Truth Magazine

By Lewis Willis

I was given an article from the TV Guide (3-11-89) by Dan Wakefield, entitled, “We Need More Religion In Prime Time.” The article was of special interest to me since only last week in our adult Bible class we had discussed the dangers which television poses to the morals of our nation. The article concerned a scene in a recent prime time program in which a leading character, in the midst of a crisis, had turned to religion for answers. Wakefield described it as “. . . an emotionally moving and genuinely spiritual scene but an extremely rare one for prime-time TV.” His point was that more scenes of this nature are needed to reflect the way it is in contemporary life.

He quoted the pollster, George Gallop, Jr., in a speech called “The 1990s – Decade of ‘The People’s Religion,”‘ who reported that his latest surveys reflected that “levels of religious belief and practice in the U.S. are extra ordinarily high . . . The large majority of Americans believe in … God . . . and say that religion is either ‘very’ or ‘fairly’ important in their lives. . . Only 4 percent of Americans are totally ‘non-religious. “‘ Wakefield asked why the writers and producers of prime-time TV, who constantly search for the latest “hot” subject to use in their stories, have so neglected God and religion as a source for dramatic possibilities. He then explained why it is neglected. He referred to a recent Newsweek article by Los Angeles lawyer and authority, Benjamin J. Stein, who said, “It would be hard right now to imagine a more atheistic community than the people who make prime-time TV and feature movies.” Therefore, he said we do not see TV characters who make decisions based on religion. Stein predicted that this would change. He said Alcoholics Anonymous is “sweeping Hollywood” with its message of reliance on God or a “Higher Power” for help in getting off booze and drugs. Wakefield noted how some programs have experimented with religious subjects in recent seasons and offered some suggestions about how other highly rated shows might inject the national trend toward religion into their programs. He suggested that Michael J. Fox of NBC’s Family Ties might discover what contemporary, successful, over-achievers have discovered, that is, material possessions do not satisfy all of the longings of man. Wakefield quoted a successful young man, writing in New York magazine, who had returned to his faith. He said, “Once you’ve played all the tennis you can play, what then?” Too many people have nowhere to turn when they realize that materialism and worldliness do not offer solutions to life’s problems. It is here that religion offers the answer and TV needs to turn to religion if it is going to be “true to life.”

I do not believe that screen writers will accurately depict the religion of Christ. Nor do I trust them to develop a religious consciousness for America. However, I remember a time when my peers unashamedly confessed their faith in the doctrines of denominationalism and, at that time, I remember that America had a higher standard of morality than it does today. In those days homosexuality, fornication, divorce, alcohol, drugs, etc., were all considered by most people to be WRONG! It was not that all religion was right in those days – it was simply a fact that a religious society has higher moral standards than does a non-religious society.

People in those days were materialistic but they knew that “things” would not supply what they needed in times of sickness, distress and death. In those circumstances, they turned to their faith. As television has depicted modern man, he has no place to turn on those occasions because, supposedly, he cannot turn to God. Screen writers would have us believe there is no God. Surveys indicate the screen writers are wrong – most Americans still believe in God and give religion a place of importance in their lives. Most Americans turn to God in their times of trouble, even though the screen writers choose not to recognize this. Perhaps, if given enough publicity, this fact about the modern American will one day be reflected in its popular television fare like the Cosby show. Such will not solve all of our problems but it surely will not hurt.

It will always be the role of the Church to teach the Truth, the whole Truth, and nothing but the Truth. We are trying to do that. However, it would help if so important a factor as television is in our lives, would at least acknowledge that there is a God to whom we can and must turn. Having seen the effects of glorified sin on TV, I am ready to see the effects of a return to a recognition of God. It couldn’t hurt – it has to help. Parents, in raising their children, need all the help they can get! Don’t you agree?

Guardian of Truth XXXIV: 4, pp. 98, 118
February 15, 1990

By Larry Ray Hafley

Thank you for your letter and accompanying enclosures. Your brotherly spirit was much appreciated, and I shall seek to respond accordingly.

In my article of June 1, 1989, I plead guilty to putting words in your mouth via an imaginary conversation. In so doing, I did not misrepresent your position. Yea, verify, your letter argues that gymnasiums and Family Life Centers are scriptures. Bill Jackson is, as you say, in a “contradictory position.” He espouses “Fellowship Halls” but eschews gymnasiums. I used an imaginary argument between you and Bill to expose his “inconsistency.” In so doing, I did not misrepresent your “true beliefs,” nor Bill’s, as your letter demonstrates.

