Truth Magazine

By Joe Neil Clayton

The people of God are troubled to learn of the death of a beloved servant of Christ, brother H.L. Bruce, by his own hand. This perplexing news is considered incredible by those who have walked by his side, and have a deep appreciation for his steady affirmation of the Word of Truth. A mind so clear in the understanding and the presentation of the gospel, we think, cannot be the same mind that would contemplate an action so drastic, so uncharacteristic. Yet, as we consider the outcome, we are forced, reluctantly, to admit that it is altogether possible.

Brother Bruce was widely known, having served in churches across the Southwest and West. Born in Arkansas at Sulphur Rock in 1934, and growing to maturity in that region, he ultimately came to the decision to become a preacher of the Word. He has served churches in Texas at Mt. Pleasant, Pittsburg, Klute, Baytown, and most recently in Amarillo with two congregations, Pleasant Valley and Dumas Drive. At other times he worked in Colorado Springs, Colorado and Ontario, California. He has also worked in many Gospel Meetings in other places.

Brother Bruce had a reputation of integrity, boldness, and moral worth unexcelled, in the view of many who knew him. He effectively presented truth when in the pulpit, depending upon the content of his lessons to have the proper impact on his hearers, rather than personal style and eloquence. He had a ready command of the teaching of God, and could defend the truth ably.

Separate from his ability as a preacher, he was a respected father and husband, as well as showing Christian friendship with many across the country. He was generous with his time to aid others in their understanding of God’s Word. Yet, during the latter part of his life, he carried burdens that were not readily discernible to his friends and family. The problems that faced him have been experienced by many preachers of the gospel, but his ability to cope with them was perhaps less sufficient than found among his contemporaries.

When a man reaches the decision that, as a Christian, the most dedicated and rewarding service that he could render to the Lord Jesus is to become a preacher of the “gospel of grace,” he enters into that service with enthusiasm. He considers, as well, that this service holds the promise of saving many souls, a purpose and a goal certainly pleasing to the Lord. He therefore orders his life to fulfil this service, in order to reap these satisfying rewards for both himself and his Master.

Having made this decision, however, he may be unaware of the toil and trials inherent in this vocation (though some vicarious notion of this can be found in reading of the experiences of the evangelists of New Testament times). He may also be unaware of the personal temperament needed to fulfil his goals. When trials come, he may experience disillusionment because his resources to meet them are in short supply. If he retreats from his commitment, he usually is like John Mark, weakened only for a while. When the trial is past, he girds himself with the fortitude to try once again. He may have been strengthened by the experience of overcoming his doubts, but he may rather carry a deep scar of self-deprecation because of his temporary defection. So, he struggles on, embarrassed by his momentary retreat, fighting a battle within himself to recover his confidence, goaded by the knowledge that the expectations of his Master are demanding.

But experiences of this sort have the tendency to repeat themselves. Brethren whose minds center on worldly values, and worldly tactics to obtain them, cause endless heartache to men whose only goals are to hold up the truth, and live faithfully to it. The apathy of worthy brethren, also, allows those with less pure motives to have their way. The spirit of many a dedicated man has been sorely tested in the forefront of some such spiritual battle, when, like Uriah, he felt isolated and abandoned. He stands at a fork in the road at such times, one way seemingly hopeless, leading to bitterness and uncontrollable depression; the other more hopeful way leading to freedom from anxiety, where every problem is committed to God “by prayer and supplication with thanksgiving,” resting on the promise that “the peace of God, which passes all understanding, shall guard your hearts and your thoughts in Christ Jesus.” He mistakes the way, however, and enters on that road which tends to unsettle the mind, so that it does not meet problems soundly. This road may eventually appear to have no “point of return” to the disillusioned mind. In such a state, he may finally do harm to himself. We abhor the conclusion that a mind so influenced can be held responsible for its thoughts and acts, and this judgment brings us a measure of the comfort earnestly desired. Even so, regret and anguish come to those who see the resulting tragedy, and wonder why they did not prevent it.

This scenario may not fit the case of our beloved brother fully, but many of us were aware of his anxiety, and tried to lift it from him. He reached out to us, but we did not perceive the depth of his depression. We advised the course to take, based on what we knew, thinking that he would have the mentality of a survivor. Our advice was based on the yearning to see him find relief, and a return to that placid state which is interpreted by the Apostle Peter as “joy unspeakable, and full of glory.” But, tragically, we were too late in realizing the urgency that the situation demanded. Our tears are evidence of the anguish we feel for ourselves, for his bereaving family, for the church he served, and for all of his Christian friends who “weep with them that weep.”

