Truth Magazine

By Lowell Blasingame

One of the most frequently asked questions by Nigerian brethren is, “What is World Bible School?” Much time and money has been spent there in promoting it for the spread of the gospel.

Action, a monthly religious publication founded by Jimmie Lovell and presently edited by Reuel Lemmons, is the voice for WBS. Acdon’s masthead includes a figure of the world formed by the words, World Bible School, and within the inset, “Nothing Compares With It In Our World.”

Our forefathers conceived the American Christian Missionary Society in 1848 in Cincinnati, Ohio and thought they had founded the ultimate for spreading the gospel. Lucien Palmer wrote of the Bible Training College at Ukpom, Nigeria, “We are convinced that it affords the greatest of all opportunities to preach Christ to the 80 million in Nigeria” (World Radio News, Nov.-Dec., 1975). Action says of WBS, “Nothing Compares With It In Our World.”

Somehow I can’t get as carried away with these human innovations as those who conceived them. I keep thinking that maybe the church built by our Lord, bought with His blood, of which He is foundation and head, and which is a declaration of the manifold wisdom of God and which succeeded in preaching the gospel to the known world in less than 50 years after its establishment just might compare favorably with these human creations!

What Is World Bible School?

It is an organization conceived by Jimmie Lovell that promotes teaching by means of correspondence courses. Concerning it, brother Lovell said:

Legally, and again I have never been questioned, we are incorporated under the laws of California as West Coast Christian Publishing Co. – a non-profit, tax deductible religious organization. We have another corporation in Texas known as World Bible School, with directors who are on the WCC board. In neither organization have we ever had any conflict of purpose (Action, Sept., 1983, p. 2).

WBS is not a school in the sense that a Sunday or Wednesday arrangement of classes is nor is it simply a method of teaching. It is a “corporation in Texas” that is under “directors who are on the WCC board.” It obtains students through ads in newspapers and journals and its teachers consist of volunteers who send lessons to students assigned them by WBS.

In some areas WBS has workers employed to do “follow-up” on students. Jake Coppinger, who worked in devising this plan, said that natives in the area were first used but this did not work out too well “so we started our current plan and it is working very effectively. We have people working full-time in Ghana, Liberia, India and Malawi. Ralph Perry supervises Follow-Up work in Nigeria.” In the same article he says, “Support runs from $60.00 a month in some countries up to $300.00” and “All of this is handled through our follow-up work in Visalla, California with funds provided by churches and individuals who want someone to follow-up on their students” (Action, Jan., 1986, p. 4).

WBS is an organization that employs a method of teaching, provides the contact between students and teacher, employs workers to do “follow-up” work on the student and solicits contributions from churches for its work.

We would like to see more churches financially supporting WBS. Small churches that do no mission work because they are small would find themselves responsible for more baptisms than more large churches if they simply sent a monthly check to WBS to help with this good work. Mention it to the leaders and elders where you worship and ask that they consider doing it (Action, March, 1986, p. 2).

It should be obvious that WBS is not just a method of teaching but an organization that employs methods, hires personnel and solicits contributions from churches for doing its work. It is not a local church, the Lord’s organization, but an organization formed by a man for doing what local churches are to do.

Doctrinal Soundness of WBS

Christians are to earnestly contend for the faith (Jude 3) and to speak things that become sound doctrine (Tit. 2:1). However, statements have been made by those who promote WBS which give reason for doubting their doctrinal soundness.

Jimmie Lovell, in Action, March, 1984, said, “My observation of us of the church of Christ as I read, listen and look, the more our children and friends tie into other religious groups by marriage and otherwise, the less we appear convinced that our platform is the only safe one upon which we can stand.”

Hear him again in the same article, “I have wrestled with this question of who is in Christ and who is not more years than most of you have lived. As Rubel Shelly has said in this paper recently, no matter what man may think, he will never be able to pass final judgment on another.”

