Letters to the Editor

Names of those Disfellowshipped

Frequently, we receive complaints about including in the Ecclesial News the names of those who have been disfellowshipped.

As with many aspects of ecclesial life, there are pros and cons to this practice. The negative aspects are the danger of wide publicity inhibiting a return to fellowship and pos­sible embarrassment to other parties.

However, as editing the magazine has made obvious, wide publicity can have the useful effect of alerting distant relatives and old friends to someone’s spiritual problems. Help can possibly come from such brethren and sisters, many of whom would be very upset if they did not have the opportunity to offer such assistance. In most cases, the purpose of disfel­lowship is salvation. The hope is that the individual’s experience apart from the ecclesia will make them want to repent and return. If we respond to notifications of disfellowship with the loving intent of ultimate refel­lowship, publicity should help, and not hurt, the individual.

In a minority of situations, other ecclesias need to be protected against unscrupulous individuals. There can be no doubt that, if such is the case, the local ecclesia involved needs to publicize their actions and the rea­sons for them.

In addition, hopefully others will be dissuaded from duplicating the conduct that has led to the disfellow – ship of someone else.

Overall, we feel the present practice is justified.

God and Creation

Dear Bro. Styles:

On reading the articles entitled “God and the Universe,” I am reminded of the observation by Lord Atkin in the judgment of the famous Deeks vs Macmillan, Wells, et. al. case. “After all, neither Miss Deeks nor Mr. (H.G.) Wells was present at the beginning of the world or until a very considerable time later…”

The word science comes from the Latin Scire which meant to know. Speculations concerning the origin of this universe do not fall within the category of science at all for the simple reason that no one knows what happened. Scientists may develop models and equations and theories but not one of them is entitled to declare, I know. Furthermore, there is no universal agreement concerning the theories about the origin of the universe. Many are the critics of Einstein’s and Hoyle’ s models.

Most of man’ s attempts to explain the origin of the universe and living things on this planet are designed to un-God the universe. Einstein clearly revealed his notions in his request that “teachers of religion must have the stature to give up the doctrine of a personal God.” “Science News Letter” Sept. 21, 1940.

The closest that some scientists come to acknowledging God is that He worked by means of evolution and the Big Bang.

The only information we have of knowing facts concerning the formation of the universe and living things on this planet is contained in the Bible. The Big Bang is unknown to the first chapter of Genesis.

Would any layman reading Gen. 1 get the idea that the universe was formed 10 to 20 billion years ago when everything that now exists was compressed into a volume not as large as a speck of smoke? Would he come away with the notion that the sun, moon and stars were formed over a period of billions of years by means of a Big Bang that God engineered from a speck of compressed matter/energy?

On the contrary, Psalm 33 records: “By the word of the Lord were the heavens made; and all the host of them by the breath of his mouth.” When the Psalmist says, “When I consider thy heavens, the work of thy fingers, the moon and stars which thou hast ordained…” would anyone guess that what really happened was a Big Bang billions of years ago from which condensed the heavenly bodies? Concerning the origin of the universe, we are informed that, “God spake, and it was done; He commanded and it stood fast” (Psa. 33:9). This does not sound to me like a prolonged period of “creation” stretching over billions of years!

A growing number of scientists, equipped with the PhD degree, are convinced that the universe is very young rather than very old and that the scenario of evolution concerning the origin of the universe and of living things on this planet is false.

Philologos (E.W.F.)

In his article, Bro. Billelo did not mention evolution. He does not be­lieve in it and has presented forceful studies throughout the community showing the theory of evolution to be rubbish. The point of his series was to demonstrate that the evidence God created the universe is so pervasive that skeptics are forced to acknowledge it whenever they pursue true science. All of the way through his series, the word “theory” is used. “Theory” is not fact, but as man’s theories come closer to fact they come closer to an open recognition of God and His creative hand. We believe Bro. Billelo made this point clear in his essay.