But, the time has passed for our feeble help to bring back brother Bruce from the brink of despair. We mourn for him, as David of old mourned for the regal house of Saul, who also fell on his own sword in desperation: “Thy glory, O Israel, is slain upon the high places! How are the mighty fallen! Tell it not in Gath, Publish it not in the streets of Ashkelon; lest the daughters of the Philistines rejoice. . . How are the mighty fallen, and the weapons of war perished! “

The family, the local church, the brotherhood, are all left behind to mourn, so, “leaving the things that are behind,” let us “wipe the tears from every eye,” renewing our commitment to be “like-minded, compassionate, loving as brethren, tender-hearted, humble-minded: not rendering evil for evil, or reviling for reviling; but contrariwise blessing; for hereunto were ye called, that ye should inherit a blessing.”

Guardian of Truth XXXII: 1, pp. 20-21
January 7, 1988

By Raymond E. Harris

The foregoing command of Jesus is found in John 11:39. The occasion was the resurrection of Lazarus from his tomb.

Lazarus had been dead four days. Jesus worked this great miracle to prove that he truly is the Son of God. I would like to borrow the expression, “Take ye away the stone” and apply it in a different, but appropriate, way.

In New Testament times when a cave or carved out tomb was prepared for the dead, a large round wheel shaped stone was carved to cover the entrance. The wheel-like stone was often four or five feet in diameter. Obviously it would weigh several hundred pounds and require the combined strength of several men to move it. Hence, the great round stone sealed the opening of the tomb and separated the living from the dead.

Stones Separating Men From God

The Scriptures describe those who are not Christians as “the living dead.” The word “death” means separation. And, so all who are not Christians are said to be spiritually dead since they are separated from God by their sins (Isa. 59:1-2).

This separation from God could end if certain “stones” were rolled away.

(1) In some cases the stone of ignorance needs to be rolled away. It is tragic that so many far and near, know so little about the Bible and Jesus. How sad for millions to live and die without ever understanding how Jesus died to extend to one and all the opportunity of salvation (John 3:16).

(2) With others the great barrier to salvation is the stone of prejudice! Often mis-informed or un-informed people become offended or antagonistic toward the Church or religion in general. It is sad to realize that countless multitudes will spend eternity in a devil’s hell because some stone of prejudice became a mental barrier that kept them from ever realizing the love that God has for them (Acts 2:38).

(3) From time to time we find self-righteousness is the stone that needs to be taken away. The Bible teaches that salvation is by grace through faith. “It is the gift of God.” However, the gift is not unconditional. Sinners must believe in Jesus, repent of their sins, confess that Jesus is the Messiah and be baptized for the remission of sins. Indeed it is sad when so many reject God’s simple way and suppose they can work or buy or serve or suffer their way into heaven (Rom. 6-3-8).

To lose one’s soul is to lose all. To save one’s soul is the ultimate victory. For the sake of your own eternal welfare, we implore you to roll aside anything and everything that stands between you and a proper relationship with the Almighty.

Stones Affecting The Indifferent

Jesus taught another lesson. He was about to call the dead back to life (which no man could do). But, mortals could roll aside the stone – and this they were commanded to do. Hence, we see the principle that God will do for man that which is beyond his power; but, man must do his part by responding to the grace of God. Man must do for himself all that he is,capable of doing.

The principle can be applied today to church members who have grown cold and drifted back into the world. It is obvious that real or imagined barriers separate them from God. Anything standing between man and God should be removed at once. Some such “stones” that need to be rolled away are:

(1) Anything that hinders a lack of spiritual growth and development.

a. “Desire the sincere milk of the word, that ye may grow thereby” (1 Pet. 2:2).

b. “Study to show theyself approved unto God” (2 Tim. 2:15).

c. “Blessed are they which do hunger and thirst after righteousness” (Matt. 5:6). The Bible says faith comes from hearing the word of God (Rom. 10:17). We suggest that one’s faith can only be maintained and sustained by continued study.

(2) Anything that hinders total commitment and genders indifference.

a. “I beseech you therefore, brethren, by the mercies of God, that ye present your bodies a living sacrifice, holy, acceptable unto God, which is your reasonable service” (Rom. 12:1).

b. “Therefore, my beloved brethren, be ye steadfast, unmoveable, always abounding in the work of the Lord” (1 Cor. 15:58).

(3) Anything that hinders church attendance and worship.

a. “Not forsaking the assembling of ourselves together” (Heb. 10:25).

b. “Love not the world, neither the things that are in the world . . . the world passeth away, and the lust thereof: but he that doeth the will of God abideth forever” (1 John 2:15-17).

