Truth Magazine

By Mike Willis

In an effort to provide more good writers for Guardian of Truth, I have asked brother Bobby Witherington, who preaches for the Mountain View church in San Bernardino, California to join our staff of writers. Brethren all over these United States have appreciated his work in the past and we are thankful to have him laboring with us in the venture of teaching the word of God through the printed page. In an effort to introduce Bobby and his family to our readers, I am giving this biographical information about him. I think you will have a greater appreciation for him after reading it.

BIOGRAPHY — Bobby Witherington

On February 15, 1934 Bobby Witherington was born in a farm house a few miles north of Kenton, Tennessee. He attended grade school and High school in Kenton, graduating in 1952. In the fall of 1952, he entered the University of Tennessee (Knoxville), intending to major in animal husbandry. However, while enrolled at U.T.; he also attended worship services at the Laurel Ave. church of Christ, during which time he re-evaluated his own standing before the Lord. He was supposedly “restored” one Sunday night at Laurel Ave.-a “restoration” which was invalid because further consideration, based upon a closer study of the scriptures, convinced him that he had not repented prior to being baptized.

Nevertheless, notwithstanding the fact that the church at Laurel Ave. was “liberal” (and in those days he did not know the meaning of “liberalism” or “institutionalism”) and notwithstanding the fact that his “restoration” was not a restoration, he was to some extent a changed person following his first year in college. In the summer of 1953, he returned to Chicago, Ill., where he had spent the previous summer, to earn moneys for his next year’s schooling. On the first Sunday night after returning to Chicago, he assembled with the Grand Ave. church where he met Norman Fultz (whom he had first met the previous summer and who was also there for the purpose of earning school money). After the initial “hello,” Norman’s first remark was, “You are going to attend church on Sunday night this summer!” During that summer several persons influenced him, but it was mainly through Norman Fultz’s persistence that he finally decided to enroll that Fall in Freed-Hardeman College, instead of returning to U.T.

In December of 1953, as a penitent believer, he confessed his faith and was baptized into Christ “for the remission of sins.” In the spring of 1955, he graduated from Freed-Hardeman College. At the time of graduation he, though concerned about the “issues” affecting brethren, was convinced that the position espoused by most of the Freed-Hardeman teachers just had to be right. After all, how could such pious and intelligent brethren possibly be wrong!

Of great significance in brother Witherington’s life was his chance meeting of the former Sue Troutt at the Trimble (Tenn.) church in January, 1953. Knowing a good thing when he saw it, he deemed it wise to get better acquainted with that Troutt girl. He did! They were joined in marriage on Dec. 26, 1954. Theirs was the first wedding ceremony solemnized by the then nervous Norman Fultz.

To this union four children have been born. Connie, the eldest, is married to Ted Doss, Jr. They are both faithful Christians who work and worship with the Northside church of Christ in Dyersburg, Tennessee. James, the second child, now living in Selfner, Florida, is married to the former Cheryl Chapman of Brandon, Florida, and both are faithful members of the church in Brandon. David, the middle child, is now attending Florida College and also is a faithful member of the church in Brandon. Philip, age 12, is in the seventh grade, and is the last child still at home. Bob and Sue deny being prejudiced, but they will tell you that their grandsons (one to each of their married children) just happen to be the finest and brightest of all!

Following his graduation from Freed Hardeman, Bob and Sue moved to Chicago, Ill., where he labored first with the church meeting at 410 S. Michigan Avenue. In the fall of 1957, he helped establish the Englewood church of Christ. During their six-year stay in Chicago, brother Witherington also labored fit, secular work, while preaching every Lord’s day. For five years of that time he worked as an Ironworker, during which he was able to support a growing family and pay off his college debts. It was also during this time that he learned the truth regarding institutionalism, the sponsoring church arrangement, etc.