My response to brother Lovell’s statements is that truth is not determined by what my children and friends do or by my emotional reaction to their actions. If my children married into a cult which advocates faith in more than one God and I bent my convictions trying to justify their decisions, would it alter the fact that there is only one God (Eph. 4:6)? Neither will my wavering convictions about there being but one church change what the Scriptures teach (Eph. 1:22-23; 4:4). Brother Lovell said that he has wrestled with the questions of who is in Christ and who is not. Isn’t this something! Here is the man who founded WBS and he has a problem telling who is in Christ and who isn’t. The Scriptures teach that salvation is in Christ and that one is baptized into Him (Acts 4:12; Gal. 3:27). Denominations teach that one is saved before baptism, therefore they deny what the Scriptures teach. The cry about passing judgment on others is the same denominational dodge used for years by those who don’t believe the Scriptures. That one is baptized into Christ is not my decision but the Lord’s and my failure to believe it won’t change it.

“Mrs. Art Mueller, 750 East 36th Pl., Eugene, Or. wants to share this letter from one of her students, a member of the Pentecostal Church in Africa: ‘I was able to teach on baptism and we will baptize our members by immersion next Sunday'” (Action, March, 1986, p. 3).

What profit is there in immersing people if they are not being baptized for the reason given in the Bible (Acts 2:38) and into the body of Christ (1 Cor. 12:13)?

Following one of the unity forums held between liberal preachers in the church and Christian Church preachers, Victor Knowles said, “And Reuel Lemmons; told me that from five to ten thousands teachers in his World Bible School (which baptizes scores of thousands each year) are people from instrumental churches. So we are uniting our effort in feeding the hungry, educating the church, and saving the lost souls. And isn’t that really the three-fold work of the church?” (One Body, July, 1985, p. 21)

With between five and ten thousands in Christian Churches using WBS, its literature will contain no teaching opposing the use of instrumental music in worship. Lemmons who presently heads WBS, agrees with Lovell that children of God are in all denominations and regards the use of instrumental music in worship as a matter of opinion, not one of faith.

A further illustration of brother Lemmon’s doctrinal softness is seen in his writings in the May, 1986 issues of Action. “Incidentally, we furnish teaching materials to any who order them and pay for them and we have a number of denominations who order World Bible School materials regularly. I wish every one of them would use our materials. But we provide student names to our own people only. We have never had a request from anyone other than our own brethren for student’s names.”

Brother Lemmons says that there are “a number of denominations who order World Bible School materials regularly.” Obviously little or no teaching against the errors of denominationalism is done in WBS material or this would not be the case. Paul’s teaching in Jewish synagogues was so plain that it resulted in the conversion of the honest and the arousal of the prejudiced to the point of denying him continued access to them. Human reactions have not changed greatly and I’ve preached long enough to know that if WBS materials clearly exposed denominationalism and its errors that a number of them would not be ordering them regularly.

Conclusion

Teaching by correspondence is an excellent method and involvement of individuals in using it is commendable but in our quest for souls, we must not forget that the local church is the organization that is to function and a declaration of the whole counsel of God must be made without compromise (Acts 20:24-27).

Guardian of Truth XXXI: 8, pp. 227-228
April 16, 1987

By Warren E. Berkley

Virtue is “the quality of moral excellence” (American Heritage Dictionary of English Language, p. 1432). This definition immediately raises the question of standard. By whose standard will we regard a thing as morally excellent and, therefore, virtuous? The child of God doesn’t hesitate to answer: God’s standard. We can rely on His revealed standard of right and wrong to determine that which exhibits moral excellence.

For those who do not acknowledge the Creator, the definition of virtue is fraught with problems. Virtue, without God, becomes a relative matter left entirely up to the person using the word or giving the definition. And, out of this situation comes the manufactured virtues of men. You see, in the hands of men, vices have a way of becoming virtues. Two examples follow: There are some who have made avoiding controversy a virtue. These folks want everything to be sweet and peaceful. And, they have placed such emphasis on this desire – they refuse to face the fact of false doctrine, sin and wretchedness among men. They sweep all the bad stuff under the carpet of “love,” and make a virtue out of avoiding all controversy. (They will even argue against arguing!) Clinging to this “virtue” means disobedience to the plain statements of God’s Word: “Note those who cause divisions and offenses, contrary to the doctrine . . . purge out the old leaven . . . have no fellowship with the unfruitful works of darkness . . . withdraw from every brother who walks disorderly . . .charge some that they teach no other doctrine. . . contend earnestly for the faith” (Rom. 16:17; 1 Cor. 5; Eph. 5:11; 2 Thess. 3:6; 1 Tim. 1:3; Jude 3).