Note, too, the scriptural indications that Genesis 1 does not supply full details on the creative process. “Let the waters under the heaven be gathered together unto one place” (Gen. 1:9) involved a process of rearranging the surface of the earth and making shorelines capable of restricting the power of the seas. “Who shut up the sea with doors…and brake up for it my decreed place, and set bars and doors…(who) set the sand for the bound of the sea” (Job 38:8-10; Jer. 5:22). While “God spake, and it was done,” there was evidently a process involved in carrying out His edicts.

So far as the antiquity of the universe is concerned, we favor Bro. Thomas’ approach in Elpis Israel chapter 2: “Let the reader peruse the history of the creation as a revelation to himself as an inhabitant of the earth…To an observer on the earth, this was the order of their (the stars and sun) appearance; and in relation to him a primary creation, though absolutely pre-existent for millions of ages before the Adamic Era.”

A key passage to keep in mind is Deut. 29:29: “The secret things belong unto the LORD our God: but those things which are revealed belong unto us and to our children for ever, that we may do all the words of this law.”

Abortion

Dear Bro. Styles:

Would you consider publishing my letter regarding abortion which appeared in “The Testimony” August, 1986 or possibly the attached article?

Your sister in Christ
Enesworth “Pixie” McLeod
50035 McLeod Rd.
Langlois, OR 97450

We have published the article under the “Family Life in the Lord” section.

In addition to the points covered by S is. McLeod, some other Bible verses should be noted. Jet 20:17 speaks of the child which dies in the womb as a person. Job 3:16 puts the stillborn child in the same category as one that is born alive but immediately dies (vs.11-12) thereby suggesting the fetus is considered a human being. In Exo. 21:22, the phrase “her fruit depart from her” is rendered by the NIV, “if she gives birth prematurely” thus making it clear a child is born but may be injured or dead due to the miscarriage.

A few years ago, we were not wholly convinced that a strong stand against abortion in the early months of pregnancy was scriptrually supportable. However, additional evidence, both scriptural and scientific, has convinced us of the validity of the position expressed by Sis. McLeod.

Letters to Susan

Dear Brother Don:

Your “Family Life in the Lord” section is a wonderful help for young people and the article to Susan would be useful as a discussion item at CYC .

Your sister in the one hope,
L.W., Toronto, ONT

You may be interested to know that some young people are already using the series as a basis for discussion. The articles were written with that possible use in mind.

Dear Brother Editor:

I have been following the “Family Life in the Lord” series with some interest.

I agree with everything said in the February (1989) issue’s installment about “friends in the world” except the blanket assertion that we cannot have them and hold to the Truth. It was assumed, I think, that all friendships in the world are based merely on common (fleshly) tastes, senses of humor, or entertainments, etc. Nearly all such friendships are based on these, of course, and as such are worse than useless. But, by God’s grace, rare exceptions can occur. I went to high school in peer isolation with two particularly serious, reasonable young men with whom I had a lot in common on a somewhat higher level. Their minds were much like mine, with the exception that I had the Truth of God and they didn’t. I was able to make them understand, as best they could, how important the Truth was to me. While they could never really sharpen me (Prov. 27:17) as could another “called of God,” they were and are my friends. One of them is now earnestly studying the scriptures, thank God.

I realize that I was in an exceptional situation and am not suggesting that everyone could do this. Nor do I know if it would have been different were I a sister. The dangers mentioned in the letter are real enough. But I think my experience is worthy of mention.

I would also disagree that it is possible to “grow to love someone.” I know you will throw the example of Isaac at me (note the sequence of actions in Gen. 24:67) but he was living in a much different culture. In pre-industrial society, marriage was much more of a working affair than it is now; the family unit was necessary to laborious survival. Given such challenging common tasks as a family engaged in daily, husband and wife could grow together much more readily than today with our outrageously high standard of living, where aside from raising children (certainly very important!) the only real reason to marry is for love. Given the practical roles of husband and wife in today’s post-industrial society, it seems to me that an excellent match is necessary to begin with. And, of course, it can only be made by God — certainly none of us is wise enough to find such a match without His blessing.