Regarding brother Guy N. Woods, I certainly meant no disrespect. Paul said some were “dead” while they lived (1 Tim. 5:6; Eph. 5:14), and on the issue of church funded gyms and Family Life Centers, I believe that included brother Woods. I hope he will come to life and oppose such innovations in the Gospel Advocate. The brother Woods of 1939 to 1946 would not have “kept silence” against Family Life and Day Care Centers, secular schools, and other denominational, human works and organizations. Indeed, it is my appreciate ion for his former years of contention “For a pure faith and a faultless practice” that has caused me such disappointment in his present silence against modern innovations. See the context of my statement. Perhaps the word so Bill Jackson are pertinent and relevant:

. . . we, in the kingdom, need the advice of the older . . . gospel preachers. . . I remember so many of them as powerful preachers and writes or the 50’s and 60’s, and you could hardly pick up a gospel paper without their great articles being there to inform, warn and guide. But, where are they now, and where is their voice being heard? I would think articles on the great issues of today would wield great influence, and perhaps turn some young preacher away from error and toward truth . . Again we ask, “Where is the voice of the older men?” (Bill Jackson, The Southwesterner, Vol. 17, No. 1, October 4, 1989).

Bible Authority

There is Bible authority for the church to come together in one place (Heb. 10:25). Hence, meeting places are authorized. There is scriptural authority for the church to teach (1 Thess. 1:8), thus, various aids (projectors, boards, charts) are authorized. Singing is approved of God (Eph. 5:19; Col. 3:16). Songbooks, notes and leaders are authorized. The Lord’s supper is to be eaten (1 Cor. 11). Items essential to carrying out the command to eat the Lords’ supper (table, trays, plates, containers) are authorized. Laying by “in store” is commanded (1 Cor. 16:2), so, collection baskets are scriptural.

If one wants a gymnasium or a Family Life Center, he will have to find authority for the church to engage in social, recreational activities. Where is the Scripture? If one wants the church to build schools to teach secular subjects (History, English, Math, Spelling), he will have to find Bible authority for it. Where is the Scripture? If one wants a piano, organ or guitar in worship, he will have to find authority for playing. Where is the Scripture? If the church wants to raise its money by selling, it will have to cite book, chapter and verse for doing so. Where is the Scripture?

We will not argue about church supported cabins, canoes, archery ranges and ping pong tables. Just cite the passage that authorities the church to furnish fun, food and frolic. We will not argue about church supported colleges which teach algebra or economics. Just cite the passage that authorizes the church to provide secular education. We will not argue about tambourines and violins with the Christian Church.

Brother Kearley, fertilizers, light bulbs, paper towels, parking lots and toilets are not the problem. The issue is not tissue. Those items merely expedite our doing the things the Lord has authorized us to do. If the Lord authorized the church to provide secular education, then it follows that fertilizers, light bulbs, paper towels, parking lots, bike racks and toilets would all be furnished, along with math books, rulers, pens, pencils, etc. First, though, someone must show Bible authority for the doing of the work of secular education itself.

There is no command, example or necessary implication, no authority, either generic or -specific, that allows the church to provide ball gloves or pianos, to teach algebra or preach arts and crafts, to provide bath houses or sell car washes. If you find Bible authority for the church to provide amusement and entertainment, I will not quibble over a checker board. If you find Scripture for the church to furnish exercise areas or health spas, I will not quarrel about a locker room in which perspiring players may shower.

What Others Have Said

1. N.B. Hardeman: “. . . it is not the work of the church to furnish entertainment for the members. And yet many churches have drifted into such an effort. They enlarge their basements, put in all kinds of gymnastic apparatus, and make every sort of appeal to the young people of the congregation. I have never read anything in the Bible that indicated to me that such was a part of the work of the church. I am wholly ignorant of any Scripture that even points in that direction” (Tabernacle Sermons, Vol. V).

2. B.C. Goodpasture: “It is not the mission of the church to furnish amusement for the world or even for its own members. Innocent amusement in proper proportion has its place in the life of all normal persons, but it is not the business of the church to furnish it. The church would come off a poor second if it undertook to compete with institutions established for the express purpose of entertaining people. It would make itself ridiculous if it entered into such competition. Again, it is not the responsibility of the church as such to furnish recreation for its members. A certain amount of recreation is necessary to the health and happiness of the individual . . . but it is not the function of the church to furnish the play. The church was not established to furnish athletics. .

