Truth Magazine

By Herschel Patton

“And we have known and believed the love that God hath to us. God is love; and he that dwelleth in love dwelleth in God, and God in him. Herein is our love made perfect, that we may have boldness in the day of judgment: because as he is, so are we in this world. There is no fear in love; but perfect love casteth out fear: because fear hath torment. He that feareth is not made perfect in love” (1 John 4:16-18).

Many brethren seem to see in these verses vindication for all earnestly striving Christians who may be guilty of sins of ignorance (of which they are not aware). Such thinking leads to the extremes of the “grace-fellowship” issue that plagues the brotherhood today – “If you are `in grace’ God will overlook or excuse all sins of this nature.”

One brother says, truthfully, of the above verses, “The object of the Christian’s life is to perfect (finish) this love . . . that on the day of judgment he might stand before God with confidence.” He then states, “There is an obstacle that prevents many from accomplishing this – `fear’ . . . . The Christian who lives in fear of the judgment, lives in constant torment now.” The brother admits that some Christians ought to live in fear of the judgment because their lives of unfaithfulness offer no hope, but he goes on to suggest that there are others “serving God faithfully, yet who live in fear. Their only sense of security comes after they have arisen from a prayer of repentance, only to see it vanish again the next time they err. They have been taught by some of our own number that each sin committed, regardless of intent, separates from God and consigns them to hell.” He then brands such a concept as “Phariseeism” and one that “stifles the development of love toward God.”

Here is suggested the idea that some sins – errors – do not separate from God and consign to hell . . . A life of unfaithfulness will, but some sins (where there is no “intent”) will not separate from God or consign to hell.

Another brother has written (in a booklet): “I was afraid of the Christian life that had to be lived after baptism. Even after 1 was baptized I am afraid I did not live with much of a feeling of confidence and assurance. The preaching I was raised on had left me living with an anxiety about how I stood before the Lord – an anxiety that only escaped me for a moment after I had prayed for forgiveness. I always felt that I probably was not doing as much as the Lord expected out of me. That fearfulness, however, did not drive me to do any more. It just made me miserable . . . . A lot of faithful disciples, I am afraid, are `running scared.’ They live with doubt and with anxiety and with fearfulness, always wondering how they stand before the Lord.” This writer next shows that such fears are unjustified because the Lord (Jesus Christ) who made possible our justification by his loving sacrifice for us is the same one who now saves us by “his life” and enables us to “glory in hope of the glory of God.” He says further, “But I insist that faithful children of God ought to quit `running scared,’ always anxious and fearful, always in doubt, always wondering where they stand. We must cease to trust in our own goodness and learn to rest our hope on the love of God in Christ. If we will do that, we will be able to face even the judgment without fear; we will be confident that we shall be saved from the wrath that is to come through the intercession which our living Savior is making for us.”

The implication of all this is that Christians need not be concerned about some sins and matters of faithfulness, if they are “in grace” and earnestly striving to do right. The Lord’s love and intercessions will take care of these without repentance, confession, and prayer on our part. This is a degree of Calvinistic doctrine of “The Security of the Believer.” They would cover all sins of a believer, but our brethren limit the covering to “non-intent” or “ignorant” sins.

I would like for those of this persuasion to list some of the sins and errors that Christians need not be afraid of committing – that do not separate from God. The Bible says “all unrighteousness in sin”(1 John 5:17) and that no sin (thing that defileth) entereth heaven (Rev. 21:27). This being true, God must either not regard sin in the lives of some or the shed blood of Christ automatically takes care of all “non-intent” sins we commit. This is Calvinism, pure and simple.

Such a belief might, indeed, contribute to one’s living here without “fear” and go to the judgment with “confidence,” but such does not guarantee acceptance at the judgment (Matt. 7:22-23).

