Truth Magazine

By Tim Norman

In Titus 2:4-5, Paul admonishes young women to “love their children” and to be “homemakers.” In 1 Timothy 5:14, Paul expresses his desire for younger widows to “marry, bear children, manage the house.” A true widow deserves honor if, among other things, “she has brought up children” (1 Tim. 5:3, 10). Indeed, women are “saved in childbearing if they continue in faith, love, and holiness, with self-control” (1 Tim. 2:15).

I affirm without fear of successful contradiction that God’s plan for the home includes full-time mothering. Sadly, the value of motherhood has been grossly devalued in this country. Sadder still, the church has been affected by this ungodly, worldly attitude. Many Christian women are needlessly working outside the home and hiring others to raise their children. In the case of latchkey kids, many Christian parents are leaving their children to raise themselves.

Dr. Brenda Hunter vividly illustrates the consequences of other-than-mother care in her recently published book, Home By Choice: Facing the Effects of Mother’s Absence, Creating Emotional Security in Children (Portland, Oregon: Multnomah Press, 1991). In this article, I review and recommend this excellent book.

Parental Absence

According to William R. Mattox, Jr., “The amount of contact parents have with their children has dropped 40 percent during the last quarter century” (Home By Choice, p. 119). “One psychologist has said that never before in American history have so many children been raised by strangers” (HBC, p. 65). Dr. Hunter’s theme is simple. There is no substitute for full-time mothering. She writes, “Increasingly, child development experts are saying what many mothers and fathers have known all along – that to be fully human a child needs to be intensely loved and cared for by someone who won’t ‘pack up and leave at five o’clock.’ That someone is the child’s mother” (HBC, p. 16-17). She continues, “Babies need their mothers. They need them during their earliest years more than they need babysitters, toys, or the material comforts a second income will buy” (HBC, p. 52). She concludes, “Children thrive in their mother’s presence and suffer from her prolonged, daily absences” (HBC, p. 16).

Parental Absence and Emotional Problems

According to Harvard psychiatrist Armand Nicholi, “Individuals ‘who stiffer from severe non-organic emotional illness have one thing in common: all have experienced the ,absence of a parent through death, divorce, a time demanding job (emphasis mine, tdn) or other reasons.’ A parent’s inaccessibility, either physically, emotionally, or both ‘can profoundly influence a child’s emotional health'” (HBC, p. 28). British psychiatrist John Bowlby explains, “‘The young child’s hunger for his mother’s love and presence is as great as his hunger for food’ and that her loss or absence ‘inevitably generates a powerful sense of loss and anger'” (HBC, p. 26). According to Dr. Hunter, “Absence does not make the heart grow fonder. Instead, absence generates profound feelings of rejection and a yearning for love that can dominate the whole of life” (HBC, p. 28). Dr. Hunter concludes, “The evidence is mounting that these separations do their damage – that the cost of separation in early childhood is high” (HBC, p. 62).

What is the evidence? Dr. Hunter summarizes it as follows, “Studies such as the one conducted by J. C. Schwarz and his colleagues have shown that older children who entered day care before they were twelve months old are more physically and verbally abusive toward adults, less cooperative with grownups, and less tolerant of frustration than their counterparts who were cared for by their mothers. Another long term study of kindergartners and first graders found that those who had been in a high quality day care facility since they were three months old were more aggressive than those who had begun day care later on. These early care children were ‘more likely to . . . hit, kick, and push than children in the control group, Second, they were more likely to threaten, swear, and argue.’ Teachers said that these early day care children did not have strategies for dealing with their angry feelings; instead of talking about how they felt or walking away, they lashed out” (HBC, p. 64).

After reviewing the evidence, Dr. Jay Belsky, professor of human development at Penn State University, said “that placing a baby in a day care during his first year may erode his sense of trust and order in the world. This may also lead to later personality maladjustment. Belsky wrote in Zero to Three, ‘Children who initiated care in the first year, the evidence suggested to me, seemed at risk not only for insecurity but for heightened aggression, noncompliance, and possibly social withdrawal in the preschool and early school years… (HBC, p. 54). When is parental absence excessive’? Dr. Hunter answers, “The evidence since 1980 indicates that when a baby is placed in substitute care, even good quality care such as nanny care, for twenty or more hours per week during his first year of life, he is at risk psychologically” (HBC, p. 62). John Bowlby, the only psychiatrist to have twice received the American Psychiatric Association’s highest award, the Adolph Meyer Award, offers this advice: “I don’t recommend at all that a mother return to work during the baby’s first year. What’s important . . . is what’s optimal for the child, not what the mother can get away with” (HBC, p. 54). Interestingly, “Two studies have found that boys are particularly vulnerable when mother goes to work during that important first year” (HBC, p. 63).