“For the church to turn aside from its divine work to furnish amusement and recreation is to pervert its mission. It is to degrade its mission. Amusement and recreation should stem from the home rather than the church. The church, like Nehemiah, has a great work to do; and it should not come down on the plains of Ono to amuse and entertain. As the church turns its attention to amusement and recreation, it will be shorn of its power as Samson was when his hair was cut. Only as the church becomes worldly, as it pillows its head on the lap of Delilah, will it want to turn from its wonted course to relatively unimportant matters. Imagine Paul selecting and training a group of brethren to compete in the Isthmian games!” (Gospel Advocate, May 20, 1948, p. 484)

3. Roy H. Lanier, Sr.: “Recreation and entertainment are good for young people,. . . But such activities are the responsibility of the home, not the church. . .

“And there are congregations which have kindergartens five days a week for children under school age. Some of them charge tuition, but some do not. . . Where is the Scripture which authorizes a church to educate the children of parents who are able to pay for their education? And if the church charges tuition, where is the Scripture that authorizes the church to charge for its services? A church may as well charge for its Sunday school instruction as to charge for its Monday school instruction.

“The truth of the matter is that the church is involved in a work which it is not authorized to do, and using the time and energy of its members in a work which is the responsibility of the home” (Firm Foundation, March 22, 1977, p. 201).

4. Bill Jackson: “One can immediately call to mind . . . problems currently ongoing in the church, all of them residing in the false doctrine that the church has a mission to the ‘whole man’ . . . as to his family, his work, his finances, his health, his recreation, etc. Years ago, as some of the denominations . . . began to develop a ‘social gospel,’ they turned more and more to this ‘whole man’ idea. It is amazing that some in the Lord would pick up such a false idea!

“. . . The concern for ‘ministering to the whole man’ has had the church involved in child-rearing, to provide some with ‘mothers-day-out.’ Such has had the church involved in all manner of recreational activities. . .

“The point is simple . . . the church’s ministry is not to the ‘whole man,’ but it is a ministry of the word. . . There’s a world of difference in the church administering the whole Word to man, and the church administering to the whole man! Inspiration teaches the first, and sectarian man teaches the latter” (The Southwesterner, Vol. XVI, No. 48, September 20, 1989, pp. 1,2).

The brethren quoted above are not the standard of authority. But what do you know that they did not know? Scripture, please.

Church Owned Businesses

Next, I want to take your arguments, which are based on ‘purpose and need” (See your editorial in the Gospel Advocate, November, 1988), for church support of schools, day care centers, health clubs, camps and Family Life Centers and apply them to the church’s owning and operating business, industrial complexes, According to “purpose and need,” and using your own words and ideas in your letter to me, what would be wrong with the following proposal?

Remember that, “Due to the history of these problems it behooves all of us to be very tolerant and gracious to the other in discussing and applying these matters.” So, bear with me while I use your reasoning to authorize the church to own and operate an automobile plant.

First, the elders ask themselves, “What is the purpose for which this money is to be expended? Will it contribute significantly to the evangelization work, the edification work, the worship activity or the benevolent work for which the church is responsible?” Their “studied answer is, ‘Yes, it does contribute significantly to these,’ then I believe it is permissible for the leadership of the church to expend the money for that item or project.” Note that no Scripture is necessary. It is their “studied answer” (cf. 1 Chron. 13:4; 15:13-15). Before you dismiss these comments as absurd, please remember that many of the Protestant and Catholic denominations have already become involved in such businesses (Hospitals, Burlington Mills’ towels, Goodwill Industries, etc.).

Financing is not a problem. Simply announce to all the world that this church is the sponsoring church for “Abilene Christian Cars.” The Bible says, “Go,” and cars are one way to do it. Churches can fund the company and be heralds of truth by helping to furnish “Christian” transportation.

