Jon Gary Williams
Articles / Resources
0973
Guy N. Woods vs Van Banneau (anti - divided classes and women teaching)
February 3, 1949
Houston, Texas
(By W. S. Bayette)
Guy N. Woods vs Van Banneau (anti) at Houston, Tx., Dec. 28-31, 1948.
Propositions: women teaching, divided classes, simultaneous teaching.
Bro. Woods began the debate by showing from Banneau's tract, "Teaching The Word," that Banneau did not oppose: 1) an assembly, 2) an assembly not for the purpose of teaching the word, 3) a class, 4) a woman teaching a class, 5) a woman teaching a class "under individual circumstances. Bro. Woods showed from Ex. 18 that Moses arranged for simultaneous classes in handling problems which taxed his ability to handle. Banneau answered that this was a civil matter only. But Woods showed that the passage stated that Moses made them to "know the law and the statues" which included the law of God - certainly a religious matter. Banneau's reply was that they were not all in the building. It was then shown that the twenty-Sixth and North Shepherd church did not have all of the classes in the same building.
Banneau finally said that the division was on par with the numerous congregations that make up the church in the aggregate. Woods showed that Banneau had surrendered all that portion of the tract concerning the reading of the law to all Israel. He had admitted that Israel could be divided for the purpose of teaching it. Further, he had shown how to have classes -- merely call the classes "congregations" and he would have no objection. When he was pressed on this point, he said, "If this will allow classes today, it will also allow instrumental music." This was a fatal blow for him. It drove him out of the O. T. Much of his tract was an effort to show examples of teaching from the O. T., but after this he did not even offer one.
Bro. Woods showed that Acts 5:20-5 was a clear-cut example of simultaneous teaching. The argument was made: "The men [plural] - - - are standing in the temple, and teaching the people." All were standing -- all were teaching the people. Either they were doing it all at the same time, in which case confusion prevailed, or they were separated into groups. Banneau's effort to offset this was very weak. Banneau cited Acts 5:29: "Then Peter and the other apostles answered and said, we ought to obey God rather than men." He asked if Peter and the other apostles all spake at the same time. This was an effort to dodge the force of the use of the present tense in the passage in Acts 5. It was shown
that this passage was in the past tense, whereas the passage in Acts 5 is in the present tense. This illustration was used to show the difference.
Bro. Woods and bro. Banneau stood (past tense) in this building and spake." They might have been a month apart in speaking. The past tense does not indicate the relationship of th speakers, or the times elapsed. But if one says, "Bro. Woods and bro. Banneau are standing (present tense) in this building and speaking to the people, there is but one way this can be so -- both must be in the building ans speaking at the same time." This blow was crushing, and from it Banneau never recovered.
Banneau's most difficult moment came when bro. Woods cited Matt. 17:1, where Jesus took three of this apostles out of the group of twelve and taught them a special lesson. Banneau was asked if he would take a smaller group of three out of a larger group of twelve and teach them. This placed him in a dilemma from which he never escaped. He could not answer it outright. If he said, " "Yes," he denied his practice; if he said\,"No," then he would not do what the Lord did. He disregarded this throughout most of the debate; but when pressed he said they called the church out of the world every Sunday. This did not help him any because Jesus called apostles or followers. Finally, Banneau said he would not call them out; but the next night he denied that he said it.
Banneau was completely overthrown. He was defeated in his first speech and it grew worse. Woods conducted himself as a gentleman. Banneau was often in "hot water." Woods is able to take care of the best of the "antis." The brethren were greatly satisfied with bro. Woods' defense.
VIEW NEXT REPORT >>