When is some parental absence tolerable? According to Dr. Hunter, the consensus of experts at an infancy conference concluded “that a mother should stay home, if at all possible, until attachment was consolidated at two to three years of age” (HBC, p. 67). Selma Frailberg, famous for her intervention with wounded mothers, believes “that while a baby needs his mother most of the time before age three, ‘around age three, but sometimes later, most children can tolerate a half day’s absence.’ Once a child has learned to trust his mother, he can transfer some of that trust to others . . . a child of three also has the cognitive capacity to know his absent mother will return. Moreover, at this stage of development, a child is interested in playing with other children” (HBC, p. 68).

A word to fathers. In a July 24, 1991 radio interview with Dallas talk show host David Gold, Dr. Hunter underscored the following warning: “If dads are not close to their children when those children are young, they probably will not be close to them emotionally when they are teenagers.

Parental Absence and the Parent/Child Relationship

Other-than-mother care not only imperils children emotionally, but also risks the parent/child relationship. Dr. Hunter writes, “It matters that a mother is present, both physically and emotionally, during her child’s early life. If she is . . . absent for long hours each day, her relationship with her child will be affected (HBC, p. 28). Dr. Hunter warns, “Too early other-than-mother care has its dark, problematic side. Since the early eighties researchers have found that about half of the babies who enter outside care in the first twelve months of life are insecurely attached to mother and/or father” (HBC, p. 49). Dr. Hunter explains, “No matter how much feminists have tried in the past two decades to erase sexual differences, biology dictates that a woman carry her baby inside her body until birth. Her breasts provide milk. (Her husband’s never do.) Moreover, a woman’s baby is programmed to fall in love with her. During that first year, a mother isn’t just feeding, diapering, and playing with her baby. She is teaching him lessons about love and intimacy he needs to know his whole life long. If a mother is absent, he will fall in love, or try to, with whomever she has left in charge. A mother who elects to re-enter the work place needs to grapple with this and decide if she can live with the consequences” (HBC, p. 48).

For Christian parents, the consequences are unacceptable. Carolee Howes, psychologist at UCLA, has found “that as toddlers, early care children were more influenced by their caregiver-teachers than were those cared for as infants by their mothers. This was not the case for those who entered day care after twelve months of age. Then the family was the most important socializing influence. For a parent, this is sobering news, particularly to those who want to be the leading influence in their child’s life” (HBC, p. 65). Dr. Hunter concludes, “As we give our very young children to others to rear, what’s at issue is not only their attachment to us, but also our power to influence them later on. That’s a lot to put at risk for any reason” (HBC, p. 65). Amen!

In Home By Choice, Dr. Hunter focuses first on the child’s emotional bond and the fact that too early day care puts the parental attachment at risk. She explains why, “I have done so deliberately because this is the area of greatest concern for child development experts. If a child falters his emotional development, he falters in life” (HBC, p. 66).

Parental Absence and Other Hazards

Disease. According to Dr. Hunter, “Day care is a breeding ground for disease – for children of any age. Children in day care are exposed to a host of diseases, ranging from bacterial meningitis to epiglottis, cytornegalovirus, and hepatitis A. In addition, children in day care are at much higher risk for having gastrointestinal disease, especially diarrhea, than are home-reared children. Add to that colds, ear infections, and other upper respiratory infections and the result is a child who’s often sick” (HBC, p. 66).

Children Dislike Day Care. Dr. Hunter confirms, “Many children find the long day in day care oppressive, regimented, and antithetical to their needs as children” (HBC, p. 66). In my own experience, I have yet to find a child who truly enjoys day care. Indeed, children typically view it with contempt. Many parents find comfort in thinking their children stop cryinq the minute they are left at day care. Wendy Dreskin, founder and former director of a high quality day care center in San Francisco, says, “This is often what directors tell the day care workers to say to make parents feel better” (HBC, p. 66). She further relates “that at the end of the day the children eagerly awaited the sound of mother’s car coming up the hill. ‘The children would listen and say, “Cathy, I hear your mother coming.” They were so anxious to be reunited with their mothers that they were tuned in to the motors in their parents’ cars'” (HBC, p. 66-67).

