Devoted to the Propagation and Defense of New Testament Christianity
July 21, 1955

No Misrepresentation Intended

R. L. (Bob) Craig, Lometa, Texas

I am in receipt of a letter from Reuel Lemmons, editor of the Firm Foundation, in which he says that I, and others, have misrepresented him. In particular he calls attention to a recent article of mine, "Can Both Be Right?", which was sent to him and to the Guardian, but was published only by the latter. He says, "In the article you misrepresent what I said about orphans homes on the nature of Boles completely. The last two sentences in Paragraph 4 are not accurate. You try to make me say something I did not say, and which I do not believe. This is the failure of some others too." (Please read my article of June 2.)

It is not my intention to misrepresent anyone. If truth cannot be arrived at without misrepresentation, then we will let truth remain buried. If I misrepresented Brother Lemmons or anyone else, then it was completely unintentional. And if I did, it was because he has not been as clear and emphatic in what he believes as he should be. Further, if I did, then I am ready to apologize. My deduction was based on what he had already said in other letters, and articles, but I will not go into them because they are personal correspondence. But I would like to quote from the one in which he accuses me of misrepresenting him and then allow you to draw your own conclusion. Here is what he says and I quote verbatim. "I want to make it clear that I do not believe that an orphans home, directed by a board that is larger than a local eldership, is a `church institution' or is 'the church at work.' If you quote Brother Oler correctly, then he and I are in complete agreement on the subject. Homes of this nature are, as you presented, 'service institutions' on a level with a hospital or post office in some respects. As such they should be supported by individuals or their services `bought' by congregations." To make the statement more complete and still not wishing to misrepresent anyone we give the exact quotation from Brother Oler to which I had referred and that Brother Lemmons mentions in his statement. "Boles Home is not an organization within the church, nor of the church. There never was any organization under the elders of the New Testament church except the local congregation. We believe that the simple New Testament arrangement must be held inviolate. Private homes, hotels, radio stations, children's homes or anything else that renders services to churches of Christ must retain their status as separate organizations, and that is where Boles Home stands."

The only question to answer now is, "Does Brother Lemmons believe that it is right and scriptural to place private homes, hotels, radio stations, children's homes and everything else that renders services to the church, in the budget of the church for regular support, even when these service institutions are not being used by the church?" If he says "yes" then I apologize to him and say that he does not stand in the scriptural position where I placed him in my article. If he says "no," then he must oppose Boles Home, as it now is, and there is no apology due him, for that is where I said he stood in the first place. Will Brother Lemmons please set the record straight?