Truth Magazine

By Billy C. Williams

Before I answer Weldon Warnock’s last article, it is necessary to explain the role each one plays in this exchange. It is not unlike a jury trial in which there are prosecutor, defendant, jury and judge. In this case, Weldon assumes the stance of prosecutor, I am the defendant and the readers are the jury. The judge? I think Weldon wants that job too. Because I was accused, I am on the defensive and am forced to answer and explain. Always in such cases it is presumed that the accuser is correct in his views and the accused is wrong. The accused must answer yes or no to the charges. And upon that evidence alone he is pronounced guilty. Thus, it was put to me that I will be allowed to “exonerate” myself, meaning I can either plead guilty or recant. Well, you can be sure this defendant has no intention of letting anyone dictate his answers. Too many questions and accusations were made to answer all in this small space. So just the major points will be covered.

Since he hinted that I was “fired” by a church because I taught false doctrine, I must say something, though I had hoped it would not be necessary. Weldon’s flippant remark that I was not fired “because of the way he parted his hair,” is unbecoming. It is still true that no one would say that I taught false doctrine. The only “point of doctrine” brought against me was that I condemned in general the partyism and factious spirit so prevalent in the church today. But if Weldon wants to talk about it we could discuss the out-of-town preachers who interfered and the un-Christlike conduct of a few in and out of the congregation. But I do not think he really wants to talk about that.

He asks three questions wanting to know if I condemn members of the Christian Church for using instrumental music, and premillennial and institutional brethren. Such questions are asked because he believes one must “strictly and faithfully” obey all commandments to be saved. When this type of question is asked, I get the distinct impression that it is feared someone will be saved who does not deserve it. Is it possible that some wretched perverter of truth will rise from the dead, overpower the host of heaven, and walk through the Pearly Gates in defiance of God?

To answer his questions: If one deliberately and wilfully disobeys God’s law or does presumptuous sin (presuming to change or act in defiance of God’s laws), he is surely condemned as long as he continues in that sin (Num. 15:22-30; Heb. 10:26ff). But if he, in ignorance, transgresses God’s law while earnestly desiring to serve Him faithfully, I do not find any passage that allows me to condemn him. He is no more a sinner than I am. And we are both guilty (Rom. 3:10, 23). Many people want to judge others according to their own understanding. But our Lord specifically warned against it (Matt. 7:1-5). For one to demand of others perfect obedience to all of God’s commandments (as he sees it), he commits a twofold error. In the first place, the individual must understand completely all of God’s Word. What man or woman has ever lived, besides Christ, who could claim such knowledge? Is my salvation and yours dependent upon intellectual supremacy? The second error is the assumption that anyone can in fact obey God perfectly. If anyone ever could perfectly obey God in all things, without sin, then why did Christ suffer for us? Let us be careful of our presumptions and demands.

Some have turned the Lord’s church into a business or social club to satisfy their own lusts; some seek to be entertained by their instruments of music and know nothing of worshiping God in song; others dethrone the Christ and say He died because He failed. These all stand self-condemned! But there are faithful brethren who honestly believe they can use institutions in the church, worship with instruments, or that Christ will return and reign over an earthly kingdom. Are they condemned because they do not understand these things as I do? I do not presume to so judge them. The understanding of each one is different and at different levels of growth. Are we all supposed to have the same knowledge? It is impossible!

Brother Warnock readily condemns those who use instruments or support institutions. Why does he stop there? What about the covering, one cup, or women’s slacks? Will he also condemn those who disagree with him on those issues? I would really like to know his answer to that one. If he will not condemn them, then just what makes one issue worse than another? If we all accept Christ and trust in Him, why is one ostracized and another fellowshipped?

Now what has all this got to do with the plan of salvation? There is a logical connection. If the “Plan” is BRCB then it is a ritual to be jealously defended. But if the Plan is Christ, the “ritual” becomes our natural and logical response to the Plan, namely Christ’s sacrifice for us. And if Christ is the Plan we will reject sectarianism and become only Christians.