The Lost Joy of Youth. Dr. Hunter notes that “one of the silent costs of years spent in highly regimented day care will be a longing for the freedom of lost childhood. Play is the work of childhood. To play freely children need unstructured time. They need to be able to concentrate on building houses with blocks, coloring, dressing their dolls, waging warfare without the constant interference and regimentation that day care requires” (HBC, p. 67). My greatest memories of childhood are summers at home. Freed from the cruelty of children whose association school forced upon me, I would choose my friends and do as I pleased. What adventures Jimmy Perry and I enjoyed. One of the saddest things I can imagine are endless summers of day care.

Parental Absence and Older Children

Should a mother re-enter the workplace once her children have entered school? Dr. Hunter has concluded, “Youth in this country have not flourished during the more than two decades of feminism. Children, whether babies or teenagers, do not prosper when mother is absent” (HBC, p. 100). Dr. Hunter explains, “Our children need continuing parental care to have a sense of wholeness. They need someone at home who’s passionately concerned about them, not just during the early years but over the long haul. Even beyond infancy and toddlerhood, children need someone to be present during most of the hours they are at home. Someone needs to be available, on a daily basis to educate, love, nurture, discipline, and guide. It is my conviction that that someone is mom. If a mother wants to rear a child who will leave home with a sturdy sense of self, she needs to be there for her child during his growing up years. Mothering is simply not a job she can turn over to babysitters or teachers or to the child himself” (HBC, pp. 102-103).

In Home By Choice, Dr. Hunter gives several compelling reasons why mom should be home when her children are home. First, to listen. Dr. Hunter rightly affirms that any child, whether seven or seventeen, needs “to have a mother to listen to words spoken from the heart” (HBC, p. 106). As previously mentioned, school children can be terribly cruel. According to Dr. Hunter, “It’s the nature of the beast for some children to torment others. Once our children enter school, they often need us at home to shore up wounded self-esteem” (HBC, p. 107). Dr. Hunter warns, “If we aren’t there when our school-age children return home, we may never hear about pressures or triumphs of the day. Many mothers find that by the time they arrive at home at five or six o’clock from work, aerobics, or volunteer activities, their children’s hearts are closed to them” (HBC, p. 197).

Second, to teach. Dr. Hunter explains, “on-site, interested mothers oversee their children’s intellectual development, offer help with homework, and give the child the message that he has interested, involved parents. This is important if children are to achieve academically. Studies of maternal employment generally find that sons of employed mothers perform less well academically than sons of full-time mothers. Why is this so? Boys may need more guidance and supervision than their ‘time-poor’ working mothers provide. Psychologist Ann Crouter and her colleagues write that to achieve academically a child needs ‘an effective monitor’ who knows about his day and is aware of his experiences” (HBC, p. 111).

Third, to discipline and instill values. Dr. Hunter states what we all know. Namely, that “it takes time and energy to love and discipline our children. I had no idea when my babies were born just how many hours I would spend in the next eighteen years shaping their behavior. Yet what better person than their mother to teach them to speak to adults with respect, to care for their pets responsibly, to clean their rooms, to handle their angry feelings, to develop good study habits, to obey curfews, to show compassion?” (HBC, p. 113). I must add, to teach them the will of God in word and deed.

Fourth, to counteract negative peer pressure. Dr. Hunter warns, “Given that adolescence is generally a stressful, confusing time, this is no time for mom and dad to retreat and retrench. It is also not a time for mom to be so involved in her career she has too little time and energy to stay the course. If we either cave in to our adolescents’ demands or absent ourselves from their lives, we force our kids to seek guidance from their peer group. As one high school teacher says, , I don’t believe kids turn to their peers because they are close to them or even because they like them that much. Sometimes they go to their peers by default. Nobody’s home'” (HBC, p. 116).

Fifth, to prevent self-destructive behavior. “Armand Nicholi, who has conducted research on drug users, says that young people who use drugs have one thing in common: emotional distance from their parents” (HBC, p. 108). Nicholi argues that children use drugs to meet intense emotional needs created by parental absence, “due to divorce, death, or a time-demanding job. Parental absence contributes to ‘the anger, the rebelliousness, low self-esteem, depression and anti-social behavior’ of the drug user” (HBC, p. 108). Another study has noted “that eighth graders who were home alone for eleven or more hours per week were twice as likely to engage in heavy use of alcohol, tobacco, and marijuana than those who had a parent home after school” (HBC, p. 108-109). Why were these latchkey children more susceptible to substance abuse? Dr. Hunter explains, “With nobody home, teens turned to their peers who led them astray. So even adolescents need a sensitive parent to supervise and listen after school” (HBC, p. 109). Dr. Hunter concludes, “Kids do not profit from parental absenteeism and neglect, and the empty house can become a dangerous place. Parents are naive if they assume their teenagers will never use the empty house for drugs or afternoon sex” (HBC, p. 117).