Second, the same church (and I do not have a specific congregation in mind) buys 500 acres of land for $500,000 and builds worker cottages, bathhouses, a dining and rec hall and several other facilities for $1,450,000 for a total of $1,950,OW, one-half the cost of the church building (fellowship hall, gym, etc.) in town. In these facilities they conduct Christian work (Eph. 4:28; Tit. 3:14) 52 weeks during the year. During the year, the first, second and third .shifts average at least 20 hours per day “doing service, as to the Lord” (Eph. 6:7); in “break time” prayers, singing and labor training in the “cars for Christ” campaign. This totals 140 hours per week, year round, for a total of 7,280 hours per year.

The Abilene Christian Cars Company over a one year period accomplishes many times as much teaching, edification and evangelization as the church’s Family Life Center, gym and camp. Though it may cost a bit more than a camp or a cabin on the lake, which is the best use of the Lord’s money? Both of these (the car company and the Family Life Center) are operated completely by the church and are under the control of the elders. No para-church is involved, of course.

Third, before I would take a position on whether it is right or wrong, good or bad, to build a “church car company,” I would need to see a thorough justification paper (not to mention scriptural authority) indicating clearly what the purpose for this was, how it was intended to be used and what was hoped to be accomplished. I would like to see evidence from a similar program and how many have been led to Christ in obedience to the gospel, how many have been retained in the church and how they have grown spiritually as a result of the use of the car company.

(The statistics requested above were the ones the Christian Church gave in their “justification papers” 140 years ago to authorize the Missionary Society. A car company, like the first gym or Family Life Center, would be a novel idea, so pertinent data could not be cited, but that did not prohibit the first Missionary Society among us. It did not deter the first gym and camp ground, so why should it stop or stifle the first car company?)

Fourth, brethren working at a car company would promote fellowship. Now, obviously I know that fellowship is sharing in Christ Jesus, but it does include growing to love, appreciate, care for and work with one another. This cannot happen sufficiently with people looking at the back of one another’s heads. (This is a snide aside at what allegedly occurs in a scriptural worship service, but what else would some do on a bench in the stands of a “church” basketball game?) Genuine Christian fellowship comes when people are involved in one another’s lives or working side by side and shoulder to shoulder in the cause of Christ, but fellowship does include getting to know each other, sharing our work (e.g., at the Abilene Christian Car Company), our hobbies, our families and other interests and activities. It is only when people really grow to love one another that they are going to miss one another for disfellowship to have any meaning.

(So, when a brother is “disfellowshipped” at church, he loses his job at our car company, his kids are kicked out of our day care center and/or expelled from our “Christian” school, and they lose membership privileges in our health clubs, spas and Family Life Centers. Now, that, friends, is “disfellowship” with a vengeance! Hence, they really feel the true meaning of fellowship, and since it enhances the sense of true fellowship, “church” owned car companies are authorized!) Fellowship, then, in the full sense of the word, including friendship and brotherly love which is one of the Christian graces, is a part of the work of the church. Using your reasoning, brother Kearley, I conclude that car companies, as well as gyms and camps, owned and operated by the church, are scriptural.

Note: The above caricature, paraphrase and partial quotations of you, brother Kearley, will justify Abilene Christian Car Company as surely as it will authorize church support of Abilene Christian University, cabins, crafts and canoes. Having noted that, I continue with my parallel justification paper. Remember, now, that I am using your words to authorize the church to own and operate a business industrial complex. I do so in the same way you attempted to justify the church’s owning and operating gyms, recreational resorts, Family Life Centers and day care facilities.

After making your arguments for gyms, brother Kearley, you state, “I certainly am on no campaign for churches to build gymnasiums.” In parallel fashion, I argue that I am on no campaign for churches to build car companies. The campaign I am on is for churches to use their building to the glory of God more than four or five hours per week, and a church owned car company will do that and more. I believe churches should be conducting daily Bible study sessions. Some might use the term, “car manufacturing plants,” but by car manufacturing I do not mean the secular type. I mean a situation where the church takes advantage of the opportunities provided by our culture and offers a haven to workers from first through the third shift. During this time the auto workers should be taught Bible stories, shown video cassettes of Bible lessons, played audio cassettes of Bible lessons. They should sing psalms, hymns and spiritual songs in contrast to filthy, smutty songs being piped into worldly work places. They should learn, learn, learn all they possibly can about the Lord Jesus Christ, salvation and his church. They should learn to love one another and have the love of Christians showered upon them in a “Christian” work place.