Those who promote the human potential movement (an arm of secular humanism and New Age religion) have made exclusive positive thinking a virtue. They are convinced that merely entertaining a “negative” thought will cause an adverse influence in one’s life. They have become so absorbed in this positive thinking concept – they test everything by it! When some concept is proposed for their consideration, their first analysis is this: “Is this negative or positive?” Let me say, what actually matters is not whether something is “positive” or “negative,” but whether something is true or false, scriptural or unscriptural. Instead of thinking in terms of the negative-positive test, and making positive thinking a virtue, let us think in terms of the true-false test, and make sound, scriptural thinking a virtue (see 1 Tim. 1:3; Acts 17:11; 2 Tim. 4:2; 1 Jn. 4:1; 1 Thess. 5:21).

When men leave the divine standard, and try to walk in their own ways, they cannot give virtue anything but a relative definition. And, they fall into the trap of humanly manufactured virtues.

Guardian of Truth XXXI :7, p. 209
April 2, 1987

By Mike Willis

Having given in my last article a brief overview of the historical development of the positive thinking philosophy, I want to call attention to some of the main doctrinal affirmations which have become popular as a result of the movement.

In case some might misunderstand me, I hasten to add that opposition to the positive thinking philosophy is not an affirmation of pessimistic thinking. Each of us needs to have as positive an outlook on life as reality will allow. However, there are certain doctrines of the positive thinking philosophy which need to be assessed. Let us consider some of them:

1. The deification of man. None of the movements that paved the way for the positive thinking philosophy directly affirm the deity of man. Nevertheless, affirmations are made which lead to that necessary conclusion.

Anything you can imagine, visualize, and develop a sincere desire for can be yours if you plan for it and work for it through a program of goal setting (Paul Meyer, Dynamics of Goal Setting, Lesson 2, p. 1).

You can make just about anything of your life – anything you will believe or will visualize, anything you will pray for and work for. Look deeply into your mind. Amazing wonders are there (Norman Vincent Peale, The Power of Positive Thinking, p. 176).

. . . God is willing to give you everything you ask for, if you but believe (Peale, You Can If You Think You Can, p. 12).

As I meditated on this, a thought came crystal clear, Whatever you can conceive, and believe, you can do! (Oral Roberts, Miracle of Seed Faith, p. 7)

In order for these statements to be true, man would have to be deity, for only deity can accomplish everything he imagines. That these are over-statements at best and outright deceptions at worst should be obvious. There are definite limitations on man. He is finite, not infinite; he is not omnipotent, omniscient, or omnipresent. Consequently, there are things which no human being can achieve, though he believes that he can achieve them. The account of the tower of Babel in Genesis 11 is conclusive on that point!

Teaching this dogma deceives men and leads him into despair. A man who believes he can accomplish something but is unable to achieve it will conclude that the problem is his lack of faith. The Scriptures teach that “the race is not to the swift, nor the battle to the strong, neither yet bread to the wise, nor yet riches to men of understanding, nor yet favor to men of skill; but time and chance happeneth to them all” (Eccl. 9:11). Circumstances beyond human control contribute to whether or not men achieve their goals. A young couple who gives birth to a deformed baby should not attribute the deformity to lack of faith. Though they believed they would have a healthy baby, prayed about it, and visualized a healthy baby, sometimes a baby is born without an arm or leg. Experience, as well as the Scriptures, demonstrates the limitations of man.

2. Faith in mind power or “faith,” instead of faith in God. The positive thinking movement teaches faith in “faith” rather than faith in God. Some refer to mind power being released; others speak of the miracle of seed-faith. In either case, the power to accomplish begins in the human mind with unlimited potential.

When people begin to think that they can control what God does for them by prayer or faith, they have slipped into pagan concepts of God. In magic, men manipulate a higher power to obtain things for themselves. Those who promise success to those who believe teach that by believing one can bring God (or some other kind of power) under obligation to provide health, wealth and success. Do you want a raise in pay at the factory, desire a higher paying job, or wish your restaurant sold more food? Believe you can have it, pray, visualize, and receive it. “God answers prayer” ends up meaning “God is at man’s beck and call!”