God bless your work.

With regards in Christ,
Bro. Tom Price
Pittsburgh, PA

Actually, there is no disagreement between us other than in the use of the word “friend.” We have used it in the narrower sense of someone to whom we can open our hearts on the deeper issues of life with assurance that we are at one on them. You are applying the word in a broader sense, using it of those who are amiable acquaintances with whom we can pass pleasant hours.

Your description of the two men with whom you found some compatibility matches the experience of many. As you have intimated, the power and scope of the Truth is such that even though we have much in common in every other way, this one difference is so great that it prevents us from being “friends” in the more complete sense of the word. Eventually, if they do not take hold of the Truth, we will drift apart from even amiable acquaintanceship.

Your point about married couples in today’s society is a true but sad commentary on a situation we must work to avoid. We are to “dwell with” our wives, spending considerable time together as true partners in life, not just sleeping under the same roof with them. If our lifestyle is such that we spend little time together, some changes are in order.

As you have acknowledged, time together will cause love to grow especially where people have the basic compatibility of the Truth and want a marriage to work. The importance of romantic love is overblown in western societies. Too often it fades as quickly as it flourishes. When that happens, if a relationship has no solid elements binding it together, it will quickly disintegrate.

A marriage that begins with less romantic love but a joint commitment to the Truth along with a similarity of tastes, etc. has a much better chance of success, with God’s blessing, than one where the members are madly in love but do not share the Truth.

Our point to Susan was that if you are going to compromise in anything, better it be on the point of romantic love rather than on the element of sharing a love for the Truth.

Dear Brother Don:

Permit me to say, at the outset, that I do not feel you have provided “an answer” for Susan.

You have expressed a philosophy which may not be of much help to Susan, given what I perceive is her present dilemma.

To send young people away to college, or see them relocate for employment purposes, perhaps in isolation, and not expect them to develop friendships with other human beings is not only unrealistic, it is unfair. Worse still, it can be counter productive and may well be far from what the Lord Jesus Christ expects of those whom he entrusts to teach God’s word in these last days.

You say to her, concerning having friends in the world, “you cannot do that and hold to the Truth.” This view pre-supposes a lack of confidence, even faith, on her part — which may not be the case, while, in effect, preventing her from spreading God’s word, which work often requires close or extended personal relationships.

Indeed, we should have “nothing in common” with friends “outside” — unless it is the greatest common denominator offered to men — the opportunity to hear of and learn of God’s way.

I seek no friendships in the world, yet as a business owner for 30 years, I have had many valued and lasting friendships with individuals of varied types, not one of which compromised my covenant relationship in Christ. Rather, some of those people were influenced to search out God’s word for themselves and a few did so.

Interestingly, a review of our ecclesial membership about two years ago revealed the following:

• of the four examining brethren, none were from Christadelphian fami­lies.
• of the seven arranging brethren, five came in “from the world,” between the ages of 19 to 28, and three of them were introduced to the Truth by their respective spouses.
• half of the 14 exhorting brethren “came out and were separate,” the same goes for door keeping brethren.
• similar comparisons exist with pre­siders and readers.

All of this occurred within a single generation; and possibly none of these servants would have come to a knowledge of the Truth had not some Chris­tadelphian extended the helping hand of friendship, whether through romance or other ways.

Unquestionably, romantic interests offer more potential for difficulty, even entanglement, but they do happen – and they often result in a new brother or sister for which we rejoice. In our family, we have the case of my daughter, who was immersed with her husband, he having come out of the world to a knowledge of God’s Truth. Conversely, my son was able to find his mate within the household.

Yes, as you have said, it is best if young people can date within the brotherhood. However, affairs “of the heart” cannot be programmed, nor should they be arranged or contrived.

