Truth Magazine

By Harry R. Osborne

While on vacation in San Antonio, my wife and I saw something that caught our attention. We were driving down a street and came upon a rather modem looking building. A large sign identified the structure as the “Holy Spirit Catholic Church.” Wanting to be fairminded about this piece of information, we discussed possible alternatives to our initial reaction that the sign was false advertising. We finally settled on an interpretation which released the maker of the sign from any charge of prevarication.

The connection between the Holy Spirit and the Catholic Church is that much of the practice of the latter is spoken of by the former. The Holy Spirit through the apostle Paul speaks of practices which have characterized the Catholic Church, namely fasting and celibacy for spiritual purification. However, the way in which the Holy Spirit spoke of these things is not going to be perceived as complimentary by the Catholics. For instance, in Colossians 2:20-23, he reproves the same idea about fasting which the Catholics promote by calling it “will-worship” (that which originates in man’s will as opposed to God’s will) and declaring it is “not of any value against the indulgence of the flesh.” In 1 Timothy 4:1-5, the Holy Spirit says those “forbidding to marry and commanding to abstain from meats” were “giving heed to seducing spirits and doctrines of demons,” thus, speaking “lies.” We thought of stopping to suggest that such passages be put under the sign to show what connection the Holy Spirit had with the Catholic Church, but doubted that the “priest” or others in charge would take our suggestion with much thanksgiving.

Having noticed a sandwich shop by this Catholic Church building, we came back down the street from the opposite direction that we might partake rather than abstain from meats. As we passed the building a second time we noticed another structure adjoining the church building which had gone unnoticed in our first passing. It too was a modern looking building, even larger than the church building. The sign on the structure proclaimed it the “Holy Spirit Family Life Center.” I am still in the process of seeking to be edified by that sign.

Leslie and I have wondered what connection the Holy Spirit has with a “family life center,” the name most denominations give to a structure designed to house various entertainment and social facilities (i.e., gyms, racquetball courts, volleyball courts, ping pong tables, aerobics classes, weight training rooms, kitchens, hot tubs or even swimming pools). We recalled that the Spirit of God was said to have “moved upon the face of the waters” in creation (Gen. 1:2), but could not think of a reference to such happening in a swimming pool or hot tub. We remembered that the Spirit of Jehovah was said to come “mightily” upon Samson in slaying the lion and wondered if these people thought that may have required weight training. We thought about a number of passages which prophesied or related the Spirit “falling” upon one, but thought that these folks must know that such did not happen as a result of tripping on a basketball or racquetball court. Since the fruit of the Spirit is named in Galatians 5 as love, joy, peace, etc.; we believed these people could not think that fruit, was apples, oranges, and peaches necessitating a kitchen to facilitate the consumption of such. We are still pondering the relation these people saw between the Holy Spirit and their recreational facility.

It made us remember that many of our liberal brethren are evidently of one mind with these Catholics in this matter. They, too, are building their family fife centers to rival the very latest among the denominations. Surely they would not be doing so without believing such was approved by God. However, since the Holy Spirit revealed the mind of God through the apostles (1 Cor. 2:10-13), the record of that complete revelation which we possess in the New Testament must declare that approval. Would it be out of line for us to ask them where they find that approval? They must believe the Holy Spirit is connected with their family life centers, even if they will not state it as boldly as their Catholic allies in this matter. Well, where is the connection? We read about the church being “the pillar and ground of the truth” (1 Tim. 3:15). Where do they read about the church providing the pillar and ground for the basketball court? We read about providing for the spiritual maturity of saints in the truth (Eph. 4:11-16). Where do they read about it providing a hot tub in which to soak sore muscles after a racquetball or aerobics workout?

Normally, our liberal brethren when pressed for the authority to justify their social gospel efforts reply that they are “expedients.” Maybe this is the connection between the Holy Spirit and their family life centers. The Holy Spirit does speak of expedients through the apostle Paul to the Corinthians (1 Cor. 6:12; 10:23). The bad news for our liberal brethren is that both places speak of an expedient as being something which is first lawful. That makes sense. By the very term, we would expect an “expedient” to “expedite” or help something to be done. The question is, “What is being expedited by means of this expedient?” With that question in mind, these brethren still have a problem. What is the work of the church which these family life centers expedite? Evangelism of the world? Education of the brethren? Benevolence towards the saints? I fail to see how a hot tub or volleyball court could teach a sinner about the need for or identification of the Savior. Furthermore, I have the same problem in seeking edification or benevolence furthered or expedited by an aerobics class or swimming pool. No, the appeal for “expediency” to be the connection between the Holy Spirit and their family life centers won’t work!