Anthony Campolo, Jr., author of The Success Fantasy, wrote,

Will Herberg, a contemporary Jewish social philosopher, claims that Americans have “faith in faith.” They think believing in God assures them of economic prosperity and personal achievement. He may be right. But this kind of “faith” makes God a means to our own personal ends and declares that He is there to help us achieve things which society tells us are important.

The eternal God does not exist to serve our ends. He is not an instrument for the fulfillment of our wishes. We exist to serve Him. We are called to be instruments of His will.

Many sociologists differentiate religion from magic by pointing out that in religion people submit themselves to the will of a higher power; in magic, people try to manipulate a higher power to get things for themselves. Many people who think they have true religion transform the Christian faith into a primitive form of magic, treating God as though He were the genie of the magic Imp. Prayer becomes a litany for manipulating God into delivering what the petitioners want. Jesus’ name becomes a magical incantation that must be blasphemously uttered at the end of the prayer if God is to deliver the desired results (The Success Fantasy, pp. 137-138).

3. Eliminate the negative. Even as positive thoughts have power to create, negative thoughts have power to destroy. Hence, according to positive thinking, success depends upon eliminating the destructive power of negative thinking and replacing it with the power of positive thinking.

It is important to eliminate from conversations all negative ideas . . . . Never use a negative thought in prayer. Only positive thoughts get results . . . . Suffice it to say that we manufacture our unhappiness by thinking unhappy thoughts, by the attitudes which we habitually take, such as the negative feeling that everything is going to turn out badly, or that other people are getting what they do not deserve and we are failing to get what we do deserve (Peale, The Power of Positive Thinking, pp. 33, 65, 69).

It was at this moment that I might be able to show him he had sowed seeds of doubt that brought him a harvest of needs, and more needs . . . . With faith you do something first and thereby make your faith an act and release it toward God . . . . On the other hand, doubt is just as real, in a negative way, as faith. Doubt (or unbelief) is the REVERSED FORM of faith. . . . In this negative spirit, you block the flow of God’s intervention in your behalf to turn the tide (Oral Roberts, Miracle of Seed-Faith, pp. 145-148).

As positive thinking has been applied to preaching, the result has been that preachers only preach what is positive. Preaching that condemns others creates a negative impression toward the church and should be eliminated. A “I’m O.K. – You’re O.K. ” disposition arose toward every religion and sin virtually passed from the vocabulary of the preacher. Instead of the preacher being a prophet who called man’s attention to his sins with a message of repentance, the preacher began delivering messages which made a person feel warm inside. Robert Schuller defined sin as “lack of self-esteem” (Self-Esteem: The New Reformation, p. 98); consequently, his preaching was designed to build man’s self-esteem, feeling of self-worth. Anything which attacked the man as a sinner condemned in the sight of God damaged his self-esteem and should be eliminated. Preaching had to address the “human needs” of the non-Christian – to meet his deepest emotional needs.

One needs only to listen to radio and television evangelists or visit any religious bookstore to perceive the influence of positive thinking on preaching. Preaching has turned from theology to psychology. Many seminaries now have a larger staff for pastoral counseling than for biblical studies. Man is more interested in “practical” preaching than “doctrinal” preaching. Preachers rarely preach a “hell-fire-and-brimstone” sermon (indeed, some have renounced belief in hell and others who believe in it do not want to alienate those who might be listening). In the mainline Protestant denominations, any doctrinal belief is accepted, welcomed, or tolerated; only those who are so “narrow-minded” and “bigoted” as to assume “their little group is the only one going to be saved” are openly condemned. Intolerance of other religions and lifestyles is the ultimate – if not the only – heresy in the minds of most social commentators and even some preachers! Positive thinking has eaten the doctrinal heart out of the mainline Protestant denominations and all that is left is a denomination with no specific doctrinal beliefs. Many remain historically tied to their denomination but have no doctrinal ties to it.