In June, 1961, the Witheringtons moved to Owensboro, Kentucky to labor “full-time” with the Southside church of Christ. They had to learn a lot, and fast – like how to get by on one third as much income as he formerly made as a structural ironworker. They also learned that problems among brethren need not be unresolvable. Consequently, in cooperation with Thomas Hickey, who diligently labored with the Central church of Christ, and with the help of a number of concerned brethren, the differences which had resulted in a division in the Central church in 1960, were ultimately resolved. In fact, in January, 1963 the two groups merged. Eventually the old, inadequate meeting house was sold, a, new one was erected, and a good work has continued to be done by the Southside church of Christ.

In June, 1965 the Witheringtons moved to Louisville, Kentucky to labor with the Haldeman Ave. church. While there, brother Witherington became more aware than ever of the value of home Bible studies-especially a planned series designed to give an overview of the Bible, with particular emphasis placed upon man’s obligation in this age. As a result, an “old” congregation began to get younger that is, with reference to the average age of the membership. And in connection with such work, he became more keenly aware of the tremendous help which faithful, retired brethren, like the late Robert McClellan, can give to a young preacher. Working together for one year, they baptized upwards of 40 people – and in an area where the “nobody is interested” refrain had been repeated over and over. He is still convinced that no church can expect to grow numerically unless the members get out of their comfortable recliners, and get out and teach.

Following a six-year stay in Louisville, the Witheringtons moved in June, 1971 to Murray, Kentucky, to labor with the West Murray church of Christ. While living in Murray, the Witheringtons learned more about the damage done by the “quarantine” which a lot of “liberals” like to place on churches. At West Murray, he worshipped with some faithful brethren who had been withdrawn from by some of the area churches -withdrawn from for no reason other than the fact that they were willing to go hear such men as Irven Lee preach, and for insisting on “book, chapter, and verse” before building a “fellowship hall!” He had contact with a number of area brethren who admitted that some practices where they attended were unscriptural, but for business reasons, or because of the quarantine’s stigma, several of them lacked the courage to make the change.

In June, 1977, the Witheringtons moved to California where they worship and work with the church of Christ meeting on Mt. View Ave. in San Bernardino. The Mt. View church is served by four elders, with Sunday a.m. attendance normally running around 180. In many respects their labors with the Mt. View church have been the most productive and enjoyable of any to date. One thing they have learned in San Bernardino is that many in California keep the faith! There are still brethren who want to serve the Lord according to His revealed will. And there are still aliens who are interested in learning the truth. In fact, in a recent week brother Witherington scheduled three home studies with people who initially asked him to go and study with them – and two of these studies resulted from calls made by people whom he had never heard of prior to their call.

Brother Witherington, coming from a broken home, learned by observation what an unselfish, povertystricken, hard-working, loving mother of six can do, even without a lot of government handouts- provided she has enough faith and enough determination to never give up. He does not claim any special talents. He does profess gratitude that, notwithstanding his own imperfections, he can be usefully engaged in the Lord’s work.

Conclusion

The first assignment which has been given to brother Witherington is a series of ten articles devoted to a discussion of the home. Having already read several of those articles, I can assure you that you are going to profit from reading his material. His loyalty to the truth manifests itself throughout these articles, as also does his wisdom in making practical application of the truths of God’s word. I think that you will soon agree, if you have never had contact with brother Witherington before, that we have made a wise choice in adding him to our staff of writers.

Guardian of Truth XXV: 3, pp. 35-36
January 15, 1981

By Hoyt H. Houchen

Question: Denominationalists like to use Acts 15 as their “authority” in attempting to justify ecclesiastical councils and centralized headquarters over their churches. They argue that Acts IS shows that churches from other areas appealed to an authoritative council in Jerusalem concerning a matter of doctrine and that the decision handed down and promulgated in their letter was binding in all the churches. How can it be shown that Acts 15 is not an approved example for ecclesiastical councils and centralized headquarters over the church today? Thank you.