Those present at the Nashville meeting heard numerous justifications for these recreational facilities built and maintained by churches. One brother said they were a form of advertising much more effective than our newspaper ads. Others said they were not authorized, but were too small a thing to divide over. Another segment of the speakers justified them through their “New Hermeneutic” of a “Christiological approach” to interpreting the Bible. For us simpletons, that means these new thinkers figure Christ would like to have played in and invited others to play in these “family life centers,” therefore the church can pay for them. None of these explanations will work either. They are not advertising an authorized work, but creating a new work for the church in the realm of recreation which is wholly unauthorized. Since Christ revealed his desires for the work of local churches through his apostles without mentioning recreation one time, who are these new thinkers to suppose he must have wanted such? It may be a small thing to our liberal brethren, but it is important to God whether we act in obedience to his will or disobey due to presumptuousness.

No, the connection between the Holy Spirit and these “family life centers” is not found in these feeble justifications. Instead, the connection is found in the same place we found the connection between the Holy,- Spirit and the Catholic Church. The Holy Spirit condemns the Catholic Church because it is not in harmony with his teaching regarding the true church. The Catholics go beyond that pattern laid down in the Spirit’s teaching and stand condemned (2 Jn. 9). Likewise, the Holy Spirit condemns our liberal brethren’s digression into the social gospel efforts because they are not in harmony with Ins teaching regarding the work of the true church. The liberals have gone beyond the pattern laid down in the Spirit’s teaching and stand condemned (2 Jn. 9).

Many institutional brethren understand the problem, but are not sure what to do about it. In recent years, several young preachers have left institutionalism because they see the digression brought on by going beyond God’s pattern. The family fife centers are merely one ample of this digression which also has brought the “sponsoring church arrangement,” institutions doing the work of the church, and a variety of innovations totally void of scriptural authority. Given the statements by several at Nashville, that digression is not complete., The denial of the inerrancy of Scripture, verbal inspiration, and the call for a “New Hermeneutic” in an effort to “re-interpret the Bible” suggest the digression is picking up pace. Many of them are not only “liberal” with regard to their views on the authority for their practices, but are “liberal” in the classical sense of the word! May our prayer be that some of our institutional brethren will see the danger and leave this error before it blends imperceptibly into mainstream denominationalism. Let us work to bring the truth on these issues to our erring brethren before it is too late!

Guardian of Truth XXXIII: 7, pp. 195-196
April 6, 1989

By Andy Alexander

The warnings of Paul concerning false teachers have largely fallen on deaf cars. Most people for one reason or another tend, to think every religious group of people is going to be saved. Though this is contrary to the teaching of Christ and the Apostles, they still aimlessly wander along life’s pathway believing a lie (Matt. 7:21-23; Gal. 1:6-10; 2 Thess. 2:11-12). No better illustration could be given than the group who call themselves the Jehovah’s Witnesses. Their whole organization is based upon failed prophecies.

The prophecy that has caused the largest problem over their entire existence is that concerning the events they predicted would take place beginning in the year 1914. There is a way that we as humans can easily ascertain whether a man who calls himself a prophet is speaking from God or merely speaking as a man. In Deuteronomy 18:22 God instructs us,

When a prophet speaks in the name of the Lord, if the thing does not come about or come true, that is the thing which the Lord has not spoken. The prophet has spoken it presumptuously; you shall not be afraid of him.

With this in mind, consider what the Witnesses predicted would begin happening in the yea 1914:

1. Rule of imperfect men would cease.

2. Christ would then reign as earth’s new ruler.

3. Jerusalem not longer be trodden down by the Gentiles.

4. “New heaven and new earth” with peaceful blessings recognized by all humanity.

5. God’s kingdom, organized in power, would be in the earth.

Other things were prophesied for this date, but these are enough to prove to any honest inquiring soul that C.T. Russell was a false prophet and not to be feared by any who believe God’s word in Deuteronomy. These prophecies come from their own publication, The Time Is At Hand, published twenty-rive years prior to the year 1914.