Weldon states that he has never known one Christian who believes we earn salvation, and challenges me to name one. Now pay close attention to the following:

He distinguishes between who and what saves. The who is Christ (bless his heart!), and the “what is several things.” Then he gives “conditions” – grace, gospel, word, work, faith, baptism, and ourselves. Skipping over his misuse of some scriptures, I will say that those things are valid only as they relate to Christ and His work of righteousness (2 Cor. 5:14-21). Then Weldon quotes me as I quoted from Eph. 2 and says “Peter says differently. Listen to an apostle,” – and he quotes Acts 10:35. Dear reader, who wrote Ephesians? Wasn’t it Paul? Wasn’t he an apostle too? He is still having trouble convincing folks of his apostleship. Then Weldon says that teaching BRCB is “telling people what . . . they must obey in order to be saved,” “emphasis is placed on keeping the commandments of God.” He quotes and misquotes some passages in John and 1 John. Then he says, “Jesus saves our souls by obedience to his commands.” Under the new law . . . we have forgiveness by obeying his commandments in order to appropriate his grace . . . . Jesus’s law is a law of grace wherein forgiveness is offered . . . by obedient faith.”

Notice carefully what he has said. He claims that command keeping is our salvation. And the specific commands he has reference to are belief-repentance-confession-baptism. According to Warnock, we are forgiven because we obeyed (BRCB) and thereby appropriated His grace. His use of “appropriate” is interesting. It means to take possession of. Does he mean that one who has done BRCB takes possession of God’s grace and thus owns His favor because of that obedience? Think about it.

Brethren, I think I have found one who believes that BRCB is what saves us and we thereby earn salvation. Furthermore, look at his phrase “law of grace.” If he meant the principle of grace, he would be right. But I think he means a system of legal grace whereby we merit grace through law keeping. Read Gal. 2:16-21; Rom. 3:20-31; 6:14. In these passages and others the original language omits the article “the” with “law;” which means it is talking about the principle of law, and it is not arguing for one law against another law (Christ against Moses).

Weldon quotes from 1 Jn. 3:22, 24 omitting vs. 23. Read it. The command to obey is stated.

I have not said that we do not have to obey God’s commands. We most certainly do. But we are not saved by our command-keeping. We are saved by Christ’s commandkeeping (Heb. 10:7). Because salvation by law-keeping is possible only by perfect obedience and we cannot do it. (Rom. 3:23: 4:4; Gal. 3:10, 11; Jas. 1:10). Christ kept law perfectly and made atonement for sin (Heb. 9:22-28). So we turn to Christ and through Him gain salvation. We begin by responding naturally and logically to His work of love. BRCB is not works of righteousness (Phil. 3:9; Tit. 3:5; Gal. 3:23-29). There is no merit in our doing of those things. Instead those things point to the One who does merit God’s approval (Matt. 3:17; 17:5; Heb. l; Rev. 5)

Let us stop preaching salvation by command-keeping and start preaching salvation by Christ. Stop proclaiming a “plan” that we do and start praising God for His glorious work of salvation.

I have stated clearly that BRCB is only our response to Christ. Christ is our Lord and Savior and we must honor him in all that we do, which includes righteous living. We are not created anew in Christ to do evil but righteousness (Rom. 6; 1 Jn. 2:6; 3:1-10). Doing righteousness is the result of our new relationship to Christ. It is not the cause of our salvation.

Why would anyone argue against salvation in Christ?

Who is your Savior? Is it Christ or BRCB?

Truth Magazine XXIII: 19, pp. 311-312
May 10, 1979

By Weldon E. Warnock

Well, Brother Billy Williams has been finally “smoked out of the woodpile.” All can now see his true color (if they want to). His article in Truth Magazine made it crystal clear where he stands.

He had crept into the Sciotoville church at Portsmouth, Ohio, unawares, and almost immediately began laying the groundwork to take the church into the Ketcherside Arnold Hardin-Edward Fudge Camp. Before he was able to accomplish this task, the brethren detected his strategy and terminated his services. Billy said in his article, “And no one would say (at Sciotoville) that I taught false doctrine.” They did not fire him because of the way he parted his hair. Billy is now a member where Arnold Hardin preaches. That tells us something.

