Truth Magazine

By 

There are many things people seek in religion today. Some look for the church with the most parking spaces or the most elegant building. Some look for a place to display their clothing, or for a place where the preacher will not preach very long or hard. Some think the elders and preachers give the congregation a hard time by being anti-modernistic a n d trying to teach the word of God as it should he taught. (Of course, such faithful brethren will not be very popular with the younger generation).

It is said one colored preacher told his congregation that one fifth of them wore out the knees of their trousers praying while the other four-fifths wore out the seat of their trousers backsliding. The same is true today. In many ways, we can deny Christ just as Peter did. Many of us condemn Peter for his action, but we do the same thing in our every day walks of life. We are going to be held responsible for teaching the pure word of God. If we fail in this, then I’m afraid the younger generation and the following one will have plenty of parking spaces, be long on air conditioning and very short on sermons and the practice of a pure religion.

When we surrender to the will of Christ and obey his word, the Lord forgives our sins and purifies our souls like that of a newborn baby. Jesus can’t keep sin out of our lives – we must do this in manifesting the fruits of repentance. He told the sinful woman to “go and sin no more” (John 8:11). Again we read, “Draw nigh to God and he will draw nigh to you. Cleanse your hands ye sinners; purify your hearts ye double minded” (Jas. 4:8). The responsibility for a change in our conduct and character is ours. We must change. Christ can’t clean up our sinful lives while we continue in evil doing. He has promised to aid, guide and sustain us, but the actual obligation of refusing to sin is ours. Let us here note some things Christ is unable to do for us.

He Can’t Purify Our Bodies While Our Hearts Are Evil

Jesus said, “For from within, out of the heart of men, proceed evil thoughts, adulteries, fornications, murders, thefts, covetousness, an evil eye, blasphemy, pride, foolishness: All these evil things come from within, and defile the man” (Mark 7:21). Sin that is made evident in the actions of the body has actually had its origination in our minds. The intellect of man is responsible for his sins. If we would possess bodies that are clean and pure, we must first clean up the inner man. If we would speak words that are sound and “cannot be condemned,” we must be sure that speech emanates from a clean heart, for “out of the abundance of the heart the mouth speaketh” (Matt. 12:34). Whoever thinks evil long will soon find himself saying or doing evil. Thus Paul admonishes Christians to think on things that are honest, just, true, lovely, of good report, virtuous, and worthy of praise (Phil. 4:8). Christ can’t control our thoughts, nor can He make our lives to be in contrast with that which we think on.

Christ Can’t live Our Lives for Us

Christianity is a doing religion. Jesus went about doing good to others, and we are commanded to “be ye doers of the word, and not hearers only” (Jas. 1:22). Pure religion includes helping those in need and keeping oneself unspotted from the world (Jas. 1:21). The Lord is not going to pay our debts, give our money to the poor, force us to help the feeble and downtrodden. Pure religion does not consist in what He does for us, but what we do for Him and His.

Jesus can’t make us honest, benevolent, helpful, zealous and kindhearted. Yet, those are all attributes He requires of us. He will not perform a miracle on the bank to keep our credit good, nor does the banker investigate the record of Christ to determine our credit rating. Again, Jesus does not remove the food in our pantry and give it to the poor, nor does he reach into our pockets to relieve the beggar. The widow and orphan are not sustained by a miracle from heaven, nor does the Lord make the beds, wash sheets, clean blankets, etc. so we can have a bed to give to the unfortunate. The fevered brow of the sick is not touched with a cool, damp cloth from heaven. The feeble and downtrodden are not sustained and encouraged by a special guardian angel sent to them by some miraculous means. Christ came to do the will of the Father, and did it perfectly, but He can’t do for us what God has given as our own responsibilities.

He Can’t Make a Good Worker Out of the Unwilling

Jesus can’t make a good teacher out of the unprepared, because one must first be a student before he can become a scholar. The Lord can’t make a good personal worker of one who won’t speak to people about the truth, just like he can’t make a good bishop out of one who does not desire to thus serve. He can’t make a preacher out of the unwilling to speak, nor a good song leader of one who just will not sing. Jesus can’t even make a good janitor of one who won’t sweep, or a good deacon of one who is not eager to be a servant of men.