Obviously, after making such grand errors they had to come up with an alternate plan. They did this by claiming that Christ did come and begin an invisible reign upon the earth. The magnificent events that were to take place before 1914 are now shifted to begin during the generation of people who were alive during 1914. This comes from their own publication, The Truth That Leads To Eternal Life, 1968. They are now in the process of working out new dates since that generation is just about all dead and their predictions have been proven utterly false. Why cannot men just believe the simple teaching of God in his word when he tells us concerning the second coming of Christ, “For you yourselves know full well that the day of the Lord will come just like a thief in the night” (1 Thess. 5:2)?

Pointing out these facts should help those in this religion to see the error of their own teaching. Many in the Witness Organization are blind to the facts surrounding the year 1914 and all the prophecies that have failed concerning that date.

Christ’s kingdom is in existence at this very time, but it did not begin in 1914. The New Testament plainly teaches that the kingdom is the church (Matt. 16:18-19). Those who are obedient to Christ are added to his church or kingdom (Acts 2:47). The Colossians were in the kingdom when Paul penned his letter to them (Col. 1:13). In Revelation 1:9, John informs us that he was in the kingdom at the time he was writing the last book of the Bible. Christ’s kingdom will last forever as he prophesied and those who believe in Christ, repent of their sins, confess Christ before men, and are baptized for the forgiveness of their past sins receive a kingdom that cannot be shaken (Mk. 16:16; Lk. 13:3; Matt. 10:32; Heb. 12:28). The reason this kingdom cannot be shaken is because it is a spiritual kingdom, not an earthly kingdom (Jn. 18:36; Rom. 14:17). Christ is at the right hand of God on his throne at this very moment and when he returns this earth will be completely destroyed and the Judgment will occur (Acts 2:32-36; 2 Pet. 3:10-12; Heb. 9:27). We need to follow the inspired instructions that Peter gave those early Christians, “Therefore, beloved, since you look for these things, be diligent to be found by him in peace, spotless and blameless” (2 Pet. 3:14). This can only be done by obedience to the gospel of Christ (Heb. 5:9).

Guardian of Truth XXXIII: 7, p. 198
April 6, 1989

By Ron Halbrook

A magazine of history reported on America’s fascination with Jesus. Many writers have tried to explain who he is during the last 200 years.

Novelists, biographers, reformers, poets, and businessmen joined theologians and ministers in the attempt to explain what Jesus was really like, hoping that Christianity could be understood in modem terms.

He was a capitalist. He was an urban reformer. He was a country boy. He was “Comrade Jesus,” a hardworking socialist. He was the world’s first ad man.

Clearly, most of these self-serving portraits of Jesus tell us more about the lives and times of their American authors than they do about Palestine two thousand years ago (Patrick Allitt, “The American Christ,” American Heritage, Nov. 1988, pp. 128-41, see p. 128).

Jesus has been explained as a human philosopher, a black Muslim, and a psychologist who originated the positive-mental-attitude. Others have said he was a head angel or one of many prophets who have appeared in history.

The speculations and theories of modem man can never answer the question, “Who is Jesus?” The eyewitnesses and contemporaries of Jesus left the only reliable testimony about him the world will ever have. Their testimony is sound historically on the same terms as other ancient documents, but, more than that, it was inspired of God so as to preclude any possibility of error (Lk. 1:1-4; Jn. 20:30-31; 2 Tim. 3:16-17).

Jesus is the Christ of the prophets. The Old Testament prophets spoke of God sending his chosen Servant, Savior, and King to bless all mankind. This chosen one is called “the Messiah” (from Hebrew) or “the Christ” (from Greek) someone anointed or set apart to a special office. The prophets predicted the coming of God’s chosen one from the family of Abraham (Gen. 12:1-3) – from the tribe of Judah (49: 10) – a great prophet like Moses (Deut. 18:18) – a king from the royal lineage of David (Psa. 2; Isa. 11:1) – one to be born of a virgin, and in Bethlehem (Isa. 7:14; Mic. 5:2).

There is no possibility of mistaking the Messiah. Jesus alone fulfilled the prophecies and he fulfilled every one of them. Andrew told Simon, “We have found the Messiah, which is, being interpreted, the Christ. ” Philip told Nathanael, “We have found him, of whom Moses in the law, and the prophets, did write, Jesus of Nazareth, the son of Joseph” (Jn. 1:41,46).

Jesus is the son of man. Ezekiel is often called “the son of man,” meaning one who dwells in the flesh, of the order of humanity, or sharing the nature of mankind (Ezek. 2: 1, 3,8ff). The flesh is frail but the son of man must have a heart tender and open to God’s Word, which must be spoken with a determination “harder than flint” (3:7-11). Daniel saw by prophetic vision “one like the Son of man” coming to receive “dominion, and glory, and a kingdom . . . which shall not pass away” (7:13-14).

