Devoted to the Propagation and Defense of New Testament Christianity
VOLUME 8
January 17, 1957
NUMBER 36, PAGE 12

Woods - Porter Debate

Paul Brock, Dyersburg, Tennessee

Sometime ago I made plans to attend the Woods-Porter debate to be held in Paragould, Arkansas, January, 1956. The Lord willing, I shall not miss it. Brother G. K. Wallace under the heading, "Woods-Porter Debate" (Gospel Advocate, December 6, 1956), has attempted to prejudice the minds of those who plan to attend. Brother Wallace in his article attempts to align Brother Porter with Sommer and Ketcherside, as if this would prove the proposition one way or the other. He knows however, that not five percent of the Advocate readers know anything about either man, but they have heard Sommerism, and if in their minds Wallace can brand Porter as a Sommerite, he will have closed their minds to any truth.

This is a sad commentary on Brother Wallace's attitude toward the truth and toward an honorable discussion of the truth. The debate itself will reveal what Brother Porter believes, but let us note Brother Wallace's reasoning ( ?) in the matter.

1. Porter and Ketcherside believe the same thing (on orphan homes), therefore Porter is a Ketchersideite or Sommerite.

Does this follow, Brother Wallace ? Let us see.

2. Wallace and Ketcherside agreed that churches could not support colleges, (Wallace-Ketcherside Debate) therefore Wallace is a Ketchersideite or Sommerite. (Brother Wallace has changed on this.)

3. Wallace agrees with the digressives (mission work, care of orphans), therefore Wallace is a digressive. (The digressive preacher here doesn't believe in the second coming of Christ, therefore Wallace doesn't believe in the second coming of Christ.)

Now, Brother Wallace are you willing to accept the consequences of your reasoning?

We are sorry indeed that a good gospel preacher like Brother Wallace has given himself over to ridicule and misrepresentation of his brethren who oppose his teaching. I have seen it first hand and this is the pattern reported everywhere. Brother Wallace has never debated these issues, but he can if there is a church that will endorse him.

Brother Wallace also misrepresents the Guardian saying they have not advertised the Woods-Porter Debate held in Indianapolis. But maybe he thinks Advocate readers won't know the difference. Many brethren are wondering why the Advocate is not pushing the first debate held on this, the Indianapolis Debate. The Guardian has brought out another edition of it, and reduced the price so that brethren can get it and study the issues. Price $2.50.