Perfect Love and Confidence

It is true, as John declares in our text, “love made perfect” in us gives boldness in the day of judgment. What is the “perfect love” of our text? In the fourth chapter of First John, we are told to “love one another” (vs. 7-8). Verses 12-15 show that while man has never seen God, there are many manifestations of Him, especially in the Son who came to earth in the form of man and suffered death in man’s place. The apostles, by the Holy spirit, bore witness of this. The love demonstrated by Jesus for man was the same that the Father has for man (John 3:16). Christians, moved by this divine love, in turn, love God and one another. God abides in them and they in Him (vs. 11; John 14:23). In men and women of faith who love one another, God’s love is perfected. God’s love was demonstrated by Christ “manifested in the flesh,” which made possible our justification, and is manifested by Christians in their love for one another. Thus the love of God is perfected in the Christian.

It is this “perfected love” in the Christian that makes for boldness in the day of judgment. Truly, God’s love is the basis for our justification. We couldn’t be “in Him” and “have peace with God” without this. And, it is this same love that “keeps us” as Christians since the one sacrifice not only provided for our justification but also “cleanseth us” continually (1 John 1:7), providing we use the advocacy provided (1 John 2:1). God’s love did not provide for our justification unconditionally, nor does it cleanse us from sins we may commit now unconditionally.

Fear of Judgment

Christians, in whom the love of God is perfected, truly have no reason to fear God in the judgment because Christ’s death not only assured their justification (free from guilt) when they obeyed the gospel, but also provided continual cleansing in the future for all who will repent. In other words, the cleansing fountain was, and always is, open – conditionally. This means no one need fear facing God in Judgment.

We must-not confuse the “fear” of our text with that of reverential fear and awe. On this point, Pulpit Commentary lists some good thoughts. “The fear which is inconsistent with perfect love is the fear of the slave dreading the lash, or the culprit dreading the verdict. But if the love of God is within us, sweetly subduing us with its tenderness, and if through that love sin in pardoned and destroyed, why, there is no lash to dread – no adverse verdict to fear . . . . The judge on the throne is viewed as an infinite vindicator and friend in whose love we ever live …. If this is not our state of mind, there must be some deficiency in love in exactly the same degree as there is any restless fear” (pp. 114-115).

A Christian who harbors fear of the judgment, evidently is lacking in trust in God, a wrong concept of God, or is condemned in his heart for a lack of love for God and his brethren. The one talent servant of Matt. 25:24-29 was “afraid” because of a misconception of the nature of his master and a lack of trust. The Christian, in whom the love of God is perfected, doubts not the true nature of his Lord but knows He is a loving, merciful, vindicating friend, and one who can be trusted to keep his promises; he knows in his heart that he has diligently sought the will of God, been watchful and earnest, continually using the advocacy of Christ, so lives without fear of the judgment.

Of course, reverential fear and awe, which the Bible teaches we must have, often causes us to question our fidelity and devotion to God, to search our hearts and lives, to purpose and resolve more diligent service, but this soul-searching which results in spiritual growth and corrections in our lives, is not the fear of judgment that causes us to be miserable. The facts that God judges according to “that which a man hath and not according to what he hath not” and has made forgiveness ever available, should banish constant fear of the judgment from the Christian. There is no reason to “run scared.”

We must not be deceived into thinking that our reasons for not “running scared” will EVEN cover various degrees of unfaithfulness and “non-intent” – “ignorant” sins, unrepented of, in our lives. There are numerous examples in the Bible of “ignorant” – “human weakness” sins that were not excused, but had to be repented of. Our confidence is in the loving God who has proven His love in making ever available a cleansing fountain for those in whom His love is perfected.

Guardian of Truth XXV: 18, pp. 273, 283
April 30, 1981

By Bobby Witherington

There are many forces at work in our society which seek to destroy the very fabric out of which a strong society is built, namely the home. Not the least of these forces is the so-called “Women’s Liberation Movement” which persists in ridiculing the role of a God-fearing, submissive-to-husband wife. Her work in the home is depicted as severe drudgery in the slavish performance of never-ending jobs, and even the mentality of those wives whose lives are built around husband and children is questioned.

However, notwithstanding the repetitious harangue of today’s carping critics, no role is more important and meaningful than that of a loving, faithful wife and mother. And when all priorities are properly placed and pursued, no role brings greater joy – nor does any role bring greater misery when such are ignored or have been twisted out of focus.