As you observed from Brother Williams’ article, he does not like to put emphasis on law, commandments and obedience. There is a reason for this. If a person must strictly and faithfully abide in the commandments of the Lord to be saved, then Billy would not be able to find room for the salvation of the Christian Church people, the premillennial brethren or the institutional brethren. By relying on the grace of Christ and his righteousness, sincere baptized believers are accepted by Christ, even though they are not keeping all of His commandments. Is not this what you believe, Billy?

Brother Williams, I ask you some questions and be man enough to face them head-on.

(1) Are members of the Christian Church who trust in the blood and righteousness of Christ, condemned, even though they use instrumental music in worship? Now come on, and answer this question forthrightly.

(2) Are the premillennial brethren who trust in the blood and righteousness of Christ, condemned, even though they deny that Jesus is now King, deny the kingdom is now here and the church is just an accident?

(3) Are the institutional brethren who pervert the organization of the church, condemned, even though they trust in the blood of Christ and his righteousness?

Brother Williams, I am not asking whether you believe instrumental music in worship, or premillennialism or church support of human institutions is wrong, but rather whether you believe those people are condemned who espouse those false doctrines? I challenge you to answer these questions.

Now then, let us address ourselves more to his article in particular. Nobody among us denies that Jesus is Savior and Redeemer. Billy, you are “riding a dead horse” and “milking a dry cow” to accuse brethren of such. Nobody in the church believes what you are implying. I have never known of one Christian, and neither has Billy Williams, who believes that belief, repentance, confession and baptism are our Savior or that we earn salvation. Name one, Billy?

All my brethren teach that Jesus saves, but He saves conditionally. These conditions constitute the plan (method, procedure) of salvation that the sinner is to obey. Billy does not know the difference, seemingly, between who saves and what saves. The who is Jesus (Mt. 1:21; 1 Tim. 1:15). The what is several things. All work together in the forgiveness of our sins by Jesus. Notice:

(1) Grace saves. “. . . . by grace ye are saved” (Eph. 2:5).

(2) Gospel saves: ” . . . . it is the power of God unto salvation . . .” (Rom. 1:16).

(3) Word saves: ” . . . . receive with meekness the engrafted word, which is able to save your souls” (Jas. 1:21).

(4) Works save: ” . . . . though a man say he hath faith, and have not works? can faith save him” (Jas. 2:14)?

(5) Faith Saves: ” . . . . believe in thine heart that God hath raised him from the dead, thou shalt be saved” (Rom. 10:9).

(6) Baptism saves: ” . . . . baptism doth also now save us . . .” (1 Pet. 3:21).

(7) Save ourselves: ” . . . . Save yourselves from this untoward generation” (Acts 2:40). Brethren, if we would just let the Bible speak for itself, and accept it, we would have no problems.

True, nowhere is the phrase, “plan of salvation,” found in the Bible. However, Billy uses it, anyway. He says the notion is in Eph. 1:3-14. That is true in a broad sense. But the notion (to use his word) is also found in a limited sense in Acts 2:36-38; 16:30-33; 22:10-16, referring to conditions. God has a plan (conditions of pardon) for alien sinners to meet. Peter told the Jews on Pentecost to “save yourselves” (Acts 2:40). In other words, comply with the conditions of pardon. Billy, may the requirements for a sinner to be saved be called, “a plan”?

Brother Williams said, “We are not saved by works (Eph. 2:8-10). Any works.” Well, Brother Peter says differently. Listen to an apostle: “But in every nation he that feareth him, and worketh (emp. mine) righteousness, is accepted with him” (Acts 10:35). Brother James wrote, “Ye see then how that by works a man is justified, and not by faith only” (Jas. 2:24). It is hard to believe that Brother Williams made such a statement in direct contradiction to the Word of God.