Some disastrous Christadelphian marriages have resulted in trying to “learn to love someone” after the untieable knot has been tied.

As you have said “married life can bring enormous problems;” indeed so, and both partners being raised as Christadelphians is no guarantee of happiness regardless of how they start out. What you did not say is that most marital problems in or out of the Truth, originate over sex, money or ambition, often all three, to which may be added anything from substance abuse to inter-family bickering, rivalries or pressures.

Since your book “Family Life in the Lord” was recently the subject for our adult Sunday school class, at which I presided many times, and from which study much was gained by all, I understand completely the concept and purpose of the book, and the ideals expressed therein.

Often family life includes relations with families not in the Lord. Should we turn away from them and fail to offer them Christ’s love, be­cause they are only friends or relatives through marriages of others not in the Lord? I think not.

Having said this, I prayerfully call to your notice that since friendships “in the world” do occur, what is required of us is not to forbid them anymore than we would encourage them; rather, we need to monitor the degree of intensity, duration and circumstance of each individual case, offering instruction as needed, counsel where helpful, to the end that, living our lives in the Lord, we hope that the shining light of God’s truth and Christ’s example will never be “hid under a bushel.”

Your brother in grace,
David 0. Millard
Worcester, MA
Ecclesia of Christadelphians

This letter raises several interesting points clearly demonstrating the usefulness of an open exchange of ideas among the servants of God.

At the heart of the apparent disagreement between Bro. Millard and ourselves is our use of the word “friend” in our letter to Susan. We deliberately used the word in a specific scriptural sense in order to make a point. Congenial acquaintances in the world should not be the same as “friends” in the narrower sense of the word. If they are, it is a warning flag to us that we are drifting from true friendship with Christ. This is particularly true when we are considering someone as our partner for life. In such circumstances, Susan is asking for great difficulty if her acquaintance becomes her “friend” before he becomes “friends with” Christ.

In both Old and New Testaments, words are used in the original languages (Hebrew and Greek) which make the same distinction reflected in our comments to Susan. In the Hebrew, Rea is rendered “friend” 42 times and “neighbor” 104 times thus referring to an acquaintance. Aheb is translated “friend” 12 times and “love” or “lover” 100’s of times and refers to true friendship. In the Greek, Philos is used of the closer relationship and Hatairos of one who is an associate or friend in the broader sense. The only ones spoken of as friends (Philos) of God and Christ are Abraham (Jam. 2:23), John the Baptist (John 3:29), Lazarus (John 11:11) and the disciples (Luke 12:4; John 15:13-15).

There is one other distinction about this word that should be noted: Christ was a “friend (Philos) of” publicans and sinners in the sense that he gave of himself in an effort to save them from sin. However, he was only friends “with” them if they became his disciples and followed his commands.

In like manner, we can be a friend “of” a person in seeking to save them while not being friends “with” them until they share our convictions and standards. In fact, the true disciple will be a kind, courteous, forgiving, gentle, approachable, patient, self-giving person. He will be widely regarded as “friendly.” He will therefore have many opportunities for speaking the Truth to his acquaintances. Many of them may regard him as their friend; but he will not be friends “with” them as long as they are of the world. For them to be his friends, he would have to feel a oneness of purpose and priorities with them which he will not do if he is committed to Christ and they are not. Isolation

Sending our children into isolation to attend school is surely unjustifiable. Even if we live in a remote area, there are plenty of schools near ecclesial centers. Such schools may not have the best curriculum’s in a given discipline but that consideration must be put secondary to the young person’s spiritual welfare.

Moving into isolation for the purpose of employment is hazardous and questionable. Theoretically, it could be a way of opening up a new ecclesial area but in most cases the result is spiritual stagnation or regression. Again, spiritual considerations should be given priority over temporal ones. Ecclesial tendencies

Bro. Millard has introduced some numerical data into the discussion. The percentage of converts sounds impressive but what percentage of Christadelphian young people are being baptized? While many are coming from the world, many potential Chris­tadelphians may be falling away due to alien dating.