The Importance of A Good Wife And Mother

Solomon said, “Whoso findeth a wife findeth a good thing, and obtaineth favor of the Lord” (Prov. 18:22). Of course, whether or not one “findeth a good thing” when he “findeth a wife” depends upon what kind of a wife he finds! But he who finds a wife whose character and conduct is like unto that of the “virtuous woman” described in Proverbs 31 has, indeed, found a good thing.

Perhaps the importance of a good wife is best illustrated by observing man’s state before woman was created. Regarding the first man Adam, God said, “It is not good that the man should be alone; I will make an help meet for him” (Gen. 2:18). Because of this statement, someone has observed that “the only thing God ever made that was not good was a bachelor!” Of course, this is not intended as a slur on the character of any God-fearing male who has chosen to remain unmarried. In fact, there are times and circumstances which could make it unwise for one to marry (cf. Matt. 19:10-12; 1 Cor. 7:1, 26). However, the very fact that Eve was created to be “an help meet” for Adam implies that Adam, while alone, lacked that which was necessary to find complete fulfillment. Naturally, apart from “an help meet,” Adam could not “multiply and replenish the earth” (Gen. 1:28). But Eve was not merely a sex object whose sole role was to complete what was lacking in the procreation realm. There was the need for companionship -the kind which could only be provided by a person of the opposite sex. Man needs a counterpart, who possesses definite, but controlled, emotions and refinement, as well as an awareness of the spiritual and the eternal. Even if the infinite wisdom of God had conceived of a way whereby the human species could have been perpetuated without the aid of woman, what kind of a world would this be if the human “family” consisted strictly of the masculine gender? In brief, how many men would care to live in a society composed strictly of men?

Such reasoning as the above is not intended to imply that a man is inherently more important than a woman, or that woman’s principle mission in life is to serve man. In Christ, all racial, social, and sexual distinctions are broken down, thereby enabling all to be “one in Christ Jesus” (Gal. 3:28, 29). Of course, there are still distinctions as to function, but not as to equality. “Male chauvinism” is as contrary to the divine will as “women’s liberation.” Whether some like it or not, women are a part of “mankind,” and both genders of the human species must first recognize their responsibility to serve God, as well as their mutual dependance upon and need for one another.

However, lest verbosity has camouflaged the subject, we state again that we are discussing the importance of a good wife and mother. Perhaps at this point we should mentally underline the word “mother.” Merely the ability to bear children does not make a female a mother. I heard of one aid to dependent children recipient who filled out the necessary government forms. She brazenly answered the “occupation” blank with one word – “breeder!” Yes, she had borne children, but who in his right mind would call her a mother? A sleazy, slothful, beverage-sipping slouch, who co-habits with whatever human misfit that happens to be around so she can collect more government money so that she can perpetuate her immoral existence, is not a mother. She is nothing short of a leach, a parasite, and a disgrace to the human species. And few, if any, are more to be pitied than her offspring. The same tragedy is usually repeated in the next generation. Of course, these statements are not intended to cast reflections upon any God-fearing lady who, because of a combination of unfortunate events, must reluctantly accept government aid. There is a vast difference between a morally upright victim of circumstances, and a lazy, amoral slob who believes the world owes her (or him) a living.

But who can place a price tag on the value of a good wife and mother? “Her price is far above rubies” (Prov. 31:10). Before there was a Samuel, there was a Hannah who prayed for a child and vowed to “give him unto the Lord” (1 Sam. 1:10). Before there was a Moses, there was a Jochebed whose courage and maternal love was sufficient to cause her to defy Pharaoh’s evil decree (Ex. 2:1-3; 6:20). Before there was a Timothy, there was a Lois and an Eunice (2 Tim. 1:5). And what greater tribute could be paid woman than was paid when God chose a virgin named Mary as the one through whom would come the long-awaited Messiah (Matt. 1:20-23)?

Someone has observed that behind every successful man, there is a good woman. Frequently there are two good women – one a mother, and the other a wife. The man, who can truthfully say that “the two women whom I admire most are my mother and the mother of my children,” is one who is indeed fortunate.

