Truth Magazine

By Marc W. Gibson

The title is ironic since I, being a young man of twenty-one years, really do not have that many reflections on life as compared to one who has lived seventy years or so. Nonetheless, I feel a need to express my thoughts as a young preacher. Perhaps these thoughts will be shared by others my age. I do not know how much longer I will be considered a young preacher. I have a feeling the time is quickly approaching that that distinction will pass.

I have much for which to be thankful. A great deal of thanks goes to older preachers and other members of the Lord’s body who have encouraged me more than words can tell. Much praise and encouragement have gone from older preachers to younger men; it is now time to turn the tables. Perhaps some men my age do not appreciate the wisdom found in age. They seem to scoff at advice given from the good hearts of those who are older. I am ashamed of these ones and hope they change their attitudes for their own sakes.

Memories That Encourage

Nothing can erase my memories of sitting in awe at the powerful preaching of men such as Franklin T. Puckett and Roy E. Cogdill. The Scriptures were opened to me by men like Sewell Hall, Homer Hailey, L.A. Mott, Ferrell Jenkins, and Dee Bowman. The encouragement to preach was kindled within me as I watched and listened to Ed Harrell, James R. Cope, Connie Adams, James P. Needham, and others too numerous to mention. Dear brethren, keep on preaching the Word. We are listening and appreciative. You are truly fulfilling the command of 2 Timothy 2:2 which states: “And the things that you have heard from me among many witnesses, commit these to faithful men who will be able to teach others also.”

Much knowledge was obtained through study sessions with men such as Ron Halbrook, J.T. Smith, and Fred Shewmaker. I do want to mention in particular H.E. Phillips. I consider him a father in the faith, as Timothy did Paul. I know I share that sentiment with many other men. His conviction and love for the Lord will ever be in my mind. Just to sit and listen to brother Phillips was an experience in itself. He would ask us boys to bring up a subject and then he would expound upon it for what seemed a short time, but had in reality been 1-3 hours. We soaked up all our heads could hold. The wisdom was vast. He worried that he might not be saying things to help us. Brother Phillips expounded God’s principles to us and impressed them in our minds. It has really helped greatly. I thank and love him for it. Those who read this may be able to recall similar experiences. Oh, how we treasure them!

Facing The Reality Of Human Weakness

These men I have mentioned have faults and they would be the first to admit it. I mention these brethren not to exalt them above all others, but to simply recognize their efforts and their immense help to me and others. May their tribe increase.

There is a darker side. My faith has been shaken several times when I have learned of a highly respected man who was a great example of faith but who plunged to the depths of sin. I am distressed to see one-time giants in the faith broken by Satan’s grip. This should warn us to be ever more watchful. None of us is immune to sin. Satan is on the prowl, brethren.

Need For Experience

At the end of August 1985, I will have completed three summers of working alongside older preachers. I would recommend this arrangement highly. Bob Buchanon, Harry Lewis, and Ron Halbrook have taught and shown me the “ropes” so that I might be more effective in the Lord’s work. We young preachers need to find time to associate with older men in the faith. One does not have to work in the same congregation to do this, but it is a good idea for those just starting in the work of preaching.

The Encouragement Of All Brethren

Let me not forget to mention the brethren in general. Many an older brother or sister has given me sound advice from their experiences in life. This has helped greatly, even when I did not learn the importance of the advice until it was too late! Their patience with me in my inexperience is deeply appreciated. Their homes were ever open to me as they have shared food, lodging, and encouragement. John referred to this good work when he said, “Beloved, you do faithfully whatever you do for the brethren and for strangers, who have born witness of your love before the church. If you send them forward on their journey in a manner worthy of God, you will do well…. We therefore ought to receive such, that we may become fellow workers for the truth” (3 Jn. 5-8). May more follow these godly examples.

Do You Remember?

I could go on and on about more memories that stir my heart. I hope these few words have stirred your memory and that you will have thanksgiving in your heart for those who encouraged and helped you along. Let us be thankful for the pioneers who went before but have left their writings with us. Dig into them and find great fundamental truths. Most of all, brethren, let us know God’s Word. Study it and teach others. We are in the kingdom of God, fellowlaborers in His vineyard, and members of Christ’s body. We stand on God’s Word. While we are being thankful, may we be girdine un our loins for the work we must do.