Gospel obedience is not meritorious works. No one is turning BRCB into works of merit, but telling lost people what our Savior said they must obey in order to be saved. Billy, you are “barking up the wrong tree.” You are chasing a track that is not even there. You are not even cold trailing.

Preaching Christ crucified is preaching His Word. When the apostles and others preached what a man must do to be saved, they were preaching Christ. When Philip preached Jesus to the Samaritans (Acts 8:5, 12), he preached the kingdom, the name of Jesus and baptism. Philip later preached Jesus to the Eunuch, and among other things, he preached baptism (Acts 8:34-39). Certainly, he preached Christ and Him crucified, but in that sermon he preached baptism. Peter commanded Cornelius and household to be baptized (Acts 10:48). Billy says baptism is a response. Why not call it a command?

Paul had to do a little preaching on baptism at Ephesus to get those disciples straightened out on the difference between John’s baptism and Christ’s baptism. Of course, they had to get their faith right – faith in a resurrected Christ. So do we.

When we preach belief, repentance, confession, baptism, we are preaching that a person has to have (1) faith in the divinity of Jesus (Jn. 8:24), faith in His humanity (1 Jn. 4:2), faith in His blood (Rom. 3:24-25) and faith in His resurrection (Rom. 10:9), (2) a turning from sin to Christ in the act of repentance (Acts 17:30-31), (3) a declaration of the Lordship and Sonship of Jesus (Acts 8:37), and, (4) baptism into Christ to appropriate the blood and be saved by his grace (Rom. 6:3-4).

Billy, what is wrong with the preceding doctrine – the four points? You say, “Our `plan’ (BRCB) is no better than anybody else’s `plan’.” I would bow my head in shame for advocating that God’s plan, as outlined above, is no better than the plans of a bunch of sectarians. Can you blame the brethren at Portsmouth, Ohio for asking Brother Williams to move? We commend their courage and love for the truth.

In the New Testament much emphasis is placed on keeping the commandments of God. Jesus said, “if ye love me, keep my commandments” (Jn. 14:15). “He that hath my commandments, and keepeth them, he it is that loveth me . . .” (Jn. 14:21). “If a man love me, he will keep my words . . .” (Jn. 14:23). “If ye keep my commandments, ye shall abide in my love . . .” (Jn. 15:10). Love for Jesus is shown by law-keeping. Is one meriting Jesus’ love by strict adherence to His commandments? Certainly not!

John wrote, “And hereby we do know that we know him, if we keep his commandments” (1 Jn. 2:3). “And whatsoever we ask, we receive of him, because we keep his commandments, and do those things that are pleasing in his sight. And he that keepeth his commandments dwelleth in him, and he in him . . .” (1 Jn. 3:22-23). “By this we know that we love the children of God, when we love God, and keep his commandments” (I Jn. 5:2). “And this is love, that we walk after his commandments . . .” (2 Jn. 6).

If preaching obedience to the commandments of God makes me a legalist, then I am a legalist. Whatever doing the will of the Lord makes me, I am it! I offer no apologies. Jesus saves our souls by obedience to His commands. “Blessed are they that do his commandments that they may have right to the tree of life, and may enter in through the gates into the city” (Rev. 22:14, emp. mine). Jesus is the “author of eternal salvation unto all them that obey him” (Heb. 5:9).

Peter wrote, “Seeing ye have purified your souls in obeying the truth through the Spirit . . .” (1 Pet. 1:22). Paul told Timothy, “Take heed unto thyself, and unto the doctrine; continue in them: for in doing this thou shalt both save thyself, and them that hear thee” (1 Tim. 4:16).

Poor old John, Peter and Paul. They did not know that when people obey the commands of God that they are earning their salvation by doing meritorious works. They had not read Baptists manuals or heard Baptist preachers.

The following quotations will show us where Brother Williams is getting his doctrine. In fact, the quotes sound about like what Brother Williams wrote.

Pendleton’s Baptist Church Manual, p. 48: “. . . that justification includes the pardon of sin, and the promise of eternal life on principles of righteousness; that it is bestowed, not in consideration of any works of righteousness which we have done, but solely through faith in the Redeemer’s blood; by virtue of which faith in his perfect righteousness is free imputed to us of God.”