Jesus is called the Son of man 78 times in Matthew John. He identified with humanity by sharing both the blessings and the sorrows of mankind. “The Son of man came eating and drinking,” yet “the Son of man hath not where to lay his head” (Matt. 11:19; 8:20). He had power to perform miracles and to forgive sins, and was “Lord even of the sabbath day” (9:6; 12:8). In order to save a lost humanity, the Son of man was crucified and raised from the dead (Lk. 19:10; Jn. 12:23-24).

Jesus is the son of God. Jesus once asked his disciples, “Whom do men say that I the Son of man am?” Several answers were given, but Peter said, “Thou art the Christ, the Son of the living God” (Matt. 16:13-16). Jesus is of the order of Deity and shares the full nature of Godhood. He is both human and divine, fully man and fully God. When he spoke of “my Father and I,” he made himself equal with God (Jn. 5:17-18). “Before Abraham was, I AM” – Jesus was Deity (Jn. 8:58). We must “honor the Son” even as the Father (5:23).

God’s Son is the brightness of God’s glory “and the express image of his person.” Jesus is not a high angel but is “much better than the angels.” God never told an angel, “Thou art my son” (Heb. 1). God must be worshipped but not men or angels. Both men and angels worship Jesus Christ because he is divine, Deity, one of the Godhead (Matt. 4:10; Jn. 9:38; Heb. 1:6).

Jesus is the Saviorfor all men. Jesus Christ came to bruise or crush the head of Satan for all men (Gen. 3:15). Referring to Christ as the seed or descendant of Abraham, God promised, “In thee shall all families of the earth be blessed” (Gen. 12:3; Gal. 3:8,16). The Messiah was to establish God’s spiritual family so that men of “all nations shall flow unto it” (Isa. 2:14). In the same day when God would save “the remnant” of the Jews, Christ would be “an ensign” or banner for the salvation of the Gentiles as well (11:1-11).

The gospel is for all the world! Christ forces himself upon no one but offers salvation to everyone on the same terms. The “Great Commission” is truly great:

Go ye into all the world, and preach the gospel to every creature. He that believeth and is baptized shall be saved; but he that believeth not shall be damned (Mk. 16:15-16).

“Whosoever will” may come to him (Rev. 22:17).

Jesus is the perfect sacrifice for sin. “For all have sinned, and come short of the glory of God” (Rom. 3:23). We do not inherit Adam’s sin or anyone else’s sin – nor do we inherit a nature which forces us to sin. We have no such excuse for sinning. The shameful truth is we sin because we choose to (Ezek. 18:4; Jas. 1: 13-15). The Law of Moses made the Jews painfully aware of their sins, forcing them to see “the curse” of disobeying God (Gal. 3: 10). The animal sacrifices of the Old Law taught the Jews that the shedding of blood or giving of life makes “an atonement for the soul,” but “the blood of bulls and of goats” only foreshadowed the perfect sacrifice of Christ (Lev. 17:11; Heb. 10: 1-4).

The innocent died to provide forgiveness to the guilty. We do not deserve it. “Behold the Lamb of God, which taketh away the sin of the world” (Jn. 1:29).

Jesus is Lord of lords and King of kings. The expression “Lord of lords, and King of kings” indicates the ultimate source of all sovereignty, power, and rule. This highest authority inheres in the nature of Deity and is shared by the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit (Deut. 10:17; 1 Tim. 6:15; Rev. 17:14; 19:16). It is astonishing that any man could lay claim to the nature and power of Deity, but Jesus was “declared to be the Son of God with power . . . by the resurrection from the dead.” After he arose, Jesus proclaimed, “All power is given unto me in heaven and in earth” (Rom. 1:4; Matt. 28:18).

In keeping with prophecy, Jesus arose to rule and reign at the Father’s right hand as “both Lord and Christ.” In order to submit to his authority and to be saved, sinners must repent and be immersed in water (Acts 2:33-38). He is “the head over all things to the church,” which must follow his word in all things (Eph. 1:22-23). Even civil governments are overruled by him (Dan. 2:44; 4:25).