Then I think it would be good, when some of the workers have a limited education, for the church to use its church building to operate a Christian school to watch on behalf of the souls of the workers and their children by teaching them all subjects (including car maintenance, repair and autobody work) from a Christian point of view rather than turning them to the public schools that are filled with atheists and infidels and many ungodly, immoral people. (I am delighted for every Christian who is working in a secular car plant, and we need more, but I know from study and experience that there are far too many business men who are exerting a wrong influence on workers and their children, teaching them evolution, humanism and other forms of ungodliness that undermine the faith of workers.)

Hebrews 13:17 says that leaders in the church watch in behalf of the souls of workers and must give account for them. Leaders of our present generation have watched many a worker have his faith destroyed by worldliness while saying it is a sin for the church to own a manufacturing company. It is far better for the church to provide the worker a good job from a Christian point of view and help the worker develop a good trade by which to make a livelihood in a Christian environment along with Bible teaching than to send the worker into an environment that destroys his faith and soul. Hence, church owned and operated business enterprises are scriptural!

Finally, brother Kearley, have I correctly applied your arguments as authority for the church to build and maintain business and industrial enterprises? If not, can you show me that a church owned business is unscriptural without at the same time destroying your arguments for church sponsored gymnasiums, Family Life Centers, day care facilities and secular education? If you can do so, I will be pleased the see your reasoning, based on your own arguments, which denies the former but supports the latter. If you cannot show the difference, will you say that a church may indeed scripturally own and operate a business? I am not saying that is what you believe. I am saying that is where your arguments lead. If I am wrong, please correct me.

Frankly, brother Kearley, all this talk about wanting to see statistics and a “thorough justification paper” is largely irrelevant. A “thorough justification paper” is simply a piece of paper with a passage of Scripture on it.

This letter is too long, but if it were not, I could take your arguments for fellowship, purpose and the use of time and facilities and make a strong case for a traveling circus on the order of “Barnabas & Bailey” (the greatest gospel show on earth), complete with elephants and cotton candy. Using your reasoning, if brethren had a proper motive, noble aims and pure purpose, what would be wrong with a brotherhood circus? Think of the teaching opportunities, the fellowship, the clean wholesome fun, as opposed to worldly amusements I But, alas, I will have to leave that for another time.

As you are aware in communication with brother Willis, both your letter to me and mine to you are to be published in Guardian of Truth. If possible, I would be happy to engage with you in a written debate on these and related issues with our exchanges to be published in both the Gospel Advocate and Guardian of Truth. We can work out the necessary details if you are amenable to such a proposal.

Please let me hear from you again. The issues that divide us are not only temporal but eternal in their effect. I pray that we shall both maintain an open Bible and an open mind as we study together.

Guardian of Truth XXXIV: 3, pp. 80-83
February 1, 1990

By Herman W. Hughes

The celebrated American pollster, George Gallup, says this country is facing a moral and ethical crisis of the first dimension. He cites as examples of the moral decline widespread cheating on taxes which costs the government about $100 billion a year, pilferage costing department stores more than $4 billion a year, defaulting on federal education loans to college students by one student in seven and sexual promiscuity and extra-marital affairs of epidemic proportions.

Newspaper headlines display the looming spectra of gangs and drugs, of murder and mayhem, of corruption in high places. The television news details for us the latest Washington scandal and the sleazy antics of such influential leaders as the “Jiminy triplets,” Jim Bakker, Jimmy Swaggart, and Jim Wright.

Children today are growing up in an environment of moral decay. They are confronted with evil influence on every hand. Their music and video heroes purvey a constant diet of drugs, sex and violence. Even in their schools children face drug abuse, sexual immorality and negative peer pressure. By the fourth grade one out of every four school children in America will have been pressured to use marijuana or alcohol.

Teenage sexual activity has increased 66 percent in the last two decades and teen suicide has skyrocketed 250 percent in that same time period. An NBC television recently challenged America to “See Dick and Jane Lie, Cheat and Steal,” a sobering look at the moral and ethical crisis among America’s youth.

What does the future hold for our children? For America? Where will our children, the leaders of tomorrow, learn their moral and ethical values? Can it be in our public schools which have all but abdicated responsibility for training in morality, character and ethics? The state department of education in one mid-western state has gone so far as to publish a statement claiming that “it is not within the purview of public education to propagate moral values.”