But What Constitutes A Good Wife and Mother?

The answer is partially given in Titus 2:4, 5 wherein the apostle Paul admonished the aged women to “teach the young women to be sober, to love their husbands, to love their children, to be discreet, chaste, keepers at home, good, obedient to their own husbands, that the word of God be not blasphemed.”

“To be sober” is to be wise and temperate. It is to have one’s desires and passions under control; it is a quality which helps enable one to comply with the other character and duty requirements.

“To love their husbands. ” Paul did not say to “love someone else’s husband.” Where there is love, a marriage can survive sickness, in-law interference, a rigid schedule, and financial adversity. But it does not take much to destroy a marriage in which love has grown cold.

“To love their children. ” It seems strange that some must be taught to “love their children!” It comes easy and natural for God-fearing people. But when people cease “to retain God in their knowledge,” it is but a few steps until they are also “without natural affection” (Rom. 1:28, 31). In an age such as this, when so many “feminists” (?) are demeaning the role of a mother who is “tied at home because of her children,” it is more needful than ever to teach women to “love their children.”

“To be discreet.” “As a jewel of gold in a swine’s snout, so is a fair woman which is without discretion” (Prov. 11:22). The picture of a hog wearing a jewel of gold in his snout would be laughable – were it not for what it illustrates.

“Chaste. ” This is from a word which means pure in heart and life. This quality will be evidenced in speech, conduct, and dress. Someone has observed that “women should be chaste, not chased!” If they are chaste in their dress, they are not as likely to be chased by the ungodly element of the opposite sex.

“Keepers at home. ” Women should be attentive to domestic concerns. This expression is not parallel to the expression “stayers at home.” Of course, this writer is not encouraging women to unnecessarily leave the home and join the public work force. But let it be understood that these expressions are not identical in meaning. Some who stay at home also stay glued to their daily soap operas (whose sole plot is centered around somebody being untrue to his or her mate). Some stay on the telephone, and about the only thing they “keep” is their nose in other people’s business! But “keepers at home,” who truly live up to what the expression implies, are the unsung heroines of today’s world.

“Good. ” What better character quality to possess! One who is morally upright, whose ambition centers more in pleasing God than pursuing a career. People “do good” (Gal. 6:10) because they are good. It takes a “good tree” to produce “good fruit” (Matt. 7:17), and it also takes a good woman to make a good wife and mother. To marry an immoral person, expecting her to make a good wife and mother, is as non-sensible as using rotten wood to build a good house. Young man, if you want a good home you should at least start out with the right building material!

“Obedient to their own husbands. ” I did not say that. Paul did. And he wrote “the commandments of God” (1 Cor. 14:37). This, of course, does not give the husband permission to be an unfeeling brute, or a domineering tyrant. But obedience to God includes obedience to those whom God has placed over us. I do not know which is worse, a hen-pecked husband or a hen-pecking wife! Perhaps it is a tie. But no young lady should marry the kind of person she cannot submit to. Nor should any young man marry a young lady who either does not know, or else does not respect, God’s instructions regarding spiritual and domestic headship (1 Cor. 11:3; Eph. 5:22-25).

“That the word of God be not blasphemed.” To blaspheme is to show contempt for, to speak evil of. The idea is that even the word of God is evil spoken of when those who profess to believe it disregard its domestic instructions.

Conclusion

Time and space would fail me to describe the blessings and joys that good wives and mothers have brought to this world. Where would we be, and what would we be, without them? The wise man “hit the nail on the head” when he said “her price is far above rubies” (Prov. 31:10).

In fact, it would be appropriate to conclude by referring our readers to Proverbs 31:10-31 wherein such a woman is vividly described. The woman of this chapter is virtuous, trustworthy, beneficent, thrifty, energetic, prudent, well-dressed, unselfish, kind, an early riser, and does not have a lazy bone in her body. No wonder “her children arise up and call her blessed.” And no wonder “her husband . . . praiseth her” (v. 28). And we do, too!