Jesus is thefinal revelation of God. “No man hath seen God at any time; the only begotten Son, which is in the bosom of the Father, he hath declared him” (Jn. 1:18). Deity is invisible to the human eye, but one of the Godhead came in flesh to make a full and final revelation of God. Throughout history God spoke by many prophets, but he “hath in these last days spoken unto us by his Son” (Heb. 1:1-2). In the lifetime of his Apostles, Jesus Christ fully revealed “all truth” by the miraculous guidance of the Holy Spirit. The word of truth is recorded in the Bible and preserved for us today (Jn. 16:13; 2 Pet. 1:12-15). All modern claims to “new” light, “new” prophecies, and dinew” revelations are false.

Jesus is the great high priest. As our high priest, Jesus bears the atoning blood to the Father, “to make reconciliation for the sins of the people” (Heb. 2:17). Rising above the Aaronic priesthood of Moses’ Law, Jesus is both King and Priest “for ever after the order of Melchisedec” (5:4-10). This great high priest knows our sorrows, temptations, and suffering – he lived in the flesh – and he pleads for us at the throne of God’s grace even now (4:15-16). He saves all who serve him (5:8-9).

Sinners today are still finding Jesus as the Christ of the prophets, the Son of man, and the Son of God! “And now why tarriest thou? Arise, and be baptized, and wash away thy sins, calling on the name of the Lord” (Acts 22:16).

Guardian of Truth XXXIII: 6, pp. 172-173
March 16, 1989

By Ron Halbrook

(Note: This is the first of two articles on the theme of “Gospel Preaching” in the light of current trends. While many faithful men of all ages are preaching the whole counsel of God, strange speech and uncertain sounds originating from sectarian sources are also being heard among us. We ignore these sounds to our own peril. These articles attempt to sketch and identify some of the speak danger signs It was not pleasant to prepare this material and it will not be pleasant to read. I hope and pray that it will be profitable to the cause of Christ.

Before publication, these articles were read by such men as those listed below. Both elders and preachers, both younger and older men are included. Without suggesting that every man would have used every point or phrase which I used, it can be said that they all agree that the issues raised need to be discussed No effort is being made to establish divine truth by an appeal to uninspired men. The point is simply this. rather than rashly rushing into print, I have sought the counsel of godly men, as we are taught to do in Proverbs 24:6.

Marshall Patton, Randy Harshbarger, Harold Fite, Paul Keller, Phil Cavender, Ed Bragwell, Edgar Dye, Dan King, Bobby Graham, Connie Adams, Bill Cavender, Weldon Warnock, James W, Adams, Wayne Partain Elmer Moore, Jack Holt Minton, TX1, H.E. Phillips, Colly Caldwell, Stan Adams, Sterling Collier, Scott Finley, Steve Wolfgang, Rick Moore, Andy A lewnder, Bill Reeves, Cecil Willis, C. P. A lexander, James Moore, J.D. Harris, Leonard 7YIer, Jerry Fite, Harry Osborne Jamie Sloan Laity Hafley Mike Willis.)

Gospel preaching must be both accurate and clear if it is to save the lost (Rom. 1:16). A clarion is a trumpet whose tones are sharp, forceful, and clear. In calling men from sin and to salvation, God has always required his messengers to sound a clarion call. It is imperative in our time that the gospel call be brilliantly clear, unmistakably clear, crystal clear. If our message is garbled, tentative, and uncertain, God will not be pleased, sinners will not be saved, and the church will not be safe from apostasy.

Then and Now

When Joshua challenged. the Israelites, “Choose you this day whom ye will serve,” he clearly distinguished the true and living God from the gods of Ur of the Chaldees, Egypt, and other lands (Josh. 24:1-15). In preparing to demolish the delusions of Baal worship, Elijah offered Israel a clear choice, “How long halt ye between two opinions? If the Lord be God, follow him: but if Baal, then follow him.” For his efforts as a prophet of God, he was considered a troublemaker by some whose convictions were unsound (1 Kgs. 18:17-21). Isaiah gave the test of true and false religions in no uncertain terms when he said, “To the law and to the testimony: if they speak not according to this Word, it is because there is no light in them” (Isa. 8:20).

Those who wanted a positive message of peace and prosperity were told by the grand old prophet Jeremiah that Jehovah commanded them to seek “the old paths” of divine revelation if they would save their souls. That message was rejected in favor of the more up-to-date one (Jer. 6:16). God set Ezekiel on the walls of Zion as a watchman to sound a clarion call at all times in upholding righteousness and condemning iniquity, even though the people would harden their faces against him. If he were to falter because of the people’s criticism – “though briars and thorns be with thee, and thou dost dwell among scorpions” – God would count him rebellious just like his critics (Ezek. 2-3).

