the way, is exactly how the KJV translates the phrase. I believe they are correct in that rendering. The righteousness of God is revealed to us through the "faith OF Jesus Christ," and it is for all who believe (have faith). This, then, would explain the phrase in Rom. 1:17, where we are told "the righteousness of God is revealed from faith to faith."

Another passage which suggests this view, when properly translated, is Philp. 3:9. Paul is willing to count all things as "rubbish" so as to have a relationship with God through Jesus, "not having a righteousness of my own derived from law, but that which is through faith IN Christ, the righteousness which comes from God on the basis of faith." Again, there is no preposition used here, and "Christ" appears in the genitive case. The KJV once again correctly translates this phrase "...that which is through the faith OF Christ." Thus, our righteousness does not come through our own effort at law keeping, but comes to us who believe (have faith) in the person, work and faith OF our Lord Jesus Christ. OUR imperfect faith is insufficient to save us, but HIS faith (expressed and evidenced perfectly during His life) is redemptive, when we accept it by faith. When I believe in Him who had perfect faith in the Father, I acquire the blessing of that same perfect faith. My faith thus receives His faith, and I am thereby counted as righteous. Thus, the righteousness of God is revealed "from faith to faith." "For Christ is the end of law unto righteousness for everyone who believes" (Rom. 10:4).

The KJV has also correctly translated a couple of other passages in which this phrase "the faith OF Christ" is critical to a correct interpretation. In Gal. 2:16 we read -- "Knowing that a man is not justified by works of law, but through faith IN Christ Jesus, we have believed in Christ Jesus, that we may be justified by faith IN Christ, and not by works of law." Again, there is no preposition here, and "Christ Jesus" appears in the genitive case. A footnote in my Greek Interlinear points out that this is an "Objective Genitive" and should therefore be translated "of Christ Jesus," and NOT "in Christ Jesus." It is not our faith which justifies us, rather it is His faith which justifies us, a faith received by faith!! Thus, the righteousness of God is revealed "from faith to faith."

• In Gal. 2:20 Paul continues, "I have been crucified with Christ; and it is no longer I who live, but Christ lives in me; and the life which I now live in the flesh I live by faith IN the Son of God, who loved me, and delivered Himself up for me. I do not nullify the grace of God; for if righteousness comes through law, then Christ died needlessly." The righteousness of God does not come through law, or law keeping, it comes through Jesus Christ. If not, then He died to no avail. However, since God's righteousness IS through Christ Jesus, you and I who believe in Him live by virtue of HIS faith!! Again, the preposition "in" does not exist in the original Greek of the text. Rather, this is again an "Objective Genitive," and it is again correctly translated "faith OF the Son of God" by the KJV.

The puzzling phrase "from faith to faith" seems to again be clarified by a correct rendering of yet another passage -- Gal. 3:22. "But the Scripture declares that the whole world is a prisoner of sin, so that what was promised, being given through faith IN Jesus Christ, might be given to those who believe." Here again, the preposition "in" does not exist in the text. Instead, the KJV once more correctly translates the genitive as "through faith OF Jesus Christ." The great gift of God to the world was a man of perfect faith, the God/man Jesus Christ! This gift of this perfect faith incarnated is for all who believe (have faith). Thus, the righteousness of God, as revealed in the Gospel of Christ Jesus, is displayed in the Faith of Christ Jesus, and it is available to all who believe in Him. It is a righteousness "from faith to faith."

Conclusion

How do I acquire the righteousness of God; a righteousness declared in the Gospel message? I acquire it by faith, that is true, but I acquire it by accepting the faith OF Christ Jesus. In other words, I put on Jesus. "Now that FAITH has come, we are no longer under a tutor. For you are all sons of God through faith IN Christ Jesus. For all of you who were baptized into Christ have clothed yourselves with Christ" (Gal. 3:25-27). In this passage the preposition "in" DOES appear in the Greek. FAITH has come -- JESUS has come! We are no longer under a tutor; under law. If we have faith IN Him, then we are wrapped around (clothed) in HIS FAITH. When God looks upon each of us individually, all He sees is the faith OF Christ Jesus; He who lived a life of perfect faith. MY faith receives THAT faith, and I am thereby regarded as righteous in the sight of my God. It is a righteousness of God that comes "from faith to faith." Although there are good points to all the previous seven theories, it is my personal conviction that the eighth proposed interpretation in our study is the correct one, and I am confident in proclaiming it as the "gospel" -- "the power of God unto salvation."

From a Doctor in Kentucky:

Al & Shelly, I am sending you the DVD for the 2005 Tenth Anniversary Easter Pageant put on by the Southeast Christian Church of Jefferson County, KY. What a true "liberal" I've become; passing on "Easter pageants" from Christian Churches. The horror of it all! We've been to this pageant 6 times in three years, and have been edified to the point of tears every time. Coming from "Anti-ism" in the Churches of Christ, I never thought drama would have a place "in church." Now, however, I certainly believe drama can be worshipful to God, evangelistic, and edifying to the Body. From 53 members in 1962 to over 25,000 members today -- God seems to have built this church, and seems to be using it today in a number of ways .. including this pageant. God is surely having His hand in your work as well. Our brotherhood needs thinkers like you to help those trapped in the pit of legalism. Keep up the good work!