Guardian of Truth XXV: 17, pp. 267-268
April 23, 1981

By Earl E. Robertson

Leroy Garrett of Dallas, Texas has been in print before the brotherhood for many years. About all of his writings have been through his own papers. In all of these years, Leroy has been wrong on about every thing he has written about. He swings from one extreme to another, missing the truth in every swing. Yet, in spite of this he feels that he should be heard and accepted to the salvation of our souls and unity of the brotherhood. The Lord talked about blind leaders of the blind, saying, “And if the blind lead the blind, both shall fall into the ditch” (Matt. 15:14).

Now Leroy proposes to lead us all to the conclusion that baptism in water is not essential for salvation. He tells us of Ralph Reed who is involved in the work of the Wycliffe translators. Ralph told Leroy “that the Wycliffe program is not open to anyone who believes that anything more than faith in Christ is essential to salvation.” Leroy responds, “I am not disturbed over the position taken by Wycliffe, but over the impression people have of our doctrine of baptism.” Leroy says that if anyone should ask us if we believe that baptism is essential to salvation, “We should say no because we speak as the scriptures speak, and the Bible nowhere says that baptism is essential.” Leroy further assumes, “There is not one person in a thousand among us in Churches of Christ – Christian Churches who believes that such a person will go to hell for not being baptized. This being the case, we do not believe absolutely, that one must be baptized to be saved . . . . It is a very vulnerable, judgmental religion that consigns them all to hell. I am convinced that the vast majority in the Church of Christ do not hold such a legalistic position.” Again, he says, “Too, if baptism is an absolute must for going to heaven, even the hands of almighty God are tied.” And, “God can fill heaven with unbaptized people if he chooses to do so.” After all of this foolishness expressed by Leroy, he says we should just read the passages in which baptism is discussed with “no explanations” on our part. He says there is nothing holy about our interpretations and that “we have yet to demonstrate that we really believe that the Bible itself is sufficient.”

Leroy has more respect for the unbelief of the Wycliffe people than he does for the very word of God itself! While they say only faith in Christ is necessary for salvation, the word of God says baptism is “for the remission of sins”; but Leroy says, “I’m not disturbed over their position!” It is obvious that there is a difference between “their position” and the Lord’s position of this subject! Leroy sees the difference but likes what the Wycliffe people say about it in preference to what the Lord Himself says about it.

With this attitude toward the sacred writings, he has the nerve to set himself forth as a leader of God’s people! Again, we call to your attention the statement of the Lord: “And if the blind lead the blind, both shall fall into the ditch.”

For him to say that “we have yet to demonstrate that we really believe that the Bible itself is sufficient” is a mere effort to cause the people to think as he is acting: the Bible really isn’t sufficient. The Bible isn’t absolute with Leroy and that is the reason he isn’t “disturbed” over the denials the Wycliffe people make concerning the essentially of baptism. Leroy, if baptism is not absolutely essential to one’s salvation, is any thing at all absolutely essential? If so, what? How do you know it is absolutely essential? Are the answers to the absolutes of salvation found only within each individuals own particular situation? This is the way he determined that baptism was essential for himself! What bombastic presumption of a blind guide!

We have no hesitation in saying that the word of God is alive and active (Heb. 4:12), and that it is the voice of God to man. It is the final authority pertaining to man’s salvation. It will stand when all else passes (Matt. 24:35) and be the standard of judgment (John 12:48; Rom. 2:16). We have no appeal from it; it is absolute. It definitely teaches that baptism is essential to salvation. Do not the Master’s own words make baptism absolutely necessary for salvation? He declared, “Go ye into all the world, and preach the gospel to every creature. He that believeth and is baptized shall be saved; but he that believeth not shall be damned” (Mk. 16:15, 16). Every false teacher will make “believeth” absolutely necessary but deny the same for baptism in this verse. Does the copulative conjunction “and” not properly function here in Jesus’ statement? Leroy holds a Phd., but watch him rip the Saviour’s statement apart and categorize the commandments. Though Jesus makes “believeth” and “baptized” essential to “he shall be saved,” the blind guide rapes the sentence and comes out with only “believeth.” For one to take the alternative to this destructive course, Leroy declares it to be “a very vulnerable, judgmental religion” and “legalistic.” We call it belief, receiving the word of God (cf. 1 Thess. 2:13).