Reply: In no way is Acts 15 a precedent for ecclesiastical councils and centralized headquarters over the church. The doctrinal problem in Acts 15 was whether Gentiles had to be circumcised according to the law of Moses in order to be saved (v. 1). Men had come down from Jerusalem to Antioch teaching this doctrine, but Paul and Barnabas had refuted it. After much dispute it was decided that Paul and Barnabas, along with others, should go to Jerusalem and take -up the matter with the apostles and elders. This was not really necessary in order for the problem to be solved because Paul was an apostle, and he had already taught the truth on the subject while at Antioch. The Holy Spirit revealed the truth to the apostles and they in turn taught it. So, the meeting in Jerusalem only confirmed the truth which Paul had previously taught. It was not Paul’s decision, nor was it the decision of the council. The matter had already been settled by the Holy Spirit (Acts 15: 28). The decree that was delivered to the churches (Acts 16:4) was in reality the decision of the Holy Spirit (Acts 15:28) and it was ordained or issued by the apostles and elders that were at Jerusalem (Acts 16:4).

Church councils have no authority to determine truth. The truth is not determined by a democratic vote, but by the word of God. Men therefore have no authority to set up religious councils or headquarters to issue edicts, enact and amend laws. From the first ecumenical council in A.D. 325 on down to the present day such councils have existed, but without God’s authority. They have been responsible for the creeds of men, which have in turn, brought about division in the religious world.

The decrees which were delivered and were to be kept (Acts 16:4) merely confirmed what had been revealed by the Holy Spirit (Acts 15:28). Neither Acts 15 nor any other Scripture authorizes religious councils or headquarters. They are devised by men and not by God.

Guardian of Truth XXV: 3, p. 34
January 15, 1981

By Herschel Patton

This beloved nation of ours was founded, and flourished for many years by people who, generally speaking, were motivated and directed by a fear of God and respect for the Bible. “God is” was generally believed. The thought of offending God or not doing His will deterred man in many actions, and pleasing God, with its rewards, motivated him. When men drifted from righteousness, through fleshly lusts and human reasoning, putting the “fear of God” in them was usually sufficient to bring them to repentance. An Old Testament example of this is Jonah’s preaching in Nineveh (Jonah 3).

Then, God spoke through His prophets; now He speaks through the truth – the revealed and confirmed Word given through His apostles and prophets – The New Testament (Heb. 1:1-2; Jn. 16:13; 1 Cor. 2:12-13).

In days past, “The Bible says” was meaningful to most people. It was authoritative and settled the question of right and wrong – what should, or should not, be done. When something was being enjoined, men were quick to ask, “Where does the Bible authorize it?” Whatever the Bible said settled the question of what man’s action should be. This was because the Bible was believed to be God’s complete and final revealed word. Men did what they did religiously because they believed it to be divinely revealed. Preachers would often enter public debates affirming or denying that the Bible teaches this or that.

Now It Is Different

Today, after many years of mental development (education) and material progress, man’s pride and confidence in himself has led him to question, even deny, God and His Word (the Bible). Tell a man that his actions are against God, and he asks, as Pharaoh of old, “Who is God, that I should obey him?” (Ex. 5:2). “How do you know there is a God to whom I must account?” Putting the “fear of God” in such is impossible (Heb. 6:4-6).

Tell one his actions are contrary to the Bible, or unauthorized by Scripture, and his reply is “So what! What is the Bible other than the philosophies of men, like other books?” “How do you know it is God’s inerrant word?” Quoting the Bible to such a person is meaningless.

Why This Difference?

This change in mankind, or we might say, the loss of his faith, has come about through various processes, over a number of years. Each process stems from man’s own self-esteem. The Bible says, “professing themselves to be wise, they became fools” (Rom. 1:22).

As man became more educated and trained in mental exercise, philosophizing became a favored endeavor. He began to reason about his origin and that of the universe, spawned theories about the nature of man and the origin of things. He disclaimed as “fact” or “truth” anything that could not be proven through the senses, yet is inconsistent in that many of his claimed “facts” have never been, and cannot be, thus established. Some of his claimed “truths” of the past have in later years been proven false. Man’s theories, atheism, evolution, and humanism, have been zealously pushed on society through schools and the media in the name of education, creating doubts and destroying faith in God.