4. A gospel of wealth. Men have been taught by the positive thinking philosophy that faith in God and adherence to His word will deliver wealth, power, and status – social success. Gordon D. Fee, author of The Disease of the Health and Wealth Gospel, described this affirmation like this:

God wills the (financial) prosperity of every one of his children, and therefore for a Christian to be in poverty is to be outside of God’s intended will; it is to be living a Satan-defeated life. And usually tucked away in this affirmation is a second: Because we are God’s children, the King’s kids, as some like to put it, we should always go first class – we should have the biggest and best, a Cadillac instead of a Volkswagen, because this alone brings glory to God (The Disease of the Health and Wealth Gospels, p. 3).

While not explicitly saying what Fee has summarized, the television evangelists teach the same message when they bring celebrities to testify how the gospel changed their lives from abject failure to glowing success. They begin by describing the dismal level to which they had sunk – they lost their job, they were poor, they lived in a shack and drove a wreck. Then, they gave their lives to Jesus and since then things have changed. They now have a job paying twice what their former job paid, they have money in the bank, live in a mansion, and drive a Cadillac – because they had faith in Christ.

Another might “testify” that he sent in his donation as seed-faith and God blessed him materially. In Miracle of SeedFaith, Oral Roberts described how God sent his brother-in-law a job, arranged a loan for Oral, enabled two men to become Tulsa’s third-largest builders, etc. as they practiced the principle of seed-faith. Peale publishes many similar testimonials of success in Guideposts. The message of positive thinking is that if you have the proper faith in God, you will be living successfully. In The Success Fantasy, Anthony Campolo, Jr. wrote,

As a boy I remember attending testimony meetings at our church where Christians told how they were poor and beaten people until they accepted Christ as personal Savior and Lord. Then they would relate how, as a consequence of their new lives in Christ, they suddenly experienced prosperity. . . . Sermons from the pulpit, articles in magazines, and testimonies of successful Christian businessmen at luncheon meetings, all reinforce the creed that Jesus will prosper us if we just walk in His ways (The Success Fantasy, p. 11).

Many popular evangelists today seem to promise the world if one will accept Christ. . . . We hear mostly the positive, what one will get: health, success, self-fulfillment, and even wealth, especially if one supports that particular evangelist (George Marsden, “Secular Humanism Within the Church,” Christianity Today Institute [17 January 1986], p. 14).

a. one result of this teaching is that it has sanctified man’s spending upon himself. One is not viewed as a greedy, covetous sinner when he makes a display of his Cadillac, mansion, and diamonds; instead, these displays of wealth become a badge proving that one has faith in God. The Scriptures warn of the danger of wealth (1 Tim. 6:6-10; Deut. 6:10-12). The positive thinking philosophy has made wealth a proof of faith and poverty an evidence of an absence of faith.

b. This gospel makes life’s physical blessings dependent upon faith in Christ whereas Jesus said that life’s physical blessings come upon the just and unjust alike (Matt. 5:45). One of the most distressing things to God’s saint is the prosperity of the wicked (cf. Psa. 73), itself a proof that prosperity is not conditioned on faith in God. Some of God’s most faithful servants were destitute (cf. Heb. 11:32-39).

c. This gospel makes the theology of giving selfish. One gives (plants seed-faith) in order to receive. By giving to the Lord and the poor, one is assuring his own prosperity, producing profit-motivated giving. Jesus taught that it is more blessed to give than to receive (Acts 20:35).

5. The gospel of good health. Another tenet of positive thinking is the belief that God blesses those who have faith in Him with good health. “God wills our perfect health” is a presupposition of many television evangelists. If one has enough faith in God, he will be healed by God through a miracle. Any failure to be healed is not the fault of God but of the one who lacks faith.

The Scriptures nowhere affirm that physical healing of the body is part of the atonement of Jesus Christ. Indeed, faithful saints of God suffered physically (cf. Job, Jesus). The Scriptures do not attribute suffering from heart attack or cancer to a lack of faith in God, nor should anyone teach a gospel which drives a man to this conclusion.

Conclusion

This brief summary of some of the prominent concepts promoted by those associated with positive thinking should alarm us of its dangers as a philosophy which will destroy us spiritually. Although every positive thinker does not teach or believe every specific item mentioned, those generally associated with the positive thinking philosophy teach many of the same doctrines. Becoming aware of the danger of these influences may help us avoid being taken captive by the positive thinking philosophy.