Many teachers today do not believe it is their responsibility to teach morals and values to students and even those who would like to do so believe that such is prohibited by law. Many are unable to articulate a consistent set of values or they are products of the colleges of the 1960s and 1970s which were strongly influenced by a philosophy of “do your own thing” and “situational ethics.”

Educational, political and business leaders alike are decrying the public school’s attitude toward the teaching of ethics and values. Spencer Kagan, professor of education at the University of California, Riverside, says that one of the major problems facing the American educational system today is its failure to socialize students toward pro-social values and behaviors such as respect and care for others. And former Secretary of Education William Bennett asserts that “in our haste to offend no one and satisfy all, we have swept the teaching of values we all share right out of the classroom.”

As much as public education strives to be value neutral it cannot be. As David T. Kearns, head of Xerox Corporation, said in a speech to the Economic Club of Detroit, “Anyone who thinks its possible to have a value-neutral education is dead wrong. Everything is not relative. Exclude values from the schools, and you teach that values are not important.”

Public schools have not always attempted moral neutrality. The curriculum of America’s first public schools was Bible centered and there was general acceptance by educators and the public alike that the public schools should be in the morality teaching business. William McGuffy, author of the famous McGuffy reader which was used almost universally in American elementary schools until this century, once reflected that “the time has gone by when any sensible man will be found to object to the Bible as a school book in a Christian country.”

Not all teachers in the past were Christians, but many were. Those who weren’t professing Christians generally were products of the American middle class which for the most part held Christian values and morals. They felt an obligation to teach moral and ethical standards to their students.

An insidious change has come about in public education over the years, however. It seems that every effort now is being made to exclude the teaching of principles of morality from the public schools. This is extremely unfortunate for, as Theodore Roosevelt once warned, “To educate a man in mind and not in morals is to educate a menance to society.”

But, American children are being taught a moral standard in school today simply because education by its very nature will impart morals, values, ethics. The question is, what morals, which values, whose ethics? The anwer those of secular humanism.

Secular humanism has for all practical purposes replaced biblical morality as the underlying philosophy of public education in America today and when God and the Bible are left out of education all that is left of morality and ethics are the tenets of secular humanism. The Bible says in I Corinthians 2:6-7 that there are only two kinds of wisdom: the wisdom of the world and the wisdom of God. When God’s wisdom is eliminated from education the only thing left is the wisdom of the world. That kind of wisdom teaches: (a) humanism – that is to be man-centered, to love and exalt self; (b) secularism – to be earthly-minded; (c) materialism – to exalt material things and wealth; (d) situational ethics -no moral absolutes.

The September 1984 issue of The Humanist, the official voice of the American Humanists Association, carried an article written by Gerald A. Larue, professor emeritus of Biblical History and Archaeology at the University of Southern California, entitled “The Way of Ethical Humanism: A Religion to Meet the Psychological Needs of Our Time.” In it was this statement of humanist philosophy:

In humanism there is no supernaturalistic, paternalistic deity who has revealed his will for humans and who has made clear that there are punishments for disobedience to that will and rewards for obedience. . . We have no belief in an after life – no resurrection, no immortality, no reincarnation, no heaven, no hell, nor anything in between. . . There are no sacred scriptures, no salvation or deliverance from the reactions of a demanding father-god, no need to beg divine forgiveness for human error, no need for a god to require the killing of his own as an appeasing sacrifice for human sin. Our religion is based upon the best we know about our cosmos, our world and ourselves.

The January 13 issue of the same magazine carried this declaration:

I am convinced that the battle for humankind’s future must be waged and won in the public school classroom by teachers who correctly perceive their role as the proselytizers of a new faith. These teachers must embody the same selfless dedication as the most rabid fundamentalist preachers, for they will be ministers of another sort, utilizing a classroom instead of a pulpit to convey humanist values in whatever subject they teach, regardless of the educational level preschool day care or large state university. The classroom must and will become an arena of conflict between the old and the new – the rotting corpse of Christianity and the new faith of humanism.

Never in the history of American education has the onslaught of secular humanism on public school students been more pronounced and direct. Never has there been a greater need for Christian teachers in the public schools to help stem the tide of materialism and humanism among the young of America. Jesus exhorted his disciples to be salt and light in the world and there is no place where the need for the salt and light of Christianity is greater than in our nation’s public schools.