The apostles of Christ were chosen by Him (John 6:70), empowered by the coming of the Holy Spirit (Lk. 24:49; John 15:26; 16:13; Acts 1:8; 2:1-4), and sent into all the world to preach the gospel (Mk. 16:15, 16; Mt. 28:18-20). Their work in this matter started at Pentecost of Acts two. They did speak as the Spirit gave them utterance (Acts 2:4). When the audience heard (Acts 2:37) what they preached, the cry was made: “Men and brethren, what shall we do?” It is obvious that the apostle Peter understood that question. He answered: “Repent, and be baptized every one of you in the name of Jesus Christ for the remission of sins, and ye shall receive the gift of the Holy Ghost” (Acts 2:38). Did the Holy Spirit really “guide” the apostle in this answer making his words “truth” (John 16:13)? Did Peter tell these sinners the truth? Was this truth absolute? All Bible believing people fully accept Peter’s statement as truth, final and absolute! We fully accept the statement that “remission of sins” depends upon both verbs: repent and be baptized. Though Leroy says, “I am convinced that the vast majority in the Church of Christ do not hold such a legalistic position” as making baptism absolutely essential to salvation, I have no hesitancy whatsoever in telling the world that the Bible teaches baptism is essential for salvation. I don’t know how this man knows what the majority in the church believes about this subject and I don’t really care and will not try to find out; it wouldn’t make any difference if every person in the world disbelieved it, because the word of Christ is absolute. Jesus did say, “he that believeth not shall be damned.” Does the disbelief of the majority give credence to the position that baptism is not absolutely necessary for salvation? Does truth really have nothing to do with being saved? Is it really within man, after all, to guide his own steps (Jer. 10:23)? These blatant voices are utterly offensive to me. Like the Psalmist we say, “The law of the Lord is perfect, converting the soul: the testimony of the Lord is sure, making wise the simple. The statutes of the Lord are right, rejoicing the heart; the commandment of the Lord is pure, enlightening the eyes. The fear of the Lord is clean, enduring for ever: the judgments of the Lord are true and righteous altogether. More to be desired are they than gold, yea, than much fine gold: sweeter also than honey and the honeycomb” (Psa. 19:7-10).

Guardian of Truth XXV: 17, pp. 265-266
April 23, 1981

By Donald P. Ames

After the poor selection that was offered last year, it is a real pleasure to report that all three VBS kits being reviewed this year are full of good material. The Guardian of Truth Foundation has decided not to bother with the Sweet Publishing Company material this year in view of the poor quality in previous years and the lack of orders for it. However, we have received the kits from Gospel Teacher, Quality and Lambert. I offer here my own personal evaluation of them for your consideration.

Gospel Teacher: “Standing On The Promises Of God”

Designed to build confidence and trust in God as One Who will keep His promises, this set is very impressive. It is attractively laid out, and the cut-outs are pre-stamped for the Nursery class so they can be easily removed by the kids in class. There is little emphasis on fun for the sake of fun, but rather more emphasis on learning – even in the lower grades. A list of all needed materials is contained at the beginning of each lesson to avoid the last minute search for something that might have been overlooked, and a number of songs that can be sung to popular tunes most of us are familiar with are included in the back of the nursery booklets.

It deals with God’s promise to send the Savior and its fulfillment, to become our Father (upon obedience to the gospel), to provide for our needs (with some very good material to cause us to appreciate what He has given us needed badly in this age of material pursuits!), to build the church (and not a denomination), and that Christ will return (this has some excellent material in refutation to the false theory of premillennialism, the rapture, etc.) from about Juniors on up. An adult booklet is also included for those desiring an adult class too. You will not be disappointed in this set.