The church has fought many battles in the past and there are more on the horizon. As we who are young advance in years, we must be prepared to step forward into the battle against evil. Those whose armor is scarred and worn from many years of battle have been tremendous examples of strength and courage. Their strength is Christ (Phil. 4:13) and may we who are young learn from them. Battle on ye soldiers of Christ! We are with you. When death takes you from the ranks, be assured that the memory of your great stand for truth will be in our hearts. Those who have passed on can still be heard. Let us press on to that heavenly home where some great Day we will rejoice in victory forevermore. There we will sing that wondrous new song to the Savior: “You are worthy to take the scroll, and to open its seals; for You were slain and have redeemed us to God by Your blood out of every tribe and tongue and people and nation, and have made us kings and priests to our God; and we shall reign on the earth.” “Worthy is the Lamb who was slain to receive power and riches and wisdom, and strength and honor and glory and blessing!” “Blessing and honor and glory and power be to Him who sits on the throne, and to the Lamb, forever and ever! ” (Rev. 5:9-10,12,13) Amen!

Guardian of Truth XXIX: 18, pp. 564-565
September 19, 1985

By Hoyt H. Houchen

Question: Would Jude 12 provide authority for fellowship meals in fellowship halls, since these love-feasts were approved activities for Christian fellowship?

Reply: Jude 12, the verse referred to in the question reads as follows: “These are they who are hidden rocks in your love-feasts when they feast with you. . . . ” This, the first part of the verse, is our concern, love-feasts.

What we know of love-feasts is provided by historians. The Scriptures only mention them, but they do not explain them. From men who have written about the love-feasts (agapais), we are told that they consisted of the sharing of good by the wealthier with the poorer as a means of charity.

Some hold to the view that it was a love-feast which preceded the Lord’s Supper (1 Cor. 1:17-22) and that it had divine approval. There is no evidence, however, that the feast in the Corinthian passage is identified as the love-feast mentioned in Jude 12. It is in order to note that Paul asked the Corinthian brethren, “What, have ye not houses to eat and drink in? or despise ye the church of God, and put them to shame that have not? What shall I say to you? shall I praise you?” (1 Cor. 11:22) This question is significant to our study. It is obvious that this meal (whatever it was) was to be eaten in their houses, not where the Lord’s Supper was to be observed. It was customary in heathen festivals for each one to bring his own food. Some of these Corinthians had been pagans and it is possible that they were engaged in some kind of heathen feast. Some contend that the Corinthians had made a common meal out of the Lord’s Supper and thus had corrupted it. In either case, a common meal was not to be a part of the Lord’s Supper, nor was it in any way to be connected with it. We do know that whether they ate a meal before the Lord’s Supper, or whether they had made a common meal out of the Lord’s Supper, it made it impossible for them to eat the Lord’s Supper (1 Cor. 11:20). In contrast to the meal they had eaten (in which one was hungry and another was drunk), the Lord’s Supper is to be shared jointly by all Christians.

That Christians shared in common meals at home, we do not deny (Acts 2:46), but there is no scriptural proof that they were church sponsored. The only meal which is to be provided by the church for Christians is the Lord’s Supper. It is joint participation, fellowship (Gr. koinonia), as Christians assemble together to commemorate their Lord’s death and proclaim His future coming (1 Cor. 11:23-26).

From what we learn about love-feasts in secular history, they were provided by individuals and were for charitable reasons. The rich provided for the poor. These feasts, as mentioned in Jude 12, do not in any way justify church-sponsored socials or fellowship halls for feasting. Such practices are contrary to the primary work of the church, which is to preach the gospel (1 Tim. 3:14,15). We must always be careful to distinguish what the Scriptures authorize the church to do from what they authorize individuals to do.

Guardian of Truth XXIX: 18, p. 549
September 19, 1985

By Larry Ray Hafley

The article below appeared in the “Commercial Appeal,” Memphis, TN, August 5, 1985.

A sheriff was bitten by a poisonous snake yesterday as he tried to break up a religious service in which a preacher’s son held up 10 snakes as a display of his faith, authorities said.

Sheriff Jack Arrington was admitted to Haywood County Hospital, where he was in stable condition with a snake bite to the thumb, said hospital spokesman Joan Mackey.

Charles Prince was charged with two counts of handling reptiles of a poisonous nature and one count of resisting and delaying officers, the police said. U.G. Prince later said he was sorry Arrington was bitten, but called the accident a “sign of the Lord.”

Since when was an accidental snakebite a “sign of the Lord”? The apostle Paul was evidently accidentally bitten, but the bite was not a miracle. The fact that he, unlike the sheriff, suffered no harm was a “sign of the Lord,” a miracle (Acts 28:3-6).

Now, of course, the Pentecostals may claim that they were not bitten, but the sheriff was. Well, that is not a miracle, either. That is just a simple case of a snake doing what snakes do.