Philadelphia Confession of Faith, pp. 30-31: “. . . and by accounting and accepting their persons as righteous; not for anything wrought in them, or done by them, but for Christ sake alone.”

Brother Williams stated that Jesus nailed the law to the cross and gave a system of grace. Is he trying to tell us that we do not have to obey law now, but just rely on God’s grace? I am aware that Jesus nailed the law of Moses to the cross, but He did not nullify law. Paul said, “Do we then make void law through faith? God forbid: Yea, we establish law” (Rom. 3:31, ASV footnote). We are under the law of Christ (1 Cor. 9:21; Gal. 6:2; Jas. 1:25).

Certainly, we are not under a system that requires perfect obedience to law for justification. That was the situation in the Old Testament (Rom. 2:13) because there was no remission of sins in it. The blood of Christ was not in the Old Testament. But under the new law, the law of Christ, we have forgiveness by obeying His commandments in order to appropriate His grace. Hence, Jesus’ law is a law of grace wherein forgiveness is offered to the violaters by obedient faith.

In conclusion, I ask you, the reader, if Brother Williams has been misrepresented? I am persuaded the unbiased can see that he was accurately portrayed. We did not misunderstand him. We knew exactly where he was coming from. Joining up with Arnold Hardin further substantiates our judgment. His accusing me of slander, dishonesty, trying to prejudice, subtlety, innuendo, lying, gossiping and backbiting, all in one article, is the best Brother Williams has in trying to defend his position. Some of his personal letters are of the same character when he is challenged.

Friends, the fox has been caught in the chicken house and he does not like it.

Truth Magazine XXIII: 19, pp. 309-310
May 10, 1979

By Mike Willis

Most of the denominational creeds and manuals specifically state that sprinkling, pouring or immersion are suitable modes of baptism. Webster’s Dictionary defines baptism as “the ceremony or sacrament of admitting a person into Christianity or a specific Christian church by dipping him in water or sprinkling water on him, as a symbol of washing away sin.” Hence, the large majority of religious people today believe that there is no importance attached to the mode of baptism, whether it be administered by sprinkling, pouring or immersion. What saith the Scriptures?

Baptism Defined

Although it is true that Webster’s Dictionary specifically defines “baptism” to mean sprinkling, pouring or immersion, one must remember that Webster’s defines the word according to its contemporary usage. There is at least a possibility that the word “baptism” has experienced a change in meaning in the many years of its usage. Hence, in defining the word “baptism” we need to be careful to find out, not what the word means in twentieth century usage, but what the word meant which Jesus used when He said, “He that believeth and is baptized shall be saved.”

The lexicons are quite clear in defining the word. Here are several definitions for the word as given by reputable lexicons:

. . . properly to dip repeatedly, to immerge, submerge . . . (Thayer, p. 94).

. . . dip, immerse . . . (Arndt and Gingrich, A Greek-English Lexicon of the New Testament and Other Early Christian Literature, p. 130).

. . . to dip, immerse . . . (Analytical Greek Lexicon, p. 65).

. . . baptism, consisting of the processes of immersion, submersion and emergence . . . (W.E. Vine, Expository Dictionary of New Testament Words, Vol. I, p. 96).

I know of absolutely no lexicographer of any reputation who defines the word group bapto, from which baptisma and baptizo are derived, in any other way than the above lexicons of the Greek language define it. Our own Webster’s Dictionary mentions that the English word is derived from the Greek word bapto which means “to dip.”

As a matter of fact, our English word baptism is not a translation of the Greek word baptisms; it is a transliteration. The difference in a translation and a transliteration is this: a translation gives the word equivalent in one language which corresponds to the meaning in another language; a transliteration simply brings the word in one language into another language, letter for letter. Hence, the word baptisma was not translated in our English Bibles into the English word equivalent, “immersion.” Rather, it was transliterated; hence, we have the English word baptism to represent the Greek word baptisma.