Roll the stone away. Worship this Sunday with the church of Christ.

Guardian of Truth XXXII: 2, pp. 33, 55
January 21, 1988

By Dick Blackford

(This letter was written in November, 1981. Names and places have been changed to protect the family. This is the second in a series of three.)

Dear Joe and Jeanette,

Whichever one of you receives this letter first, I hope you will wait and both of you sit down and read it together. I have been thinking of you all quite a lot lately, and praying for you. I hope that you are both receiving the strength you need to cope with the situation at hand. I just want to encourage you both to seek God’s help and not depend on man-made solutions or the wisdom of this world. The wise man said it like this: “Trust in the Lord with all thine heart; and lean not on thine own understanding. In all thy ways acknowledge him, and he shall direct thy paths. Be not wise in thine own eyes.- fear the Lord, and depart from evil. It shall be health to thy navel, and marrow to thy bones” (Prov. 3:5-8).

I realize that when a problem of this nature arises that it is easy for two married people to begin finding and magnifying the faults of each other. I want to warn you against that because it can only be detrimental at this point. Both of you need to admit the extreme seriousness of the problem and take positive steps to work it out. I urge you both to level with each other and talk things out.

Jeanette, if you know of things you can do in the family to make Joe a happier and more contented person, you should do it. Better still, ask him what things you could do that would make him happy. Having lived with him for twenty-five years (longer than any other human being), you are in a much better position to understand him and help him (both temporally and spiritually) than any other person living.

Joe, I want to urge you to make a complete break in communication with your neighbor’s wife. I cannot emphasize too strongly your need to move completely away from here. Joseph realized that it was imperative that he get completely away from Potiphar’s wife and fast! You are a man – a human being subject to temptation. Each of us has our weaknesses. While you feel bad that she lost her job over this and feel a desire to communicate with her, losing her job is not nearly as important as you losing your soul. Whatever the cost for you to get out of the situation it will not be too high. Joseph’s going to prison was not too high a price to pay. There is an old expression that “it takes two to tango.” She will have to bear the consequences of her wrongdoing. Your first obligation is to Jeanette and your family, not to her. You should feel more remorse at what is happening to them than to her. The longer you wait to sever communications, the more difficult it will be. Like Chinese handcuffs, such a relationship will continue to tighten its grip. You can do it. I know you can. I have confidence in you.

Kathy and I both want you to know that the offer is still open for you to come and visit us – and it will remain open. We would love to have you. Also, you need to remember that, though they may not be prominent in society, the best friends that you have is that little group of disciples which meet there in Elm City. In their own humble ways they will do anything they can to help you. You shouldn’t hesitate to seek their aid.

We hope you have a Happy 25th Anniversary and a good Thanksgiving. We send our love to all of you.

Brotherly,

Dick

Guardian of Truth XXXII: 2, p. 38
January 21, 1988

By Hoyt H. Houchen

Question: I have always celebrated Christmas by having a tree and gifts with my family but not as a religious day, not as the birthday of Christ. A brother in the local church says a tree in a Christian’s yard offends him. Is my practice wrong?

Reply: There are some things which are right within themselves but wrong religiously. The washing of hands, burning incense or using instrumental music are not wrong within themselves but wrong if used as acts of worship. Simply because some have engaged in these practices as a religious rite or as acts of worship does not make the practice wrong per se.

Much of the world observes Christmas as a religious holiday, regarding December 25th as the birthday of Jesus. The word “Christmas” is not found in the Bible. One has to go to secular books, not the Bible, to learn when and how this religious observance began.

The word “Christmas” is composed of two words: “Christ” and “Mass.” The word is derived from the Catholic mass said each year in honor of Christ’s birthday. The Catholics believe and teach that Christ is sacrificed in the mass. The doctrine of the mass is opposed to the teaching of the Bible: “So Christ also, having been once offered (emphasis mine, H.H.) to bear the sins of many. . . ” (Heb. 9:28). Although the observance of Christmas is of Catholic origin, many other human churches also observe Christmas as the birthday of Christ. They feature pageants, special musical programs and special sermons on the birth of Christ. Churches of Christ are not to engage in such practices not authorized by the Bible.

The date of Christ’s birthday is not known. The Bible does give us an account of his birth and the circumstances surrounding it, but not one word is given as to its date. And, there is no record that the first century Christians observed any day as the birthday of Christ. If God intended for us to observe a holiday as the birthday of Jesus, he would certainly have revealed the date to us. The Bible simply says: “Now when Jesus was born in Bethlehem of Judea in the days of Herod the king” (Matt. 2:1). So, the Scriptures do not authorize us to observe Christmas as a religious day.