Using statistics is always hazardous as we can judge nothing before the time and simply being a Chris­tadelphian does not guarantee we are one of Christ’s. However, our curiosity was aroused and we did a similar count of the two Detroit eccle­sias. Four of 16 arranging brethren are from non-Christadelphian background and all were introduced to the Truth by young sisters whom they later married. About 25% of serving brethren in all capacities did not go to a Christadelphian Sunday school and so came “from the world” in that sense. We suspect the lower percentage reflects a difference in ecclesial attitude.

Great emphasis is placed on no social association with “the world” in Detroit’s youth program. Many brethren and sisters devote much time to providing alternative activities so the young people do not feel cheated in this regard. As a result, in recent years there are even fewer converts coming from dating in the world than was previously the case. What has been the overall effect?

During the last 15 years, 86% of all Christadelphians have been bap­tized. Total membership has risen by 36% and Sunday school membership by 350% during the same time. 22% of the members have come “from the outside” during the last 15 years. Which indicates much preaching has continued. We don’t know if these numbers tell a story or not because we do not know what the comparable figures would be for other ecclesias.

We are a small community. Our social instincts yearn for human companionship. While sympathizing with this need,the greater issue is our eternal fate. Remaining faithful to the end is not easy. Worldly associates can weaken our resolve and lower our standards. “The whole world lieth in wickedness” is the divine appraisal. Therefore we recommend great caution in this matter.

Isolation Difficult

Dear Brother Don,

Greetings in the Great Hope we share.

We want to express our sincere gratitude for the report in the “Tidings” regarding our situation here in Double springs, Alabama. God willing, it will encourage our brethren and sisters to visit. I never imagined how tough it can be in isolation. But we understand that we should be content in whatever state we are in, as was the apostle Paul. God knows what is best for our spiritual growth. All things are working together for our good.

We are just so thankful that God has opened our eyes to the Truth. Having to deal with so many who worship God without knowing the Truth gives us more reason to rejoice in our trials.

After the write-up in the “Tidings,” the Brooks in Georgia called and, God willing, we will soon enjoy their fellowship.

Jamie and Meletta Lolley join me in love to you all and to all the breth­ren.

With love in Christ,

Christy Lolley
RR 3 , Box 652,
Doublesprings, AL 35553

We are pleased to hear that some response has already resulted from the information published last month. Hopefully, more brethren and sisters will find it possible to spend some time with you.

While ecclesial life has its aggravating moments, there is no doubt that the fellowship of others in the Truth is far superior to living in isolation. We know you are trying to change your situation by actively discussing the Truth with friends and neighbors and we understand you would like to have some lectures in your area.

We well remember a situation in Wichita Falls, Texas where for years there was only one brother, two sisters and three youngsters. They seemed to be getting nowhere in their preaching efforts until finally, after years of persistence, things changed. Several people moved to the area from other ecclesias and there were several baptisms of interested friends. Now, under the blessing of God, there is a thriving ecclesia in that city.

So do not give up! As long as circumstances require you to live in isolation, keep providing the light of the Truth in your area, praying that God will eventually bless your efforts to establish a light stand.

The rest of us should take note of the situation and supply as much help as we can through prayer and personal visits. Perhaps there is even someone who will see this as an opportunity to go into the mission field right here in the States.

May God bless you and keep you in His loving care until our Lord comes.

Fraternal Greetings

Hello Sister Deborah (Sis. Deborah Bruce, Subscriptions Secretary),

Greetings to you and to all of our brethren and sisters in the name of our Lord.

Thank you for sending us the “Tidings.” It keeps us up to date and we particularly enjoy the comments on the daily readings.

Bro. George & Sis. Cath Anglin
4244 NW 98th Way
Sunrise, FL 33351

As a small community scattered across a great continent, we hope the “Tidings” does serve a purpose in binding us closer together as a living family of God.