Parental Absence and Other Issues

In Home By Choice, Dr. Hunter fully explores the issues discussed above as well as a host of other issues such as: The true extent of a child’s need for “socialization”; how most mothers still stay home (and the number is growing); the value of motherhood; why some women reject motherhood, including a background study of three famous feminists; working at home rather than the marketplace (yes, even for single mothers); making the most of the childhood years; women and depression (older women listen! young mothers desperately need you, see Titus 2:3-5); how to become a good mother; the man’s role, especially in meeting his wife’s needs (this section is particularly rich); how you can have it all (family and career) – but not all at once; and finally, the enduring legacy of a wonderful home life.

Conclusion

I wholeheartedly recommend Home By Choice: Facing the Effects of Mother’s Absence, Creating Emotional Security in Children and congratulate Dr. Brenda Hunter for a job well done. This book is a must for all, but especially for mothers who work outside the home or consider doing so, for mothers at home who question their worth (believe it, your career is one of the most necessary, challenging, and rewarding of all), for those who intend to have children, and for preachers of the gospel – especially those who fail to uphold, by neglect or opposition, the biblical demand for “keepers at home” (Tit. 2:5, KJV).

If you are unable to find Home By Choice, you may contact the author by writing: Home by Choice, Inc., P.O. Box 103, Vienna, VA 22183; or the publisher by writing: Multnomah Press, 10209 SE Division Street, Portland, Oregon 97266.

Guardian of Truth XXXV: 22, pp. 688-690
November 21, 1991

By W.R. Jones

The inspired apostle John writes to the children of God. He urges us to abstain from sin, but in case we fail, he tells us what to do with our sins. “If we confess our sins, he is faithful and just to forgive us our sins, and to cleanse us from all unrighteousness” (1 Jn. 1:9). As children of God, we must fight against temptation with all our might, but there is a great comfort in knowing I can obtain forgiveness, if I miss the mark. Therein, lies my hope of eternal life with God in heaven.

The word “confess’ in this passage is from the Greek homologeo (homos, same, and lego, to speak). The word means “to speak the same thing, to assent, accord, agree with; to confess by way of admitting oneself guilty of what one is accused of, the result of inward conviction” (W.E. Vine, Dictionary, p. 24). It “figuratively implies a dialogue between God and the sinner, in which the Father describes the condition of the sinner, and the sinner finally accedes to the correctness of the description and thus confesses that God is right!” (Woods, Commentary on 1 John 1:9).

The key word in this relationship with God is confess. No child of God who refuses to confess his sins can be forgiven. Some try to take care of their sins by moving away from the scene of their sins. Some feel that time will take care of the problem. Believe it or not, some folk become exceedingly caught up in good works trying to overcome their iniquity. Such efforts are all in vain.

The thing, however, that amazes me the most is to hear some brother trying to “rationalize” his sin away. Rationalism means: “The practice of guiding one’s opinions and actions solely by what is considered reasonable” (Webster). So, some fellow rationalizes like this: “What about the Christian who has been faithful for 30 years, but in a weak moment commits adultery and is killed before he repents?” “What about the man who has been preaching 25 years and in his discouragement and disgust at the treatment he receives, quits serving the Lord and dies before he is restored to the Lord?” “What about the woman,” a faithful Christian and wife for many years, who is neglected by her husband and in her loneliness turns to another man?” “Now, don’t you think it is unreasonable that God would let people like this be lost, in view of their good years for the Lord?”

People who think like this have left the law of the Lord. When all the verbal dust has settled, the Law of the Lord still says, “If we confess our sins, he is faithful and just to forgive us our sins.” Brethren, if we want to go to heaven we had better spend more time “confessing our sins” and trying to overcome, and less time rationalizing. Sin is a “missing of the divine mark.” Sin “breaks God’s heart,” and nothing less than full and contrite confession will make it right.

Guardian of Truth XXXV: 23, p. 711
December 5, 1991

By Terry Partain

The Lord willing, I intend to switch my energies to Spanish work full-time by the end of this year. The faithful Hispanic brethren of Miami have welcomed me with their typical warmth and charm. They will be my co-laborers, tutors and family in this work.