Some brethren feel that it is impossible to observe Christmas without it having a religious connotation. But the fact that certain customs originated in paganism or Catholicism does not necessarily make the proper use of them wrong. And, has it occurred to these brethren that we use the names of the days of our week which are of pagan origin? “Sunday” is derived from the sacred day of the sun; “Monday,” from the sacred day of the moon; “Tuesday” is from Tiw’s day; “Wednesday” is from “Woden’s Day” (Woden was one of the chief idols of mythology); “Thursday” is the day of the war god, Thor; “Friday” is from Frigg’s day and “Saturday” is from Saturn, an ancient god of agriculture. But these days have no religious significance to us. Furthermore, because one eats fish on Friday does not necessarily indicate that he is a Catholic. Likewise, Christmas can be celebrated properly (as a civil holiday) without it being a religious observance whatsoever. It is the religious attachment to practices, which God never intended to be religious, that makes them wrong. Paul wrote: “Ye observe days, and months, and seasons, and years. I am afraid of you, lest by any means I have bestowed labor upon you in vain” (Gal. 4:10,11). There were religious observances in the Galatian churches, involving not only circumcision but days, months, seasons and years as well. Paul approved circumcision, but with no religious attachment (Gal. 5:6). Because some observed it as a religious rite, it was not therefore made a religious rite when practiced by those who did not so regard it.

Instruments of music in worship originated, with the Roman Catholic Church. The testimonies of Encyclopedias attest to this. For example: “Pope Vitalian is related to have first introduced organs into some of the churches of western Europe, about 670” (The American Encyclopedia, Vol. 12, p. 638). We do not employ instruments of music in worship because they are not authorized by the New Testament. We do not reject them, however, out of the realm of worship. We have them in our homes, and we may enjoy them for entertainment without any religious significance. Because the Catholics introduced them into worship does not make their use wrong outside the realm of worship.

Christians should regard Christmas as a civil holiday, as a season of the year for families to get together, have meals and exchange gifts as tokens of love. Schools and businesses are closed. It is not to be regarded as a holy day, but as a national holiday and a joyous season for all, especially children who enjoy the excitement that goes along with it. We grew up in this kind of atmosphere, knowing that Christmas has nothing to do with the birthday of Jesus. The church and Christ are left out of it and this is what we taught our boys.

There are sincere brethren who believe it is wrong to decorate a tree, exchange gifts or celebrate Christmas in any way; so they have nothing to do with it. This is especially true of those who have Catholic backgrounds. They are disgusted with all the religious significance which has been attached to it. One certainly should not violate his conscience, but at the same time he should not make an issue of it and attempt to force his views upon others.

Should a brother be offended by seeing a Christmas tree in the house or yard of another Christian, he should carefully consider the word “offend.” Paul wrote: “Wherefore, if meat causeth my brother to stumble, I will eat no flesh for evermore, that I cause not my brother to stumble” (I Cor. 8:13). (The word “stumble” is “offend” in the KJV.) The context of this passage is clear. In heathen temples of that time, animals sacrifices were offered and then the meat was carried to the marketplace and sold. It was good food but some brethren believed it was wrong to eat meat sacrificed to idols (I Cor. 8:9-13). But if a brother could conscientiously eat such meat, knowing that there is nothing in an idol and the meat itself was all right to eat, he should be careful not to cause a weaker brother to stumble. This would be done when he would violate his conscience by eating this meat because he had seen the stronger brother eating it. The Greek word skandalizo, translated “to stumble” (ASV), “to offend” (KJV) is defined by Arndt and Gingrich: “cause to be caught or fall, i.e. cause to sin” (Greek-English Lexicon, p. 760). Neither Romans 14:21 nor 1 Corinthians 8:13 merely means hurting a brother’s feelings. It means to destroy him because he has been made to sin. “You do not destroy a Christian by violating his prejudices or notions” (R.L. Whiteside, Commentary on Romans, p. 272). If having a Christmas tree does not cause a brother to sin, then it is obvious that he is not one of a weak conscience. He is not made weaker by seeing the tree, nor is he made to fall.

We should have respect and love for one another, but we are not to suppose that every act we may perform that hurts someone’s feelings must cease. If one can celebrate Christmas without any religious attachment, while another cannot celebrate it in any sense, each may express his views-, but they should be held as his own convictions. Neither should force his views upon the other. If this procedure is followed, there should be no trouble over these matters.

Guardian of Truth XXXII: 2, pp. 39-40
January 21, 1988