Quality Publishing Company: “My Jesus, I Will Live For Thee”

Quality’s material is good in that it is designed for about 2/2 hours so that there is adequate material on hand for longer sessions (in case you are one of those who always get through too soon). It also has time allocations on the side of the page if you do not have the longer sessions so that you can adjust accordingly. Material for the lower classes is not pre-stamped, and a heavy part of the work is clearly on the teacher. Food (i.e., making orange juice, etc.) is part of the lower class activities, but can be dropped and not materially affect the lesson.

The material deals with our daily living as a Christian, and emphasizes the Christian living and loving, your influence, living at home, your living and your relationship with the church, and your living and getting along with others. Although it is still designed for use with the RSV, again special sections are included for use with the KJV also for those using that translation.

The adult class is built around the booklet by Neal Pryor, “You Can Trust The Bible,” divided into five lessons, and totally independent of the other class studies. This booklet has some excellent material on how we got the Bible, why the extra Catholic books are not included, other pseudo books, confirmations of the Bible and refutation of later revelations. It also defends some modern translations (for those who think the KJV is the only inspired translation), and points out the history of translations. The NASB gets passing commendation, while a strong defense is made for the RSV and some of the short-comings of the KJV are pointed out in good taste. It does fail to even mention the perversions of the Living Bible Paraphrased at all, and while defending the over-all present day translations (“all have some bad in them – look for the good”), the Good News For Modern Man is again casually slipped in the list of acceptable (?) modern translations. One area I clearly felt was out of line was his effort to explain the inspiration of the Bible and some of the theories of how (this could have been stronger), and the inclusion of the following comments (p. 12):

The dictation theory would leave the impression that one day God said to Paul, “All right, Paul, get your pen out; today we are going to write I Corinthians. Start off now: `The apostle Paul. . .”‘ Paul writes. “To the church of God.” “At Corinth.” “How do you spell Corinth, Lord?” “C-o-r-i-n-t-h.” Surely, this was not the way the Bible was written …. In fact, different levels of ability can be seen in the writing. Luke would probably get a grade of A; he is one of the best. Paul would get a B + . Some say that Hebrews could not have been written by Paul because it is in too polished a style for Paul. James is good; I Peter is good; but 2 Peter is not all that good. The epistles of John are in good style, but Revelation seems to have some grammatical errors in it (emphasis mine DPA).

It has some good material that can be helpful in creating respect for others and making us think of our example. Personally, though, I prefer the other two kits myself. Some might benefit also from the adult booklet in getting a background of how we got our Bible – even if not used for a V.B.S. class.

Lambert Publishing Company: “Does God Live At Your House?”

The material in this kit is strictly designed to improve the fading family relationship – to create a feeling of love and appreciation for one another, the proper fulfillment of our God-given roles, and to strive to restore the family unit again in society. It has some very excellent material in it especially in the teenage and adult booklets! Problems of rebellion, leadership, love and consideration for one another, as well as obedience to parents are well handled. Emphasis is placed on a home where God is (what is required for God to be seen in your home), agape love or what is really love, the role of the husband-father (and the failure of some men to properly fulfill that role), the role of the wife-mother (and the abuses some have taken in this relationship, or out of it), and the goal of surrendering our homes to God to make them the kind of homes He would have them to be.

It also includes the adult booklets (that would be a good class!), as well as the list of needed materials at the head of each lesson (as did the other two). The cut-outs for the lower grades are not pre-stamped, making a lot of work for the teacher. On the other hand, they are not difficult and are very appropriate to the lessons. Some good illustrations are used to make battling brothers and sisters pause and think of improving the family.

Conclusion

Again, we wish to stress that we are not trying to dictate which set of materials ought to be used – that each congregation is free to decide for themselves. However, it is hoped by such reviews to not only put the publishers on notice that their material will be analyzed publicly before usage for error, but also to point out such errors as they are discovered and to warn brethren. It is also hoped by such a review to help you in selecting which kit might lie more appropriate to your particular needs and interests. You can order your V.B.S. materials from the Guardian of Truth bookstore, Box 88, Fairmount, IN 46928 (1-800-428-0121).

Guardian of Truth XXV: 17, pp. 264-265
April 23, 1981