No man spoke with greater clarity than John when he warned those coming out to his baptism that they must “bring forth works meet for repentance” or else be punished “with unquenchable fire” (Matt. 3). No one misunderstood where John stood when he told King Herod concerning his adulterous marriage, “It is not lawful for thee to have her” (Matt. 14:4). When Jesus said, “Ye shall know the truth, and the truth shall make you free,” he did not cloud that truth in ambiguity or fail to make its application to the audience specific. Some understood so well that they took up stones to cast at him (Jn. 8:32-59). In the same fashion, the Apostles of Christ “spake the word of God with boldness” and used “great plainness of speech” (Acts 4:31; 2 Cor. 3:12).

The Holy Spirit warned against uncertain speech and sounds among the people of God. “For if the trumpet give an uncertain sound, who shall prepare himself to the battle?” (1 Cor. 14:7-8) As Connie W. Adams observes, “It would be disastrous on the battle field not to be able to distinguish between the trumpet sounds for ‘charge’ and ‘retreat.”‘ Brother Adams stresses that speaking with a certain sound has always been “a fundamental principle” among those who would “return to the purity of faith and practice” found in “the oracles of God” (1 Pet. 4:11). He cautions gospel preachers not to worry about whether someone judges the message “positive” or “negative” but to be “concerned with teaching truth.” Brother Adams offered a number of such excellent and sound admonitions because, as he says, “Frankly, I am concerned about the uncertain sound coming from some of our young men (and a few of the older ones)” (editorial, “A Certain Sound,” Searching the Scriptures, July 1987, pp. 435-436).

Similar concerns are expressed by Connie W. Adams’ article “Smoother Than Butter and Softer Than Oil,” by Colly Caldwell’s “Give Attention to the Right Things” (both in ibid., Apr. 1988), and by James W. Adams’ “Red Sails In the Sunset” (Good News, bulletin of Timberland Drive Church of Christ, Lufkin, TX, 17 April 1988).

Sectarian Sources of Uncertain Sounds

A few brethren have been overly impressed with the Crossroads and Boston churches’ “total commitment” programs, have visited their seminars, and have tired to borrow from them. More than a few are reading too many denominational authors with too little discernment, and are imbibing too much sectarian error. Popular authors include Charles Swindoll of Fullerton, California, who is “Reformed” or Calvinist in outlook; Warren Wiersbe, who preached for many years at the Moody Church in Chicago and is Calvinistic; Gene Getz, who teaches at the Calvinistic and premillennial oriented Dallas Theological Seminary; and Robert Schuller of Garden Grove, California, who blends a modified Calvinism with a positive-mental-attitude message.

Bill Gothard has Reformed roots, conducts an Institute of Basic Yoxith Conflicts out of Chicago, and lectures widely on such matters as the family and humanism. Some brethren read much from John MacArthur of the Grace Community Church in Pasadena, California, whose books are published by the Calvinist publisher Moody Press. Brethren enamored with new fads such as “discipleship” or “counseling” find plenty of sectarian literature and authors from which to choose. An institutional preacher who is too liberal for many liberals (but not for some among us) is Jim McGuiggan, presently in Ireland. Some of his commentaries are fair, but he is mediating such themes as the new “spirituiaity” and “discipleship” through tapes and personal contacts. All of us read from sectarian authors at times, but some brethren are not separating the wheat from the chaff in such materials.

Harry Pickup, Jr. recently warned about the imbalance in the comparative reading habits of many brethren. As he explained, there is a scandalous ignorance of

Alexander Campbell’s writings, especially The Christian System, and of those of T.W. Brents [his excellent Gospel Plan of Salvation was recently reprinted by The Guardian of Truth Foundation], Benjamin Franklin, J.W. McGarvey, Moses Lard, Tolbert Fanning, David Lipscomb, R.L. Whiteside, Foy E. Wallace, Jr., Roy Cogdill, to say nothing of many clear and perceptive modem writers. To compound the problem, people who are exceptionally ignorant of the writings of these men are increasingly familiar with denominational writers such as Francis Schaeffer, John R.W. Stott, Charles Swindoll, the LeHayes [sic, LaHayes), and C.S. Lewis (Melvin Curry, ed., Hebrews for Every Man: Florida College Annual Lectures, 1988, p. 167).

Guardian of Truth XXXIII: 7, pp. 193, 215
April 6, 1989