Prayers Needed

Dear Brother Don,

Greetings in the name of Jesus.

On July 29 , 1988,  I accidentally fell and injured my back. I spent eight days in the hospital and three months in recuperation.

I need the efficacious prayers of you and the brethren that God might help me with my health and financial problems.

Love in the Master’s Name,

Sis. Rosalind Daniels
Elmwood Care Center
Maryville, IL 62062

As Sis. Daniels noted in a subsequent letter, the trials of this life greatly enhance our desire for the kingdom. Surely all creation groans waiting for the redemption of the body of Christ

Comments Appreciated

Dear Brother Don,

Greetings in the Master’s name.

It was encouraging to read your strong support of and good words concerning the BASF. We are thankful to our heavenly Father for that. As a result of your editorial comments, one of this country’s most respected elderly brethren recently wrote: “As for me, and for mine, the BASF stands firmly as a statement of divine truth and the boundary of fellowship.”

More positive affirmations are what our Amended companions are looking for and need in these last perilous times. For this reason, the comments and matters alluded to by Bro. Dan McDonald of the North Industry Ecclesia (“Tidings,” 9-101 88, pgs. 145-146) are apropos and worthy of serious consideration. In like manner, the ecclesial news from Sarasota in the same magazine issue is also worthy of note. Emphasizing the same points is Brother H.P. Mansfield’s article “Peace without honour” (“Logos,” 11/87, pgs. 35­-40).

Your brother in the one hope,

J. Ashley Higham
1823 W. Victor Hts. Dr.
Bloomington, IN 47403

All of us love God and His Word and are grieved by the amazing distortion of the Truth that has beset Christianity since the first century. Our fondest hope is to participate in the glories of the age to come when everyone everywhere will be taught only the Truth.

The fact that now we must draw lines is not a consequence of the love of God or of our desire for exclusiveness but of the stubborn iniquity of men in refusing to believe God’s promises and accept His gracious revelation of Himself and His will.

As we are forced to draw lines between truth and error, we should never lose sight of the fact that it is the teaching of scripture which is vital and the BASF is only useful because it provides an excellent summary of that teaching. This point is well made in the Jersey City Resolution, the document that climaxed a reunion of most Berean Christadel­phians on this continent with the Central fellowship throughout the world.

Clause one of the Jersey City Resolution reads (emphasis added): “That we agree that the doctrines set forth in the BASF are a true exposition of the oracles of God as set forth in the teachings of Jesus Christ and his apostles, and that therefore these doctrines are to be believed and taught by us without reservation; the doctrine of the Scriptures on sin and its effects and God’s salvation from sin and death in Christ Jesus being defined in clauses three to twelve of the statement of faith.”

Sometimes in our conversational short-hand, we substitute “the BASF” for “the doctrines set forth in the BASF.” Over a period of time, this short-speak can lead us to forget that the same doctrines can be articulated in a different selection of words. There can be little doubt that if the BASF were to be written today, the emphasis and vocabulary would differ a little to reflect the issues of our day both within and without the brotherhood.

As far as we are concerned, we believe and teach the doctrines set forth in the BASF without reservation. We say this against the background of having read all of the Christadelphian magazines published in the 1860’s and 1870’s and as one who has looked up all the Bible references which are an integral part of the BASF. We are, therefore, aware of the historical and Biblical context in which the statements are made and for that reason feel we have a grasp of the intent of the BASF. Incidentally, we would commend such an endeavor to every Christadelphian, for the statement of faith, with references, provides an excellent base for instructing anyone in the first principles.

Family Life in the Lord

Dear Brother Don,
Greetings in Jesus’ name,

I would like to take this opportunity to thank you for the past year’s subscription. The “Tidings” has been informative and helpful. I pray that, through the blessings of Yahweh, it may be so on an even greater scale in the coming year, should that be His will.