He Can’t Preach the Gospel to the World

The Lord committed the charge of preaching the gospel to us, and if we fail to preach it, it just won’t be preached at all (2 Tim. 2:2). But, just as Christ can’t do the physical job of preaching the gospel to lost souls, neither can he take money from our pockets and put it into the contribution basket to supply the support of those who do get out and preach the word of God. We must supply those funds ourselves if the work of the Lord is to be carried out.

We are preaching daily by how we live and what we do for the cause of Christ. In the day of judgment, the millions who will face the Lord unprepared will not point the accusing finger at Jesus, for He has done everything He could. But, unless we have been faithful in our various duties and efforts to teach the lost, they will accuse us, and justly.

Truth Magazine, VI: 3, pp. 16-17
December 1961

By Rodney Wald

In Exodus 32, we read of a very tragic and insulting sin which the people of. Israel committed against the Lord. Only a year or so before, God had wonderfully delivered the children of Israel out of Egyptian bondage. He divided the Red Sea, enabling over a million people to cross on dry land between the “walls of water.” In a short space of a few months, these people “looked back” and wanted to return to Egypt.

As Moses was up in Mount Sinai receiving the Law from God, the people became impatient. They requested Aaron to “make us gods which shall go before us” (Ex. 32:1). The “golden calf” was the result. Imagine the insult to the God of Heaven and earth when the people said, concerning their golden calf, “These are thy gods, O Israel, which brought thee up out of the land of Egypt.” They ascribed to an IMPERSONAL IDOL of their own making what only a SUPERNATURAL and- all-powerful God could do.

This is the very same thing that has happened to the blind followers of the devilish “theory of evolution,” which is taught to our young people in high schools and colleges. Only the day of judgment will reveal how many millions of people have lost their right to eternal life by bowing before this “modern golden calf” which tries to “replace God” by a fantastic theory of how life began and developed to its present state. These idolaters (evolutionists) – ascribe to an impersonal force what only a Supernatural, living God could do, namely, give life.

We want to notice the absurdity of a theory, which demands, if true, living things came from non-living materials- and “somehow” something originally came from nothing!

Atheists are most unreasonable when they try to explain the origin of matter and life. Some scientists try to avoid facing the issue by proclaiming that the universe is millions of years old. But do they tell us how the universe began? NO! And for a good reason. They can’t unless they acknowledge a creative force or else that matter or “something” has always existed.

 

When they tell us that our earth is a fragment of another planet, which “cooled off”, making life possible, we ask two questions: (1) Where did the other planet come from? and (2) How did life originate?

It is enough to say that, if they believe that something has always been, they believe in something eternal. Then they have no reason to ridicule believers for believing in an eternal being.

If there ever was a state of complete “nothingness” in which nothing existed, then the moment the first thing appeared, you have the amazing event of something coming from nothing. This is mathematically impossible and utterly unreasonable. Therefore, something must have always been. There must be something eternal because from nothing comes nothing!

Let us suppose, for example, that gases have always been and by some process hardened into a solid piece of matter. Those who believe this readily agree that at one time there was no life on the earth. Will they tell us that life all of a sudden burst forth from non-living material? No scientist who cares anything at all for his reputation will attempt to prove that life came from non-life.

There are many truths about which there can be no mistake. Three which are true in the field of science are: (1) Life can only come from previous, not non-life; (2) every effect must have an adequate cause; (3) like begets like.

The general idea of organic evolution is that life had its beginning with a one-celled Organism. This one tell divided into two cells, then the two cells divided into four, and so on and so on. But there are some weaknesses to this theory.

First of all, where did the one-celled organism come from? Scientists are far from agreed. They only assume where it came from. But the biggest objection to this cell division idea is that cells always divide, they do not multiply from a one-celled to a two-celled organism, but into two one-celled organisms. The theory demands that all life began from a one-celled organism and then from that one cell came the more complex forms of life. If the theory were true, from the one cell would have come a two-celled organism, then a four and so on. But what the scientists do not like to be reminded of is that there are no two-celled organisms or four-celled living beings. So the tiny cell just doesn’t cooperate to make evolution possible.

Evolution, if it were true, is at best, a process, not a power. Thus, like a car out of gas, it cannot start of its own accord. Where did the first thing come from which started this process? Scientists are still wondering. How refreshing and much more reasonable it is to let the Lord tell us how the universe and life began as recorded in Genesis 1 and 2 of the Bible.