Incidentally and ironically, the passage snake handlers rely on, Mark 16:17, 18, is the same Scripture which says, “They shall lay hands on the sick, and they shall recover.” Why did not Mr. Prince perform that “sign of the Lord”? If he insisted on “handling reptiles” “as a display of his faith,” why not “lay hands on the sick” sheriff “as a display of his faith,” and as a “sign of the Lord”? The Pentecostals did not, yea could not heal him. Some sign.

Mr. Prince contradicts himself — “he was sorry Arrington was bitten,” but called the accident a “sign of the Lord.” Why, pray tell, be sorry for an alleged “sign of the Lord”? If the sheriff was wrong, if he was opposing the Bible, if he was denying and depriving the Pentecostals of their right to obey God (as I am sure they would all say he was), why be sorry? If a man did all that, he should have been bitten’ Or, if that is too harsh, the snake should have at least looked at the sheriff real mean and stuck out his tongue at him. Instead, he chose to gnash on him with his teeth.

But if Sheriff Arrington did all that, he was obviously “demon possessed.” (Would Pentecostals deny that he was?) And if he was, why did they not further obey Mark 16:17 by casting out Mr. Arrington’s demons? After all, the text says, “In my name shall they cast out devils.”

The Pentecostals miserably failed in every respect. The poor Sheriff had a sorry time, too. But the snake won the day-even if he did bite the wrong person!

Addendum To “Sign Of The Lord”

After the article above was prepared for publication, the following notice appeared in the Peoria Journal Star, August 20, 1985. Read it and weep.

Snake Bite Kills Man

A snake handler who defied the law in neighboring North Carolina by conducting religious services with poisonous reptiles died Monday from a rattlesnake bite to the thumb, authorities said.

Charles Prince, 45, was bitten at a religious service here Saturday night at the Apostolic Church of God and refused medical treatment, said Greene County Sheriff Gail Colyer.

Prince, of Canton, N.C., died at the home of Carl Reed of Limestone, Colyer said.

Prince was arrested Aug. 4 in Haywood County N.C., and charged with handling poisonous reptiles after Haywood County Sheriff Jack Arrington was bitten on the hand by a rattler.

It gives me no pleasure to report such things. Any man’s death diminishes me. “I have no pleasure in the death of the wicked” (Ezek. 33:11). However, it gives me even less pleasure to see men like Mr. Prince deceive the hearts of the simple.

Mr. Prince was consistent. He claimed the miracles of Mark 16:17,18 applied to him. In this, he was unlike Oral Roberts, Ernest Angley, and lesser known Pentecostals like Robert-Bayer, Raymond E. Parnell, G.T. Sharp and Hulon Myre. They claim “tongues and healing,” but wisely sidestep drinking “any deadly thing” and the taking “up” of “serpents.” They are inconsistent but alive. Mr. Prince was consistent. He is dead.

How Can We Distinguish?

Sharp, Myre, Bayer and Parnell make the same arguments for their position as did the late Mr. Prince. They give the same “testimony” and “witness.” They are just smart enough to know where to draw the line. They are alive. Mr. Prince went to the end of the line. He is dead.

How can we distinguish between the claims of Prince and Parnell? What is the difference between their “signs” and those of a pagan witch doctor? Catholics, Mormons, Pagan Witch Doctors and Pentecostals like Prince, Sharp, Parnell, Bayer and Myre all have claimed miracles by the power of the Spirit. What shows that the Pentecostal miracles are genuine but that those of the Mormons are false? Obviously, there is one difference between Prince and Parnell. Parnell, Bayer, Myre and Sharp refuse to “demonstrate” their faith in the power of the Holy Spirit. Mr. Prince demonstrated his faith. They are alive. He is dead. “He being dead yet speaketh. “

Note the following chart:

What Is The Difference Between “Miracles” Of Mormons, Catholics, Pagans and Pentecostals?

Each One:

1. Claims to have worked miracles.

2. Cites cases of miracles.

3. Says, “Accept my testimony.”

4. Refuses to demonstrate power.

5. Uses excuses for failure.

Difference Between True and False Miracles Obvious In The Bible

1. Moses vs. Magicians – Ex. 7

2. Elijah vs. Baal – 1 Kings 18

3. Philip vs. Simon – Acts 8:9-11

4. Apostles vs. Jews – Acts 4:16; 19:13-17

5. Pentecostals vs. Mormons – ??

What Now?

Brethren, what shall we do? Shall we wink and smile at error and its proponents? Shall we ignore their specious arguments and pious superstition and keep ourselves “above such tripe”? Shall we allow them to continue to swallow up the souls of men with their spiritual quackery and not raise one verse of Scripture in protest?