To further show the contemporary usage of the word baptisma in the time of Christ, consider these evidences. The following quotations were cited in The Form of Baptism by J.B. Briney (pp. 22-23); he cited the following evidences:

Pindar (522 B.C.): “For, as when the rest of the tackle is toiling deep in the sea, I, as a cork above the net, am unbaptized in the brine.”

Polybius (205 B.C.): “And even if the spear falls into the sea, it is not lost, for it is compacted of both oak and pine, so that when the oaken part is baptized by the weight, the rest is buoyed up, and is easily recovered.”

“They passed through with difficulty, the foot-soldiers baptized as far as to the breasts.”

Josephus (37 A.D.): “Continually pressing down and baptizing him while swimming, as if in sport, they did not desist till they had entirely suffocated him.”

These citations of the common usage of the word as used in the time of Christ, demonstrate that the words baptisma (baptism) and baptizo (to baptize) were understood by the first century Christians to mean “an immersion” and “to immerse.”

Scriptural Evidence Confirming These Definitions

Two specific baptisms recorded in the Scriptures demonstrate that the action of New Testament baptism was immersion. For example, read the following passages:

And Jesus, when he was baptized, went up straightway out of the water: and, lo, the heavens were opened unto him, and he saw the Spirit of God descending like a dove, and lighting upon him . . . (Matt. 3:16).

And he commanded the chariot to stand still: and they went down both into the water, both Philip and the eunuch; and he baptized him. And when they were come up out of the water, the Spirit of the Lord caught away Philip, that the eunuch saw him no more: and he went on his way rejoicing (Acts 8:38-39).

These recorded cases of New Testament baptism demonstrate that New Testament baptism required both a “going down into” and a “coming up out of” water. The very same reasons which prevent those who practice sprinkling and pouring from going down into and coming up out of water in the twentieth century would have prevented those in the first century. The action of baptism was immersion!

The things to which baptism is compared also demonstrate that the action of New Testament baptism is immersion. It is compared to (a) a burial (Rom. 6:3-4; Col. 2:12). If one buries a thing by sprinkling a little dirt on it or pouring a little dirt on it, then one might appropriately baptize by sprinkling and pouring. However, if burial is administered by totally covering the object with dirt, then baptism is an immersion in water. (b) Planting (Rom. 6:5). The New Testament compares baptism to a planting; where I grew up, when we planted something, we covered it with dirt. Hence, baptism is a covering. with water, an immersion.

Conclusion

The testimony of lexicons, contemporary writers, and the Scriptures themselves is harmonious. All of the existing evidence demonstrates that the meaning of the word baptisma is immersion. Hence, when Jesus said, “He that believeth and is baptized shall be saved,” He meant, “He that believeth and is immersed shall be saved.”

The sprinkling or pouring of a small quantity of water over a person’s head is not Bible baptism. Regardless of what good intentions the subject or administrator might have had when they participated in this ceremony, they were simply not obeying the word of the Lord. Not having obeyed the conditions laid down by Christ for salvation, there is no promise to such persons that salvation is given to them.

My friends, if you have been led to believe that something someone did to you as an infant, when they sprinkled a few drops of water in your face as you resisted their actions with all of your might, will suffice to meet the conditions of the gospel for receiving the benefits of Christ’s blood, you need to realize right now that there is not one piece of scriptural evidence that it will be accepted by the Lord God Almighty. Will you humbly submit to immersion in water for the remission of your sins in order that you might receive the remission of your sins?

Truth Magazine XXIII: 19, pp. 307-308
May 10, 1979

By Irven Lee

The doctors and other concerned citizens of our country, are trying to arouse the public with the fact that child abuse is very brutal and very widespread, Thousands of children are killed or maimed for life by angry parents who do not love them. The details of this war are not reported daily because no one knows the complete story, and the casualties are not lying along the street of some city or camp that was the point of the attack. The dead and wounded are scattered from coast to coast, and almost all of them are kept out of sight.