Guardian of Truth XXXI: 8, pp. 226, 246-247
April 16, 1987

By Edward O. Bragwell, Sr.

Ask nearly any Christian: what is the one thing we (church, family, society) most need today? You will likely hear “love.” No doubt there is a shameful lack of love among many professed Christians. However, I would like to put in a plug for less love among brethren with whom I often associate. Yes, I really believe that there is too much love among Christians. It is a bad sign.

“But know this, that in the last days perilous times will come: For men will be lovers of themselves, lovers of money . . . lovers of pleasure. . . ” (2 Tim. 3:14).

We need less love for self. We need brethren who will not think more highly of themselves than they ought to think (Rom. 3:3-8). Too many congregations are having problems caused by brethren who think far more of themselves than they need to. A great deal of harmony could be restored if each would esteem others better than himself (Phil. 2:3, 4).

We need less love for money among us. It is the root of all kinds of evil (1 Tim. 6:10). Brethren have trouble finding time to do anything special for the Lord’s cause because they are too tied up with making money. Men go without adequate support in hard fields because brethren love money too much to give what is needed for that support. Preachers sometimes neglect their preaching because they are too involved in money making sidelines.

We needless love for pleasure. Sin can be pleasant (Heb. 11:25). Let there be no mistake about that. Therein lies its appeal. To be sure, the pleasure is short-lived compared to eternity.

Too many brethren think that they should not be asked to forego very much pleasure in order to be a faithful Christian. I think this is at the root of much of the remarriage problem that we are seeing so much of today. Its seems almost unthinkable to some to expect an unscripturally divorced person to forego the pleasure of another marriage. It is almost as if such would be cruel, inhumane and unusual punishment. What is the problem? Too much love for pleasure.

Then many congregations’ attendance suffers from people who are constantly out of town on pleasure trips. One is almost considered some kind of a nut if he suggests that such trips should not be taken if one cannot arrange to assemble with faithful saints on Lord’s day. It seems almost too much to expect a member of a local congregation to make out of town weekend trips extremely rare for the good of the work at home.

It is easy for Christians (young and old) to get up a party. It is not so easy to get up a serious Bible class. Could it be our love for pleasure?

We need less love for pre-eminence among brethren. Diotrephes caused a lot of problems because of this love (3 John 9). We have too many limelight seekers – even among, or maybe we should say especially among, preachers. This gives rise to jealousy and all its attending evil words and deeds. Often such characters will either get the attention they feel they deserve or they will form a wrecking crew for the church.

Elders sometimes prove by their actions they have sought and/or have accepted the eldership more for the ~’honor” than the work. Men often seek positions of leadership not for the opportunity it offers to serve the Lord and others, but as a means of satisfying their lust for “chief seats.” They love the attention that goes with the territory.

We need less love for the wages of unrighteousness (2 Pet. 2:15). The wages may be money gained from outright wrong doing or from soft peddling the truth. It may be human praise gained by the hypocrite (Matt. 6). It may be the approving gestures from those who have itching ears as we go about scratching them (2 Tim. 4:2ff). Too often we are prone to tell folks what they want to hear rather than what they need to hear. The moral and financial support they give us in return is a wage of unrighteousness.

We need less love for this present world. Demas had that problem (2 Tim. 4:10). Paul seems to indicate that his love hurt the Cause. There is too much love for the material things of this present world. There is too much love for the sinful things of this world (1 John 2:15-17), too much lust of the flesh (cf. Gal. 5:19ff), too much lust of the eye, too much pride of life. Brethren need to be more spiritually minded, so that they would not attach so much value to the material and temporal things of this present world. They need more resolve to say “no” to sinful lusts. Too many churches (one would be too many) are filled with worldly minded people who see little need to resist such lusts. One only has to observe for a little while to see that materialism, immodesty, and general lack or purity of speech and discretion is wide-spread in certain congregations that call themselves “conservative.” Brethren, we definitely need less love for the world.

To be sure, we do need more love in some areas. However, surely you will agree that we need a lot less love in many areas.

Guardian of Truth XXXI: 8, pp. 225, 237
April 16, 1987