As a child, I heard my father Wayne Partain preaching the gospel to small Hispanic churches. I still remember the songs we sang, the sights, the sounds, and the smells that were part of my childhood. During the twenty years that I have preached in English, my heart has never been very far from the Spanish work. In the late ’70’s I worked in the Miami area surrounded by Cubans and discovered a growing interest in my heart. I have never been able to forget the vastness of that barely touched field.

The complexion of the Hispanic community has changed dramatically since 1979. Wave upon wave of immigrants have come from Cuba, Nicaragua, El Salvador as well as Colombia, Venezuela and most of the countries of South America. The Anglo community has dropped by one-fourth but the Latin Community has increased by two-thirds so that .-ow they are half of the population numbering about one mil,,ion in Dade County alone. “Balseros” are floating ashore daily . . . 1300 last year. Whole communities are 70 to 90 percent Hispanic: Sweetwater 93 percent (mostly Nicaraguan), Hialeah 87.6 percent, Hialeah Gardens 82 percent, Islandia 76.9 percent, West Miami 79 percent. These are some of the prominent examples.

Brethren, these people by and large have relatives in Central and South America with whom they are in close contact. Miami is the hub of the wheel of the Americas extending to New York and Chicago northward, and to Chile and Argentina southward. Like Ephesus in Asia of the New Testament, this is a strategic place from which to spread the word to all of Latin America. On my last visit to Miami I talked to a young Guatemalan who is close to obeying the gospel. He told me that the gospel had really changed his thinking about his former way of living and that when he went to visit his family next year, he was going to go as a brother in Christ.

This is a fertile field. Walk down the streets and you can hear radios on, tuned to religious programs. There are four Spanish stations that carry such programs and their rates are cheap by American standards ($125/hour). They read. They are not uneducated. Many of the schools of their countries are advanced compared to ours. Gospel teaching in the mass media has a better reception among the Hispanics, I believe, than among the Anglo population.

Brethren, my interest is not only in the local work in Miami. Scriptural teaching materials are very scarce. Those that are available are doing a tremendous job. Mature gospel preachers cannot be everywhere that they are needed to help other struggling brethren wrestle with false doctrines and critical issues as they come up but the written word can. It has a life of its own. It can be there if competent teachers will write and distribute these materials. Also, with God’s help I want to help train others to fight the good fight. In recent years many churches have been established or pulled out of liberalism and they cry out for help. They need visits, gospel meetings, exhortations to be steadfast, immovable, always abounding in the faith. I want to help.

Who will help me? I need to find support from faithful brethren. Let me discuss this work with you. I am entering this work for a long term. Let me know if you are interested in this work.

Guardian of Truth XXXV: 23, p. 709
December 5, 1991

By Jon Quinn

“Now it came about in the six hundred and first year, in the first month, on the first of the month, the water was dried up from the earth. Then Noah removed the covering from the ark, and looked, and behold, the surface of the land was dried up. And in the second month, on the twenty-seventh day of the month, the earth was dry. Then God spoke to Noah, saying, ‘Go out of the ark, you and your wife and your sons and your sons’ wives with you'” (Gen. 8:13-16). Imagine yourself in Noah’s place for a moment. You had boarded the ark with your family and all those animals a long time ago. A week later, the flood had come and the rain had fallen for forty days. Then, the waters had continued to rise for one hundred and fifty days. Finally, they had begun to recede. In the tenth month the first mountain tops had reappeared. It was forty days later that the first tentative tests had been made of livability outside the ark. This was done by the sending out a raven and a dove. The test had been made twice on a weekly basis until finally the dove had not returned. The cover had been removed and the land surveyed. The surface was dry! What do you do now?

Of course, the answer is obvious. You would shout for joy, call your family together and leave the ark. And the last one on board might find himself stuck with releasing the animals as well. Oh, those animals! It will be wonderful to breathe fresh air again!

But it was not that way at all. Read the text again, very carefully, and notice that there is at least a month of waiting around on board the ark after it was known that the land was dry! Why?

The answer is because Noah respected God very much. He was waiting for God to say, “Okay, you may leave now.” It was only when God said, “Go out” that Noah left. What does this have to do with us? Plenty!

Respect for the Authority of the Word of God

” . . . that in us you might learn not to go beyond what is written, in order that no one of you might become arrogant in behalf of one against the other” (1 Cor. 4:6). Noah was not so arrogant that he presumed to know the mind of God on a subject upon which God had not revealed his thoughts as yet. Many might assume that since God had not said not to leave the ark that it would be appropriate to leave whenever the notion struck. Noah did not look at it that way and that is in effect what Paul said to the Corinthians; “Do not presume ” by going beyond what God has revealed to Christians in his written word, the Scriptures. Earlier Paul had explained that the only way we can know anything about what God thinks is for God to revealed it to us in words (1 Cor. 2:10-13).