The victims of this war are unarmed, and they have no bomb shelter where they can hide and be in relative safety. Those destroyed by this insane slaughter are the innocent children of the land, and they suffer generally at the hands of drunk, atheistic parents who have been told since they were children that they are products of blind evolution rather than descendants of parents who were created in the image of a loving heavenly Father who would have all men come to repentance and live by the wonderful wisdom of His counsel. They are without hope and without God in this world (Eph. 2:12).

The frustrated parents were never taught to love children (Titus 2:3-5). They may have learned to look for pleasure in that which is contrary to nature rather than that which is in fellowship with God and His family. They are to be pitied as well as the unwelcome children that come to live with them. If there were some way to convert these parents to Christ so that His example and teaching could have free course in their lives, the homes would immediately turn toward the “love, joy, peace, longsuffering, gentleness, goodness, faith, meekness, and temperance” (Gal. 5:22, 23). There is no law against these traits, and people who have them would harm no one. Conversion would bring about a change which is beyond description, and this change would enrich the lives of those converted and all whose lives they touch. The children would be loved and protected rather than neglected, starved, and beaten.

“Godliness is profitable unto all things, having promise of the life that now is, and of that which is to come” (1 Tim. 4:8). The unselfish and faithful followers of Christ shall receive now in this time an hundredfold, with persecution, and in the world to come eternal life (Mark 10:28-20). The helpless children cannot teach their parents. They are destined to die early or become the vicious criminals and animal-like people of the next generation. They will learn only hate from their environment.

There are wonderful people who would delight to have these children when they first come into the world, but the children are carried into the “war zone” without their choice arid beyond the knowledge and reach of (hose who would love them. It is amazing how soon such little ones learn rebellion, hate, and ugly attitudes in the dirty homes into which they are born, it is almost impossible to remove the evil, scars of such unholy environment– and treatment that they receive early in wife even if the courts find them and make them available to wise and loving couples who desire children. The effort to help them is worthy. The physical scars are less serious then the spiritual scars of these unfortunate abused children.

It is also very difficult to get the cruel, animal-like parents with the gospel which is God’s power to change them into .saints and heirs of heaven: It is very much in order for the courts to mete out severe punishment to the guilty parents when they learn of their heartless treatment of their own children, and it is proper for the neighbors to report such criminals to the authorities because this may deter some from such conduct. The ideal is for the gospel to reach them, but they are not listening for the truth, not searching the Scriptures. These murderers of children are products of the atheism and modernism that is taught in textbooks, on television, and even in the pulpits of some of the older denominations.

Neglect of children is often found in more respectable homes. Parents are too busy in their search for money and pleasure to notice the little ones who are so hungry for attention and affection. Children from such homes may become the drug addicts, thieves, and abusers of their children in the next generation. Time spent in teaching and showing affection for children is well used. It pays great dividends.

The feminists who seek to destroy the home, the university professors who scoff at the Bible, modern vulgar entertainers who destroy the sense of moral values, and the modernistic preachers who undermine respect for the Scriptures are the productive engineers who train the soldiers in this cruel army that is engaged in this undeclared war on innocent children. If active precious faith could be instilled in the heart of every American, child abuse would stop at once. Let the truth of God be sent out in all directions to all people with all haste. Some will listen with reverence, and when they do they will glorify God and befriend the innocent. Such is the infuence of the Bible. The more abundant life is for the faithful servant of God and not for the servant of the devil. These Christians find happiness and share it with others. The unbelievers who think thay are animals are without hope, and they tend to understand only the rule of force.

Those who are guilty of child abuse are the very people who show no respect for the lives and property of adults about them. They are a selfish people with no respect for the law of God or man. Sin grows in clusters, and when one heinous crime comes to the surface it is usually accompanied by, many ,ether evidences of rebellion against the God of heaven.

Let all who have obeyed the gospel realize that their great mission in life is to encourage others to do the same. We need not expect some political party to stop the crime wave. If it is done, it will be accomplished by those who understand and obey the gospel and teach. it to others. Let us be as the salt of the earth and the light of the world.

Truth Magazine XXIII: 19, p. 306
May 10, 1979