Evolutionists look to several realms in search for proof of their theory. While we cannot go into all the details, there are some factors that should be noted.

One of the “favorite fields” appealed to by evolutionists seeking to prove this false theory is the study of geology (a study of rock layers which make up the earth’s outer surface). Notice is taken of fossils (rock imprints of various creatures found in the various layers of rock) and the layers in which they appear. The wish being father to the thought, the evolutionists tell us that since evolution is true, the age of the particular layer of rock can be determined by the type of fossils found imprinted on it. But this assumes the thing to be proved, namely, that evolution is true.

This may give some idea of the theory they devise regarding fossils and rock layers. They reason ( ? ) thusly: the rock layers which have only fossils of the simplest forms of life are the oldest because life began with the simplest forms and evolved into more complex forms as time (much time!) passed.

Let us try to think of it in this way in order to see what they have devised. Naturally if evolution was true, one would not find any fossils in the oldest layers which we call “layer A.” In the next layer (layer B) which is not quite as far down, we would find only the simplest of fossils (worms, insects, etc.). In “layer C” would be found fossils of fish and the previous simpler forms. In “layer D” more complex fossils of various animals along with other simpler fossils and finally in the most recently formed layers would be found fossils of man. Don’t the evolutionists wish that the layers of rock always contained fossils in this order!

But what do geologists find as they study fossils in the rock layers? First of all, they find fossils hopelessly mixed up in different layers of rock. Some fossils of the most complex forms of life are found in layers that contain mostly the simplest of fossils. Many times layers of rock having complex fossil forms are found below layers containing the simplest fossils. This is found to be true in places where there is no evidence of upheavals or earthquakes. To make matters worse for the evolutionists, there is no place on earth where they can find a complete series of fossil layers in just the right order to conform with the evolutionary charts. In other words, “the very rocks cry out in protest” to the ungodly and false theory of evolution.

We have put the theory of evolution “to the test” in the realm of geology and the matter of “cell division.” Now we wish to subject this false theory to two “blood tests” and see how it fares.

Evolutionists decided to prove evolution by a close study of the chemical composition of the blood found in various species. They felt this test would settle the issue once and for all, and prove beyond a shadow of a doubt the blood relationship of the various types of life.

Floyd E. Hamilton in his book The Basis of Christian Faith, pp. 62-63, explains as follows what this type of Blood test showed:

For example the blood of a man is injected into the veins of an animal such as a rabbit, with the result that an “antiserum” is formed in the rabbit’s blood. This anti-serum is then added to various kinds of blood with the result that a separation is formed in varying degrees depending supposedly on the degree of relationship to man of the animal whose blood is tested. This has been said to be direct proof of evolutionary relationship between man and the lower animals. As Prof. Morton has pointed out in his book Bankruptcy of Evolution, pages 187… this so called proof proves too much, for according to the results obtained, the femur, belonging to the ape family, is not as closely related to man as the mouse or the porcupine! The quantitative and qualitative tests did not agree in their results, and when examined closely the results obtained by these experiments certainly are far from proof that actual relationship exists between animals whose blood was thus tested, and man. The fact of the matter is, as Morton has pointed out, that these tests only prove what no one questions, that the chemical properties of various kinds of blood are similar. But the fact that the same elements are in the blood of monkeys and men and mice in no way proves that these animals are actually related in descent.

Then Foy E. Wallace, Jr., a gospel preacher tells of this experience:

While visiting the laboratory of the Federal Bureau of Investigation in Washington I saw a scientist at work on a man’s coat, making tests to determine whether certain stains on it were human blood. The garment belonged to a man who was wearing it when arrested on a charge of murder. All the evidence available was circumstantial, and it all pointed to this man as the only one who could have committed the crime. The prisoner protested, claiming the bloodstains were those of an animal he had slaughtered a few days before. His fate hung on the finding of that scientist. As our party was leaving the building, one remarked, “Would he be able to know the truth if the animal killed were an ape?” Our escort replied, “That is a fine point; I’ll go back and inquire.” He returned with the answers “Yes, that could be determined for certain for all human blood is distinguishable from animal blood, and the blood of all apes is animal blood.”

Bear in mind that the lives of people are at stake and dependent on findings in the F. B. I. laboratories. There the technicians readily admit that there is an unquestionable difference between animal and human blood and all apes have blood classified as animal blood.