What work does God want his church to be involved in? Evangelism? Recreation? Business? Edification? Benevolence? Politics? Social reform? First aid? Entertainment? Secular education? We must determine not to go beyond what is written!

How does God want us to worship him? Singing? Clapping? Dancing? Giving? Playing? Drumming? Praying? Teaching? Feasting? Supping? Animal sacrificing? Bead counting? Candle lighting? We must determine not to go beyond what is written?

What do we teach regarding points of controversy? Divorce? Marriage? Abortion? Homosexuality? Premarital sex? Husbands and wives? Parents and children? We must determine not to go beyond what is written!

Is Proper Doctrine Really That Important?

“Any one who goes too far and does not abide in the teaching of Christ, does not have God, the one who abides in the teaching, he has both the Father and the Son ” (2 Jn. 9). In our day, it is quite the thing to chart ones own courses, especially when it comes to religion. The goal becomes to please self rather than to please God. The Bible is cast aside so conveniently whenever necessary in order to reach the goal of self-gratification. Any who would object by asking for Bible authority is labeled “legalistic” or “self-righteous” or worse. But when all is said and done, God has warned that when we cast his doctrine aside, we cast our relationship with him aside as well. No matter how gratifying a religion may be, it may tickle and comfort, excite and tingle, but if it harms my relationship with God then it is a tragedy and not a blessing! Though the thought of leaving the ark was certainly appealing, Noah would wait however long God determined. He had so carefully followed the Lord’s command up to this point it would make no sense to alter his course now. This careful attitude toward doctrine was neither “self-righteous” nor “legalistic.” It was simply saving faith (Heb. 11:7)!

There Is a Pattern!

“. . . who serve as a copy and shadow of the heavenly things, just as Moses was warned by God when he was about to erect the tabernacle,- for, ‘See, ‘He says, ‘That you make all things according to the pattern which was shown you upon the mountain” (Heb. 8:5). The point of this passage is that like Moses was warned to be careful to act only according to the pattern given him for the Mosical items of worship, which were shadows of the spiritual things which we have received, that we, too, must exercise the same caution! We, too, have a pattern to observe.

The New Testament is not just a hodge-podge of writings thrown together accidently. It is our blue print. It is not a suggested plan of action, it is our “marchIng orders”! As Paul commanded by the Holy Spirit, “However, let us keep living by that same standard to which we have attained. Brethren, join in following my example, and observe those who walk according to the pattern you have in us” (Phil. 3:16,17).

The same gospel was taught throughout the Roman Empire by every first century gospel teacher. This comformity in doctrine and practice would not have existed if there had not been a pattern to follow. Paul, for example, taught the brethren to do the same thing at Corinth as he taught the churches throughout Galatia to do (1 Cor. 16:1). If any refused, they would violate the pattern and in so doing jeopardize their souls.

Establishing Bible Authority

“. . . though not being without the law of God, but under the law of Christ, that I might win those who are without law” (1 Cor. 9:21). Every professed Bible believer ought to have implicit confidence in the adequacy of the Scriptures (2 Tim. 3:16,17). Sadly, many do not. Many will claim to “believe the Bible” and yet not allow it to be their complete guide. As we have seen, it is a big mistake to minimize the importance of having scriptural authority for the things we practice and teach.

The New Testament authorizes practices by commands as well as examples. To illustrate, we have commands to partake of the Lord’s supper – “This do . . . ” (1 Cor. 11:25) as well as examples – “They came together. . . ” (Acts 20:7). In the first century disciples throughout the world did so on the first day of the week. Paul, on a journey toward Jerusalem and eagerly looking forward to arriving there, waited a week at Troas so he could share the supper of the Lord with the Christians there. Why not gather together on Tuesday evening and partake so Paul would not have to wait as long? That would have been fine if there had not been a pattern to fulfill, but there was, and there is, and there shall be until the day when we need the memorial no longer because we see him as he is.

Let us be like Noah; we will go when the Lord says “go” and not before. To have the same attitude toward the Lord’s word as did Noah certainly will secure victory over whatever may flood our lives, and it shall be appropriate to say that thus we did, “according to all that God had commanded” us, so we did (Gen. 6:22).

Guardian of Truth XXXV: 22, pp. 692-693
November 21, 1991