I have a copy of your book “Family Life in the Lord” and have been reading it. I have found very informative and blessed guidance in it. The word of God offers all instruction for life and, when placed appropriately in our writings, becomes our tool and staff while we await Jesus’ return. With five young children, I found your book so helpful.

May God’s blessing be with you and yours as we await His son’s re­turn.

Yours for the mercy of God unto life eternal,

William Leathersich
8669 North Rd
Churchville, NY 14428

Thank you for your comments; they are very encouraging. The cooperation of many brethren and sisters is represented in the family life book so it reflects a cross-section of our community.

Dear Brother Don,

Just a quick note regarding a possible series of articles for the “Tidings” magazine. I have heard

numerous times that Christadelphian standards are too high — “we must keep up with the times in which we live” (which to me means go “down” with the world).

Perhaps someone could write a series showing that God’s standards don’t change over the generations which is why the Bible, although so old, is still so relevant.

Many I have talked with thought your book “Family Life in the Lord” set standards too high and unattainable! I felt they were realistic and with effort could be attained.

May 1989 be the year our Lord re­turns. We need him so badly.

Love in Jesus,
A Concerned Sister

We will certainly keep your request in mind for a series on godly standards. In the meantime, we try to address matters relevant to this topic in the magazine section on family life and in some of the editorials.

Your feedback regarding reactions to the “Family Life” book intrigues me. One of our specific editing objectives was to make sure no practical suggestions were included which had not actually been implemented, in real life, over a period of time. If someone could mention a specific point which they feel is unrealistic, we would be interested to hear from them.

The two points we personally find the most difficult to implement both come from unambiguous scripture passages: making spiritual topics part of everyday conversation (Deut 6:6-7) and imitating the love of Christ in our relations with our partner (Eph. 5:25-30). High standards to be sure, but set by God and not by any human.

One area that we have received a lot of complaints about is our position that parents can raise their children in the Truth if they start early enough and prayerfully follow scriptural guidelines. Our contention is that this is the only reasonable understanding of Prov. 22:6: “Train up a child in the way he should go: and when he is old, he will not depart from it.”

Reinforcing our understanding of Proverbs has been our 30-year experience with a specific ecclesial program. During that time, 57 young people have participated in this program, 54 of them are baptized and active in the ecclesia. That is a 95% baptism rate. We recognize being a Christadelphian does not guarantee approval at the judgment seat but it certainly is a step in the right direction. A reasonable amount of parental involvement is required to make the program work, but the demands on time or Bible knowledge are in no way unrealistic.

Consequently, we would like to hear from any who feel the standards set forth in the family life book are not attainable in today’s world. We think they are and would be pleased to help with further practical examples and suggestions if such should be desired.

Home Schooling

“Fathers … bring up (your chil­dren) in the discipline and instruction of the Lord” (Eph. 6:4 RSV).

“Hear, 0 sons, a father’s instruction, and be attentive that you may gain insight; for I give you good precepts: do not forsake my teaching” (Prov. 4:1-2 RSV).

I was greatly distressed after reading Bro. Scott’s letter to the editor in the July-August, 1988 Tidings on the subject of home schooling. As one who has been schooled at home, I find that his views are, in fact, the opposite of mine on this subject. He states quite boldly that home schooling is a “trap … putting at great risk the welfare and social-emotional development of their children.” He further says it is the “wrong means” for shielding our children from the moral pollution of the world. And that it produces “sad results … twisted and warped personalities from attempts to dispense with organized schools.” Can these be the results of loving, prayerful, parental guidance and instruction? I do not think so.

Bro. Scott quotes, “We are ambassadors for Christ” (I Cor. 5:20) and indicates children are being prepared for this role being in public schools: “from an early age, (the child)learns to be ‘not of the world.” I question the idea of a child at the tender age of seven or eight being able to be “not of this world,” or a sojourner in a foreign land.

Yes, parents can guide children in these ways, but a child’s personality is shaped by whomever the child is around. If he is in school all day, he will naturally begin to pick