Elijah “mocked” the prophets of Baal (I Kgs. 18). He chided and derided their fraudulent claims with caustic contempt and scorching, searing sarcasm. The weapons of our warfare are not carnal, but neither are they ineffectual (2 Cor. 10:3-5). We must not strive, but be gentle unto all men (2 Tim. 2:24). Some, however, must be met “with all boldness.” It is not pleasant. It is not fun. But seeing souls deluded and damned forever is neither pleasant nor funny. Our course, therefore, must be set, fixed, determined. We must use tact and judgment — “be wise as serpents, harmless as doves.” Only by a constant warfare of speaking the truth in love can we prevent more losses like that of the lamented Mr. Prince. If you have a better solution, we would like to hear it.

Guardian of Truth XXIX: 18, pp. 554-555
September 19, 1985

By Dusty Owens

Read Matthew 18:15-20. Here, Jesus tells what my obligation is toward one who has sinned against me, in word or action. He may have brought injury to my character, person or property; matters not, I must not allow this to fester inside of me, but must go to him to resolve the problem.

Too many times what we want to do is gain sympathy and support by going to everyone but the offending brother. We end up causing this brother’s reputation to be impaired as we stir up the brethren against him. What Jesus says to do is “go, show him his fault between thee and him alone” (v. 15). It may be that all was a misunderstanding, and I have “made a mountain out of a molehill.” A little kindness and brotherly love many times will help settle a difficulty immediately, and if this happens, I have “gained a brother.”

Again, my attitude plays an important part in my role here. I must have as my main objective peace with my brother, not who is right or wrong in the matter. Certainly, if sin is involved, I must try to get him to see that, but only in a spirit of meekness and gentleness, not arrogance and haughtiness. My approach to him must not be with a disposition to “get even,” or to “retaliate,” but must be Christ-like (1 Pet. 3:8-12).

“But If He Hear Thee Not”

The brother could take on the adversary role, what then? Sometimes it might be necessary to visit with him on more than one occasion to try to resolve the problem. If, after I have tried every way and everything possible, and he insists on their being enmity between us, I must seek out “two witnesses or three” to accompany me that “every word may be established” (v. 16).

There are several advantages to this: (1) they may be able to talk convincingly to the brother and help him to see the wisdom of resolving the matter; (2) they may be able to bring further evidence showing him to be at fault; and (3) they can act as “witnesses” if the matter must come up before the church (Deut. 19:15; 2 Cor. 13: 1; Jn. 8:17).

“Tell It Unto The Church”

If all has failed to “gain the brother,” then the matter must be brought before the assembly (church). Notice, please, that Jesus did not say, “bring the matter to the attention of the preacher or elders.” He said, “tell it unto the church.” That is to all Christians that normally assemble at one place. Notice again please, Jesus did not say, “This one should be written up all across the land” so that all churches may be notified to beware of such a one! No, the group to which he would normally have fellowship is under consideration, and they should be told for the same reason that I must go to him in the first place, to gain the brother. There may be others that can bring influence to bear upon the situation, hopefully to clear it up.

But, what if he will not “hear the church”? Jesus said, “Let him be unto thee as the Gentile and the publican” (v. 17). Notice, Jesus said, Let him be this “unto thee.” The original difficulty was between him and me. The consequence of his obstinacy involves two people! The church is not under obligation to withdraw fellowship on the basis of a falling out between two brethren. Too many times, the brother who feels “sinned against” immediately masses all the forces he can in the church to do battle and to win against the brother. If he cannot get the “offensive” brother to “repent,” he will try to get him “disfellowshipped,” or “discredited” in some way!

Jesus is not talking about disfellowshipping in general. He told the “sinned against” brother to treat the “sinning” brother “as the Gentile and the publican.” That means he may not enjoy a closeness or fellowship with him, but he must not treat him as an “enemy, but admonish him as a brother” (2 Thess. 3:16). He must not hold a grudge, harbor ill-feelings, withhold his hand, snub, or in any way misuse him, but treat him in the same way he would treat any non-Christian (Gentile, publican).

Brethren, we have more to do in the kingdom of God than to do battle with each other. In many ways we seem to wear our feelings “on our sleeves”; we are quick to criticize and find faults in others without seeing our own; and we are highly suspicious of the motives of others, without the capability of knowing the heart!

Or, we go the opposite direction and demonstrate an attitude of apathy and indifference by not (1) going to a brother caught up in a sin, (2) showing an interest in one who is erring from the truth, or (3) getting to know the brethren so we can understand and love them.

May God help us to properly identify our erring brother and then to treat him as God has outlined in His word.

Guardian of Truth XXIX: 18, p. 556
September 19, 1985