Vol. 2 - No. 2

February, 1983


by Robert L. McDonald

When THE EXPOSITORY REVIEW was set in motion, we were careful to lay down certain policies regarding the acceptance and preference of articles submitted by our readers. With the first (eight-page) issue of December, 1981, we explained the purpose of the paper. Our aim was to publish a paper where issues among brethren could be discussed. However, we did not intend to allow the paper to become a publication of a continual harangue on one or two issues. Since the first number, we have tried to get brethren to exegete passages for a better understanding of the Word of God. Over and again we have invited writers to submit articles for inclusion in future issues.

An editorial was written in the November (1982) issue on Exegetical Articles. Among other things, I asked for someone to write an article on Imputed Righteousness. The reason I called for the article is because the way some write some would be led to believe that there is a passage of scripture which teaches the righteousness of Christ is imputed to the Christian. I didn't believe it then and nothing has changed my mind at the present to believe that any man can take the Word of God and establish such an idea. I wrote, “Another appropriate article which we need is for one to exegete the passage which teaches the Calvinistic view of imputed righteousness.”

 In response to this editorial, Arnold Hardin wrote, “I, therefore, would be happy to write an article relative to imputed righteousness as taught in the New Testament if you will print it.”

My letter to Arnold was immediately placed in the mail inviting him to send an article. I explained to him that the policy was as follows: If an article is sent to us for inclusion in THE EXPOSITORY REVIEW which, in the judgment of the editor, believes should be reviewed, that both the original article and the review should appear in the same issue. I further told him that if he wanted to write an article, I would be glad to receive it but I wanted him to understand our policy before he worked on the article. I was not trying to take advantage of him, but to be as fair as I could.

Frankly, I believe that the truth on a Bible subject can be established without an unending exchange of articles. This is the reason I continue to call for an exegesis of passages so as to learn the truth on those verses. If there is a passage which teaches the “righteousness of Christ is imputed to the Christian,” let someone write on it.

On November 30th, Arnold Hardin wrote, “I will be happy to exegete the scriptures relative to the biblical matter of alien sinners being justified by an imputed righteousness outside of sinner. This is the issue!” (I am not sure just what he said, but if he wanted to write on the subject, we would publish the article.) He then asked if I had put such restrictions on others before printing their material. The answer is “yes.” The policy extended to Arnold equally applies to every writer.

If Arnold Hardin did send an article and in the judgment of the editor it warranted a review, Hardin said he wanted to have a rebuttal. I explained this would not be the case if his original article would have a review when published. If an article is accepted by the editor without review when published, and one of our readers, without solicitation, makes a review, then the author of the original article will be given the opportunity to respond. (We had two such exchanges in THE EXPOSITORY REVIEW in 1982, i.e., Leon Odom-Robert West and Darwin Chandler-Glenn Burt). We are confident the policy we have set will do much to hold down “unending exchanges” of issues and at the same time allow brethren to express themselves.

This editor has used the space in this number because in the December, 1982, issue of THE PERSUADER, Arnold Hardin laments because we would not open the door to a change of policy which would allow the paper to become just one more to have an extended flow of articles on one issue. Both Bob Craig and I have discussed our policy on several occasions and both are convinced to “hold the line” as we have done. THE EXPOSITORY REVIEW is not a preacher's paper --- it is not intended to be such. We are trying to have a publication which will openly discuss issues but at the same time to close them down when both sides have been heard. We have had too many favorable remarks from brethren exhorting us to maintain the high plane of journalism. We intend to do just that.

Again, I call for someone to exegete the scripture which teaches “that the righteousness of Christ is imputed to the Christian” or “the Calvinistic view of imputed righteousness.” We still need that article since Arnold Hardin will not accept our invitation to send his material. If one has the truth on this subject, why shouldn't he be willing to write even though his material is going to be reviewed? If I believe what I teach to be the truth, why should I fear to allow someone to “review” what I have said. Truth does not fear examination. Only error is fearful of a critical investigation of its claims.