From a Minister in North Carolina:

AMEN! And again I say, AMEN! Thanks for the "history" lesson, Al -- your study of the Sunday School and Non-Sunday School movements was a rich article. Thanks be to God for men like Robert Raikes who had a vision of godly service and sought to fulfill it! May we all be like-minded.

From a Professor at Texas Tech University:

Al, I appreciate your survey of the Sunday School movement. It is informative and, in the main, accurate. However, inasmuch as I have a life-long association with non-Sunday School churches, there are a couple of points I would suggest as corrections. You say that "One Cup" and "Anti-Sunday School" positions are nearly always found in the same churches. As a matter of fact, there are about 1,000 congregations of the non-Sunday School variety that use multiple containers in the Lord's Supper. About an equal number are indeed both "one cup" and "anti-Sunday School." Further, there are a great many, perhaps most, of the former variety that do not make this issue a test of fellowship. These are largely churches that are associated with "Gospel Tidings," a journal which was begun in the thirties by G. B. Shelburne and now edited by Bill Adcox of Oklahoma City. It is true that in earlier times, these churches were more fractious, but in recent years, largely as the result of Carl Ketcherside's influence, they have become much more irenic. Most of them still do not have Sunday Schools, feeling that often they supplant parental responsibility. My own congregation of about 350 members has an active program of training for the parents, and it emphasizes inter-generational worship, teaching, and home Bible study. We also work with other churches in town on projects of mutual interest. Forgive me for going on; I just wanted to make these observations.

• Thank you for this insider's update, brother. I sincerely appreciate it, and am encouraged immensely by what you say. Yes, I was aware that some positive changes were taking place in both the One-Cup and Non-Class movements, and even made reference to such in my article. However, I was not aware of the extent of that change. I am truly encouraged to hear that more and more of these brethren in Christ are becoming more grace-centered and more accepting of those with whom they differ. I am also seeing this same reform taking place in a growing number of Non-Institutional ("Anti-") congregations, a movement with which I am far more familiar. Simply put, legalism and patternism are slowly, but surely, decreasing in influence over the disciples of Christ, and more of God's people are finding freedom in Christ from their former enslavement. A lot of my article dealt with the roots of the Sunday School and Non-Sunday School movements, as well as their early years, both abroad and in our own nation, but I had little current information regarding their present focus. I appreciate you filling in that gap for us; your insights are most definitely encouraging. --- Al Maxey

From a Minister in Massachusetts:

Your Reflections on the Sunday School was great! Your comments concerning brethren's attitudes toward one another in the Churches of Christ were, I thought, right on target and brought to mind an experience of a different sort that my wife and I had this past summer. We attended the Billy Graham School of Personal Evangelism which was held in Halifax this past July. Over 300 people from 50 different denominations from 28 states and every Canadian province gathered together for no other purpose than to learn more effective ways to share Christ. No one tried to convert us to their denomination's point of view. Honoring Christ Himself was the focus of every session. Very frankly, it was a breath of fresh air. And, as it turned out, the dean of the school was a restoration preacher, from the instrumental side of the Churches of Christ, with whom, along with his wife, we had sweet fellowship during the three day event. I cannot help but think that whoever said, "The Bible can be our greatest blessing, but it can also be our greatest curse," was right! Thanks so much for all you do to promote the cause of Christ.

From a Reader in Texas:

I so enjoyed reading the Reflections article on Sunday school. I have known some no-Sunday school people. I don't guess I personally know any one-cuppers, but I do know of congregations in the massive East Texas area that are one-cupper & no-Sunday school. I so look forward to your upcoming article on elders. That is a subject that weighs on my heart daily. As I have told you before, I simply do not believe that many people truly understand the work and qualifications of an elder. Thank you so much for the wonderful work you do. I wish there were more people like you in the world.

From a Reader in Arizona:

That was a very interesting article about Sunday schools! Before reading your article, I thought Sunday schools had always been a part of "church." I had no idea that they were started separate from church or organized congregations, and that some Sunday schools had even later become churches where none had existed before. It seems to me that a Sunday school or a mission group are simply a means of accomplishing the Lord's work. If a Sunday school is started by Christians (who are, of course, members of Christ's church), how is that being separate from "the church"? The problem seems to be in the mentality of those who view "the church" as being ONLY the assembly of saints in a particular location. They've made "the church" into a man-made institution, rather than the spiritual body, the hands and feet, of Christ. The church is the people who follow Jesus, who have put their faith in God, and who are committed to following the will and way of the Lord. A Sunday school, started and operated by Christians, is still a work of the Lord being done by His church, His body. In my eyes, Christians are the church, and Christians doing the work of the Lord, whether a Sunday school or missionary group, are doing the work of the church.