Because the Bible, God’s will, is not a flesh and pride satisfying way of life, men have attacked it, seeking to discredit and minimize its influence. They have questioned its inspiration, sought out “seeming” contradictions, and “imagined” errors. They have argued that a fixed law for one generation cannot be suited for a later, and more enlightened, one. They contend that human wisdom and self-fulfillment must not be curbed by an “antiquated” system or laws. The zeal characterizing these efforts, coupled with the “self-pleasing” nature of man, have led many to doubt the Bible as inspired and the necessity of rigid compliance. With the loss of this faith, there is no end to what men will do and yet feel satisfied and safe.

Here are the basic causes for violence, immorality, divorce, juvenile delinquency, homosexuality, dishonesty, alcoholism, and every other crime. It is the cause of digression and liberalism in religious circles – even in the Lord’s church. From those who “don’t care what the Bible says” to those who say “We don’t have to have Bible, or follow it in everything,” there is a manifest loss of faith in God and the Bible. These are no longer determining forces in their lives.

The Tragedy Of It

The tragedy of this loss of faith is in the fact that “God is,” the Bible is “His Word,” and man is accountable. In other words, man’s loss of faith does not change these facts or exempt him from eternal destruction.

Evidences for the existence of God and “the creation” (verses evolution) abounds. Many of the world’s greatest scientists have, and do, freely admits this. There just is no logical explanation for the origin of things, including man, purpose, and design, apart from God. Scientific proof is impossible, for this comes. from examining the material things that exist, and unless that scientist can find in what exists proof of its origin, which he cannot do, then his speech and writings in this area are nothing more than philosophical theories. This is why, if the evolution theory is going to be taught in our schools (and it is a theory, not scientific fact), then “creation” should also be taught as an alternative theory. Neither can be established as scientific fact, but are religious or philosophical questions, not scientific. And, there is much more, and sounder, evidence for creation than there is for evolution.

Likewise, both external and internal evidence for the inspiration of the Bible abounds. Every effort to find errors or contradictions in the Bible has miserably failed. In spite of all the efforts made to destroy it, the Bible still stands untainted as the abiding, inspired word of God. When one doubts and rejects the Bible, he exchanges something proved and enduring for “shifting sand” – man’s own thoughts and ways.

What a tragedy! Millions have and others are daily “professing themselves to be wise, become fools,” and are destined to eternal damnation. Beloved, examine yourself: Do you really believe in God? You may not be an atheist, but have you made God “such an one as yourself” (Psa. 50:21), so that there is no reason to fear Him as long as you are pleased? Do you condone and “go along with” unscriptural practices, having convinced yourself – or been convinced by others – that “no one is perfect,” so strict adherence to God’s way will not be required if you are sincere, and mostly good?

Listen to God’s Word. “Whatever ye do in word or deed, do all in the name of the Lord Jesus” (Col. 3:17). “Whosoever transgresseth and abideth not in the doctrine of Christ, hath not God” (2 Jn. 9). “And if the blind lead the blind, both shall fall into the ditch” (Matt. 15:14). “For if we sin wilfully after that we have received the knowledge of the truth, there remaineth no more sacrifice for sins. But a certain fearful looking for of judgment and fiery indignation, which shall devour the adversaries. He that despised Moses’ law died without mercy under two or three witnesses: of how much sorer punishment, suppose ye, shall he be thought worthy, who bath trodden under foot the Son of God, and hath counted the blood of the covenant, wherewith he was sanctified, an unholy thing, and hath done despite unto the Spirit of grace? For we know Him that hath said, vengeance belongeth unto me, I will recompense, saith the Lord. And again, the Lord shall judge his people. It is a fearful thing to fall into the hands of the living God” (Heb. 10:26-31).

“Let us hear the conclusion of the whole matter: Fear God, and keep his commandments: for this is the whole duty of man” (Eccl. 12:13).

