Subscribe to this page via e-mail here - Subscribe
0985
The first two nights bro. Woods affirmed: "It is in harmony with the scriptures for churches to build and maintain benevolent organizations for the care of the needy, such as the Boles Home, the Tipton Home, and other orphan homes and homes for the aged that are among us." The last two nights bro. Porter affirmed the opposite side of the proposition. Some estimated 400 preachers were there from all over the U. S. Both of the disputants are well known debaters. Bro. Woods has had perhaps a hundred debates. Bro. Porter has been one of the outstanding debaters on the church for many years.
Several interesting and unusual things characterized this debate. Bro. Porter never read one passage of scripture to sustain his proposition until his first speech of the last night. He had references on charts but did not read them. In bro. Porter's first affirmative he followed closely the pattern of Carl Ketherside by reading the charters of orphan homes. He admitted that all the churches of Memphis, Tenn., could unite their efforts and build a home for old folks or orphan children, so long as every church sustained the same relationship to the home. In that argument he surrendered the Guardian's contention against church cooperation. Bro. Woods countered by showing that such an orphan home as bro. Porter suggested was all for which we are contending. It was evident that bro. Porter was much disturbed over that point. He tried to retrieve their position by saying the home would be scriptural provided it wasn't organized. Bro. Woods showed them the only way such a home could be maintained would be under a board, or each church would have to provide individual facilities for its children, such as matrons, cooks, bathrooms and heating plants.
Bro. Porter in a further attempt to clarify his position said it would be alright for the home to be organized as long as it wasn't incorporated. The bro. Woods brought up the children's home at Lubbock, Tx., which is not incorporated and asked bro. Porter to shake hands with him upon that home, stating that at last they had found a way to take care of orphans upon which we could all agree; but bro. Porter refused to shake hands with him on the point. No one realized their predicament more than Cecil Douthitt, who was Porter's moderator. He interrupted bro. Woods and challenged him to meet Roy Cogdill, but bro. Cogdill refused to be pushed into a debate, but said that he would endorse bro. Porter.
Then in another desperate attempt to salvage some of their arguments, bro. Douthitt challenged bro., Woods to meet bro. Porter in a debate at the Caprock church in Lubbock, Tx. However, the Caprock church is a faction which was recently led away from the College avenue church by Grover Stevens, and bro. Woods would not recognize it as a church. The Garfield Heights church agreed to support bro. Woods in another debate against either bro. Porter or bro. Cogdill, provided the Belmost Avenue church which bro. Porter was representing, would endorse either one of them for another debate. Thus bro. Douthitt failed completely in an attempt to save their faces.
Bro. Woods was master of the situation from the very beginning. I have heard many debates, but I do not believe I have ever witnessed a more complete victory for the truth than in this debate. Bro. Woods is logical and clear inj his presentation of arguments. At the close of this debate even a child could have seen that the opposition was completely annihilated. Debates like this certainly will do food.
VIEW NEXT REPORT >>
Print
Guy N. Woods vs W. Curtis Porter (orphan homes)
February 9, 1956
Indianapolis, Indiana
(By W. L. Totty)
February 9, 1956
Indianapolis, Indiana
(By W. L. Totty)
The first two nights bro. Woods affirmed: "It is in harmony with the scriptures for churches to build and maintain benevolent organizations for the care of the needy, such as the Boles Home, the Tipton Home, and other orphan homes and homes for the aged that are among us." The last two nights bro. Porter affirmed the opposite side of the proposition. Some estimated 400 preachers were there from all over the U. S. Both of the disputants are well known debaters. Bro. Woods has had perhaps a hundred debates. Bro. Porter has been one of the outstanding debaters on the church for many years.
Several interesting and unusual things characterized this debate. Bro. Porter never read one passage of scripture to sustain his proposition until his first speech of the last night. He had references on charts but did not read them. In bro. Porter's first affirmative he followed closely the pattern of Carl Ketherside by reading the charters of orphan homes. He admitted that all the churches of Memphis, Tenn., could unite their efforts and build a home for old folks or orphan children, so long as every church sustained the same relationship to the home. In that argument he surrendered the Guardian's contention against church cooperation. Bro. Woods countered by showing that such an orphan home as bro. Porter suggested was all for which we are contending. It was evident that bro. Porter was much disturbed over that point. He tried to retrieve their position by saying the home would be scriptural provided it wasn't organized. Bro. Woods showed them the only way such a home could be maintained would be under a board, or each church would have to provide individual facilities for its children, such as matrons, cooks, bathrooms and heating plants.
Bro. Porter in a further attempt to clarify his position said it would be alright for the home to be organized as long as it wasn't incorporated. The bro. Woods brought up the children's home at Lubbock, Tx., which is not incorporated and asked bro. Porter to shake hands with him upon that home, stating that at last they had found a way to take care of orphans upon which we could all agree; but bro. Porter refused to shake hands with him on the point. No one realized their predicament more than Cecil Douthitt, who was Porter's moderator. He interrupted bro. Woods and challenged him to meet Roy Cogdill, but bro. Cogdill refused to be pushed into a debate, but said that he would endorse bro. Porter.
Then in another desperate attempt to salvage some of their arguments, bro. Douthitt challenged bro., Woods to meet bro. Porter in a debate at the Caprock church in Lubbock, Tx. However, the Caprock church is a faction which was recently led away from the College avenue church by Grover Stevens, and bro. Woods would not recognize it as a church. The Garfield Heights church agreed to support bro. Woods in another debate against either bro. Porter or bro. Cogdill, provided the Belmost Avenue church which bro. Porter was representing, would endorse either one of them for another debate. Thus bro. Douthitt failed completely in an attempt to save their faces.
Bro. Woods was master of the situation from the very beginning. I have heard many debates, but I do not believe I have ever witnessed a more complete victory for the truth than in this debate. Bro. Woods is logical and clear inj his presentation of arguments. At the close of this debate even a child could have seen that the opposition was completely annihilated. Debates like this certainly will do food.
VIEW NEXT REPORT >>
| Powered By |
| TheLordsWay.com |
| Click here to host your own church web site today! |