From a Minister in Tennessee:

Another great job on the Sunday School movement. I have had my run-ins with the Anti-Bible Class brethren. It is so sad. The Churches of Christ could be a great force for Jesus, yet we aren't because of all our "anti-" positions. We claim to be THE New Testament church, yet we have denominated ourselves into as many or more divisions as the Baptists, Methodists, and others which we condemn. I wonder if our rhetoric hasn't finally caught up with us; becoming our judge unto condemnation? Truly, if God's grace is sufficient to cover us in all of our inconsistencies, divisions, and shameful behavior, it will surely cover our Baptist, Methodist, and other religious friends, as well, in theirs.

From a Reader in New Mexico:

Al, Thanks so much for all the effort you put forth in your Reflections. Almost every one touches me personally. Although I would not trade my childhood or my Church of Christ roots with any other, I feel blessed that I have had people like you in my life who have encouraged me to "think" and study for myself. The result is a personal relationship with Christ. I love my legalistic brothers and sisters and try to accept them for what they are, but I pray that they will someday open their eyes. They could enjoy a life in Christ instead of living in fear of breaking the rules! When we stand before the Throne I don't think it will matter whether we went to Sunday School or not, or whether we all drank from the same cup (ugh). It all sounds so petty now, doesn't it? Keep up the good work. We are praying for you!

From a Reader in Florida:

Bro. Al, It was very interesting to read your treatise on the Sunday School question and the number of cups question. The congregation in which I grew up in the 30's and early 40's of the 20th century had to deal with these questions. I am glad to say, however, that there was never a split into two different congregations. Where the SS issue was concerned, it was finally decided that there should be classes for the children and teenagers, as well as for the adults that wished to have and participate in such classes. For those few who opposed participating in such classes, there was a regular Bible Class, which studied directly from the Bible, with no lesson materials. As to the "one cup" issue, I could never see where anyone in that congregation should have had a problem. They never did have "one cup" -- container. They had two cups, one for each side of the building. Thus, by what rationale could they object to individual cups when they became available? Being quite young in those years, I do not quite remember how this problem was settled. But, basically, the congregation did eventually go to individual cups.

Naturally, I was too young to be involved directly in any of that one way or the other, but I was carefully listening and studying these two issues. However, my father, an elder in the congregation, and my older brother, who had become a preacher, did take part in bringing that congregation into the 20th century. By far, most of the members of that congregation did want, and supported, Bible Classes for different ages. Most of the members of that congregation also wanted and supported the use of individual cups, coming rather quickly to realize that the term "cup," when used in the Scriptures dealing with the Lord's Supper, was concerned with the contents, not the container. Having read your treatise with interest, I have thusly been reminiscing of those early days.

From a Reader in Florida:
A Special Request

Brother Al, Thanks again for a great and informative article on the Sunday School Movement. I really wish you or someone would do some research on when the Sunday evening "worship service" and the Wednesday evening mid-week Bible class began among Churches of Christ. I have been unable to find any source of information on this. The only thing I found was a suggestion that these services began during or after the War when shift work began. Some brethren bind these services as if they are commanded by God and feel that missing one constitutes sin. Maybe there is some information somewhere out there that addresses this?

• Good questions, brother! That Florida sunshine must be good for the mind!! I'll do some research into this historical matter you have raised. In the meantime, do any of you readers have any information on this? If so, please send it my way and I'll incorporate it into a Reflections article dealing with these questions. Just one thought here -- some will invariably suggest that the Sunday evening assembly is actually more in keeping with the "pattern" of the early church, and that the Sunday morning assembly is the "unauthorized innovation." Therefore, the more valid question might be: When did the morning assembly come into favor as the primary time of assembly for the church? I look forward to everyone's responses. --- Al Maxey

From a Dr./Author in Alabama:

Bro. Al, I appreciate your writings. I believe that your writings are making more of an impact on those within the Churches of Christ than any other author. I am mailing you a check for your Reflections CD's. I want to give a set to a brother (one cup and non-Sunday school background) who attends a class on Greek grammar that I teach.

From a Minister in Arizona:

Brother Al, The no-class brethren are kinda like forgotten relatives. I collect all historical information about our brethren and that was an area in which I had little information, although I once had a debate with one of their men on Cups and Classes -- some 42 years ago.

********************
If you would like to be removed from or added to this
mailing list, contact me and I will immediately comply.
If you are challenged by these Reflections, then feel
free to send them on to others and encourage them
to write for a free subscription. I would also welcome
any questions or comments from the readers. A CD
containing these articles may be purchased. Check the
ARCHIVES for details & past issues of Reflections:
http://www.zianet.com/maxey/Reflect2.htm