A further interesting fact is that though the blood of a human being is distinctly different from an ape’s blood, yet it is impossible for a laboratory technician to tell the blood of a Negro from the blood of a white man. This should dispel any idea that certain races are more like the “ape family” than others. The blood test says, “NO,” and so does the Bible! Hear God’s word in Acts 17:26, which reads as follows: “And hath made of one blood all nations of men for to dwell on all the face of the earth, and hath determined the times before appointed, and the bounds of their habitation.” Keep in mind that Paul said this hundreds of years before the microscope was invented. How did Paul know this? There can only be one answer. The God who made man revealed it to Paul.

Truth Magazine, VI: 3, pp.20-23
December 1961

By Bill Echols

Archaeology is constantly adding to our knowledge of one of the most remarkable people of antiquity, the Hittites. We now have available a great deal of information that reveals much of the Hittite history, but I more must be uncovered before the complete story of these people will be known. At one time the only knowledge the world had of the Hittites was that found in the Old Testament. This led many to doubt or deny the existence of such a people. Some charged the Bible with error because it mentioned a people of which the historians had no known record.

As more and more is revealed of the Hittites, we can see that the Bible picture of them is accurate. This is just another example of how archaeology is shedding light on God’s Word. Such evidence is strengthening to our faith in the revelation of God. This is especially true when we remember that many archaeologists do not look upon the Bible as source material for historical information.

We want to observe some Bible references to the Hittites and compare them with present knowledge from the archaeologist. Since there are gaps and uncertainties in the history of the Hittites in the archaeological field, we cannot always make definite connections. The earliest Biblical references to the Hittites are in Genesis. There they are referred to as only one among a number of distinctive tribes. This picture is accurate, as we know that the earliest history of the Hittites was that of city-states. The dates assigned to this period of their history corresponds with that of the Bible. The great Hittite empire was subsequent to these Bible references. Numbers 13:29 speaks of the Hittites as dwelling in the hill country. This also harmonizes with what archaeology has shown us. The Hittites greatest power was in modern Turkey but extended down to the hill country north of Canaan.

Studies at Hattusas, the ancient capital of the Hittite empire, has revealed that the Hittites were a mighty nation. Their greatness lay in the military and political fields. There is one Bible reference that makes it clear that they were feared as a military power. In II Kings 7:6 the Syrians that had been besieging Samaria were made to hear the noise of chariots. They said, “Lo, the king of Israel hath hired against us the kings of the Hittites, and the kings of the Egyptians, to come upon us.” Here the Hittites are joined with the most powerful rulers of ancient times, the Egyptians. They are mentioned first. This indicates that the Hittites were feared as warriors, and that they were considered a great power.

Discoveries now reveal that the Hittites built an empire that challenged Egypt. This empire was built by King Suppiluliumas who extended his kingdom as far as Lebanon. He seemed so powerful that the Egyptian queen, a widow, asked that one of his sons become her husband. This union, however, never materialized. The rise of Suppiluliumas and the Hittites tended to neutralize Egyptian influence over Canaan soon after Israel’s entrance under Joshua.

A few years later in 1288 B. C., the Hittites and Egyptians met in the battle of Kadesh where the Pharaoh was defeated and barely escaped with his life. The battle was followed by one of the world’s first peace treaties. It appears that the peace following this treaty is the same as that mentioned in Judges 3:12-30. The first accounts of the battle of Kadesh that were discovered were Egyptian, and were written in terms to imply that Egypt had been victorious. Many older histories of that period record an Egyptian victory. A study of the peace treaty and other historical accounts show that the Hittite were the victors although the victory was not complete. The Bible reference in II Kings which ranks the Hittites with the Egyptians is clear.

What we know today of the Hittites’ warring ability easily explains why the Syrians fled in fear. The period of real Hittite power had passed, but their reputation for fighting still lived. The Hittites either invented or perfected the light war chariot. It was so new in its day that there was little or no defense against it. Its great advantage lay in its speed and mobility. Each war chariot carried three men, a driver and two warriors. Since other nations fought primarily with foot soldiers, the charge of a mass of chariots was enough to frighten even the bravest of men. If the infantry should withstand the first charge, they would soon be surrounded and smashed. It was just such tactics that enabled the Hittites to defeat Egypt and to build an empire.