Few other endeavors could afford the disciple of Christ the opportunity to influence the lives of so many young people -as many as 12,000 over the course of a 30-year teaching career. Modeling Christian values, counseling troubled students, meeting parenting needs of students from disrupted homes, providing the Christian perspective on things taught, standing as a beacon of hope in an often bleak and hopeless world are but a few examples of ways the Christian teacher can make an impact for good in the public school.

The Christian apologist C.R. Sproul once said, “Deeply ensconced in the marrow of our bones is the aspiration for significance . . . the clamoring beat of every human heart for self esteem. We want our lives to count. We yearn to believe that in some way we are important.” The potential for significant impact on the lives of the youth of our nation by teachers who see their work as a Christian ministry is nothing short of awesome. Christian teachers serving in the public schools can make a difference.

M.W. Edelman, in the May 1989 issue of Educational Leadership, said “Where is a hollowness at the core of our society. We share no mutual goals or joint vision – nothing to believe in except self-aggrandizement. The poor black youths who shoot up drugs on street corners and the rich white youths who sniff cocaine in wealthy suburbs share a common disconnectedness from any larger hope or purpose. The rising rates of suicide, drug and alcohol abuse, and outof-wedlock births among youths of all races and income groups relect a moral drift that cries out for correction.” Who will hear the cry for correction? Who will answer?

Parents, Sunday School teachers, preachers, Christian college professors alike must begin now to encourage our brightest and most spiritual youngsters to prepare themselves for ministry to the youth of American as teachers in our nation’s public schools. There is no higher calling or vocation than to serve God by serving mankind.

Guardian of Truth XXXIV: 2, pp. 46-47
January 18, 1990

By J.F. Dancer, Jr.

I read a lot today about a great “preacher shortage” among churches. There may be such. But there is another “shortage” that in my mind brings more danger to men’s souls and that hinders the growth of the Lord’s people even more. This is a shortage of men qualified to do the work of elders!

Many congregations are existing (and have existed for upwards to 50 years) without men qualified to serve as elders. The Bible teaches there should be a plurality of elders in each congregation. Now, I know that a congregation can exist scripturally for a time without elders. I also know that when it does it is working under a handicap and is not as God wants it to be.

What is being done to alleviate this “shortage”? Some congregations are disregarding the Bible and installing men who do not even come close to the qualifications given in 1 Timothy 3:1-7 and Titus 1:5-9. Men have been appointed without any children and with children who are not believers. Men are in the “eldership” who could not teach a person the first principles much less convince the gainsayer. Others are designated as elders who are not married and some who are barely 25 years of age and only a very short time as children of God. This is no way to properly solve this shortage.

Brethren, to disregard God’s qualifications and appoint the “best we have” or “those who do the work anyhow” is sinful. To appoint novices, adulterers, quarrelsome men, impatient men and/or men who cannot control their families and who failed to bring them up in the nurture and admonition of the Lord to oversee the church and to watch for the souls of saints does not solve the problem. It only creates another problem to add to those already present.

We need to concentrate on teaching and training more young men to develop the qualities Paul presented as necessary to do the work. We would not think of casting aside any part of the “plan of salvation,” yet we disregard (thus cast aside) this part of God’s instructions to his people. We need more men with faithful families who have learned self-control and who love God enough to accept the responsibility of becoming and then being set into the work of overseeing the flock of God (1 Pet. 5:14). This may take another generation to “grow up” in both years and spiritual maturity but it must be done! Let’s work to the end that there will be enough elders to oversee the flock and insist they are men who fit the pattern set forth by God.

This will relieve the “shortage” in a way pleasing to God. It will allow God’s people to function in a way pleasing to him as we follow the Bible. It provides proper oversight for God’s people.

(Men must not be appointed elders: (1) Who lack leadership ability; (2) Who are loose on such issues as institutionalism, divorce and remarriage, social drinking, mixed swimming, immodest apparel, fellowship halls built by the church, theistic evolution, verbal inspiration of the Scriptures, instrumental music in worship, fellowshipping false brethren, etc.; (3) Whose children are worldly minded, often seen at dances and every licentious movie that comes to town. Elders are to be examples to the flock (1 Pet. 5:3) in devotion faithfulness and purity. The church must not be satisfied with anything less. Brethren, know the men you select for elders. The future of the church depends on it! -Weldon E. Warnock)

Guardian of Truth XXXIV: 3, p. 65
February 1, 1990