II Chronicles 8:7 tells us that Solomon levied a tribute on “the people that were left of the Hittites.” By Solomon’s time the great empire was a thing of the past. Only small Hittite kingdoms continued to exist, some of which were in north Syria and over which Solomon had some economic control. By 700 B. C. the Hittites had disappeared from history and remained lost until modern times.

The Hittite religions were many. They had a thousand gods. Among the many women Solomon loved were women of the Hittites. These helped in turning his mind to other Gods (1 Kings 11:1-8).

Although there are other Bible references to the Hittites, these will suffice to show that as history, the Bible is accurate. More information will be coming forth as studies in Turkey are continued. Few have yet to write a history of this empire, and a complete bibliography about it is unavailable. A people once mentioned only in the Bible is giving the world a whole new branch of archaeological science–Hittitology.

Truth Magazine, VI: 3, pp. 11-12
December 1961

By Foy W. Vinson

Countless are the sermons which have been preached and the articles which have been written on this theme. However, it is clearly evident that too much has not been said on this subject in view of the fact that so little is being done about it. When I speak of “our” responsibility I mean the obligation which has imposed upon every disciple of Christ to inform others of divine truth (Heb. 5:12; 2 Tim. 2:2). By “responsibility” I mean that for which one will be held accountable. This word has been used so often that perhaps we have lost sight of the gravity, which is attached to it. Yes, that for which I am responsible I will have to account for at the judgment bar of Christ! By the “lost” I mean those who are alienated from God because of sin, and who, should they die in their present condition, would have to suffer the pangs and torments of an interminable hell. Let us notice that the lost fall into the following three categories.

 

Those Who Have Never Heard the Gospel

 

By far the majority of the lost fall into this first category–those who have never heard the unsearchable riches of Christ. When we consider this class of alien our minds often go immediately to some remote place far removed from our own land. We think of Africa, Asia, South America or some such place, but never of our own nation. Perhaps we convince ourselves that if we lived amid the millions of Africans and Asians who have never heard the truth we would busy ourselves in teaching them. But brethren, I fear this is but the practice of self-deceit! Why the majority of folks right in our own country, in our own state and even in our own community have never heard the gospel of Christ! Oh many of them have been exposed to counterfeit gospels, but I’m speaking of the truth. Paul said to the Galatians, “I marvel that ye are so soon removed– unto another gospel: Which is not another.” Hence error often parades itself under the guise of truth, but it is not the truth.

Now our subject concerns itself with our responsibility to the lost. Since those who have never heard the gospel are lost, then what obligation do we have to such? When Jesus commissioned his apostles directly and every disciple indirectly (Matt. 28: 19-20; Mk. 16: 15-16) he had in mind that great host of people who have never been informed of the truth. Jesus therefore lays upon our shoulders the duty of teaching the uninformed. We have an approved example which enforces this obligation in Acts 8:4 where we read that “they that were scattered abroad went every where preaching the word.”

The seriousness of this responsibility is seen in the fact that one must first hear or learn before he can obey to the saving of his soul. We know that faith and obedience are essential to salvation, but neither is possible apart from the hearing of the word (Rom. 10:13-17). This means that the salvation of others is in part dependent upon me. This has always been so. Ezekiel was told, “When I say unto the wicked, Thou shalt surely die; and thou givest him not warning, nor speakest to warn the wicked from his wicked way, to save his life; the same wicked man shall die in his iniquity–” (Ezek. 3:18). So a soul may be eternally lost through my failure to disclose to him the truth. Yet the tragedy does not end there, for Jehovah continues in the above verse by saying: “…but his blood will I require at shine hand.” Therefore, to prevent not only the damnation of others, but my own self as well, I must meet this responsibility.

 

Those Who Have Heard the Gospel But Haven’t Obeyed

 

The second category into which the lost fall covers those who have heard the preaching of the gospel but who have not become obedient thereto. These might be called the second class of alien. Not everyone who hears and even learns the truth immediately obeys it. And though this group does not compare in numbers with the one first mentioned, yet there are multitudes of people who must be thus classified.

It is true that individuals should obey the gospel once they hear it. I fear, however, that since this is so we often “write off” so to speak those who do not immediately respond to the truth. This we ought not to do. I’m sure the majority of those presently Christians did not obey the very instant they learned the truth. It seems to me altogether possible if not probable that the apostle Paul heard the gospel proclaimed at least once if not more quite some time before he submitted himself to Christ. I conclude this from the fact that he was present at the stoning of Stephen (Acts 1: 58; 8:1) which occurred as a result of the preaching Stephen had just done. Also Paul resided in Jerusalem during the period of time when the apostles and other saints were quite active in sounding out the word to those round about (Acts 2:14-40; 3:12-26; 4:33; 5:2542).

Instead of assuming the attitude of “they know the truth and if they don’t choose to obey it that’s their tough luck” I should rather consider the possibility that I might be one reason such have not obeyed! What about my example before others? (Matt. 5:16; Phil. 2:15.) I’m confident that often the dim-lighted, half converted, lukewarm child of God is the primary consideration in the failure of another to obey the truth. Peter realized the impact of a godly life on others when he penned these words in 1 Peter 3:1, “Likewise, ye wives, be in subjection to your own husbands; that, if any obey not the word, they also may without the word be won by the conversation of the wives; while they behold your chaste conversation coupled with fear.”

Above all, let us not be hasty in forsaking our efforts to lead another to Christ. In Paul’s charge to Timothy to “preach the word” he also admonished him to “exhort with all longsuffering and doctrine.” On Pentecost Peter after declaring Jesus to be both Lord and Christ and after setting forth the divine conditions for pardon still did “with many other words testify and exhort” (Acts 2: 40). Remember, many have been converted years after they first heard the gospel and many such have become faithful gospel preachers themselves or elders in the Lord’s church.

 

Those Who Have Obeyed and Have Become Unfaithful

 

Finally, in categorizing the lost we must include those who have become Christians and then have been overcome in one way or another by the prince of this world. Some say that such individuals are not to be classified among the lost. They say that once one is saved he is forever saved. They further claim that though such a person has lost the joy of his salvation he still possesses salvation itself. This is inconceivable, however, since it is the fact and knowledge of salvation which produces joy in the first place. It was the realization that he had been saved from all sin that caused the Ethiopian eunuch to go “on his way rejoicing” (Acts 8:39). The same was true in the case of the Philippian jailor who “rejoiced, believing in God with all his house” (Acts 16:34). It was the loss of this salvation on the part of Simon the sorcerer, a child of God, that caused the inspired apostle to describe him as being “in the gall of bitterness and in the bond of iniquity” (Acts 8:23). Peter describes the tragic condition of such persons in the following language:

“For if after they have escaped the pollutions of the world through the knowledge of the Lord and Savior Jesus Christ, they are again entangled therein, and overcome, the latter end is worse with them than the beginning. For it had been better for them not to have known the way of righteousness, than, after they have known it, to turn from the holy commandment delivered unto them. But it is happened unto them according to the true proverb, the dog is turned to his own vomit again; and the sow that was washed to her wallowing in the mire” (2 Pet. 2:20-22).

Brethren, we have the obligation of restoring the fallen before they become irreclaimable. James says, “Brethren, if any of you do err from the truth, and one convert him, Let him know, that he which converteth the sinner from the error of his way shall save a soul from death, and shall hide a multitude of sins” (Jas. 5:19-20). Paul also points out this duty in Galatians 6: 1: “Brethren, if a man be overtaken in a fault, ye which are spiritual, restore such an one in the spirit of meekness; considering thyself, lest thou also be tempted.”

In spite of these passages, how often do members fall by the wayside without ever being approached! It appears that the average member feels that the work of restoring the fallen is the duty of the preacher and elders exclusively. I sometimes feel that our efforts at restoring the unfaithful are largely ineffective due to the fact that often the only one who calls on the wayward is the preacher and his visit is commonly regarded as a mere “professional call.” Paul taught that “the members should have the same care one for another” (1 Cor. 12:25). Many times this “care” is conspicuously absent.

May we have a greater realization of and appreciation for our responsibility to the lost, whether they be those who have never heard the truth, or those who have heard it and not obeyed, or those who have obeyed and then erred from the truth. Let us recognize the value of a man’s soul and what it means to be LOST! Then let us look on the fields which are white unto harvest and “go forth bearing precious seed” knowing that we shall “doubtless come again with rejoicing, bringing our sheaves with us” (Psa. 12:6).

Truth Magazine VI: 3, pp. 2-4
December 1961