Guardian of Truth XXV: 3, pp, 33, 43
January 15, 1981

By Don R. Hastings

In the Beatitudes, Jesus told us the characteristics which we must possess to be truly happy. The beautiful disposition of meekness is essential to be happy. The “poor in spirit” are, also, meek.

The disposition of meekness is greatly misunderstood. Many think that a meek person is one who is spineless, weak and cowardly (one who is so timid that he is too afraid to speak out and take a stand for anything). He is devoid of strength and courage. Such a concept of meekness is completely in error as we shall see.

“Blessed Are The Meek”

Let us define the word “meek,” which is translated from the Greek word praus. Thayer defines this Greek word as “gentle, mild, meek.” Webster defines the word “meek” as follows: “mild of temper; not easily provoked or irritated; patient under injuries; not vain, or haughty, or resentful; characterized by mildness of temper or patience.” David Lipscomb stated, “Meekness is a quiet and forbearing spirit that suffers wrong without resentfulness but firmness and unyielding devotion to right.” W. E. Vine states, “described negatively meekness is the opposite to self-assertiveness and self-interest . . . it is not occupied with self at all” (Expository Dictionary for New Testament Words, p. 56).

William Barclay writes, “. . . used of animals which have been tamed, and which have learned to accept discipline and control …. A horse obedient to the reigns, a dog trained to obey the word of command . . .” (Flesh and Spirit, pp. 113, 114). It is not the absence of strength, but strength brought under control! It is strength and gentleness perfectly combined for it takes strength to be angry at sin and yet treat the sinner with gentleness! It is being aggressive in defense of God’s word, but reluctant to retaliate for injuries brought upon self!

Meekness toward God is shown by our submissiveness to Him (Gal. 2:20). A meek person has brought himself under God’s control and is, therefore, “meet for the master’s use” (2 Tim. 2:21). “The meek Christian accepts God’s dealings with him as always for his good” (The Beatitudes, by James Tolle, p. 39). (See Job 1:21; 1 Sam. 3:18; Lk. 1:38; 2 Cor. 12:7-10.) It causes us to sincerely say, “Thy will be done.” Meekness is the disposition which causes us to humbly admit our ignorance and seek understanding from the word which is able to save our souls (James 1:21; Psa. 25:9).

We are to show “all meekness toward all men”(Tit. 3:1, 2). We must show meekness in answering those who question our hope for eternal life in Christ (1 Pet. 3:15). A gentle answer will do the questioner more good than trying to ram our faith down his throat. Our answer should never be accompanied with scorn and contempt.

We must show meekness in reproving those who have gone astray (Gal. 6:1 KJV). “Correction can be given in a way which entirely discourages a man and which drives him to depression and despair; and correction can be given in a way which sets a man upon his feet with the determination to do better and with the hope of doing better” (Flesh and Spirit, by Win. Barclay, p. 117). “Meekness is the spirit which makes correction a stimulant and not a depressant, a means to hope and not a cause of despair” (Ibid).

We must show meekness in correcting those who teach error for such a disposition is far more effective than harshness. It is far more effective than an argumentative disposition” (2 Tim. 2:24, 25).

We must show meekness by refusing to avenge ourselves of the suffering and injuries which others have brought upon us (Rom. 12:19, 21). If we can learn to suffer wrong without becoming filled with hatred and bitterness, we will be a lot happier. Meekness produces peace for it will cause one to let another have his coat instead of fighting for it. He does not let trivial things upset him (Matt. 5:38-42). It takes far more strength to refuse to retaliate than to go ahead and strike back.

Two great examples of meekness in the Scriptures are Moses and Jesus. “Now the man Moses was very meek . .” (Numbers 12:3). The context of this verse proves the meekness of Moses for he was patient with those who opposed him (Numbers 12:1-15). Moses was not a spineless person, but a man of great strength and courage.

Jesus was “meek and lowly in heart” (Matt. 11:29; 21:5; 2 Cor. 10:1). Meekness is one of the ways in which Christ was like Moses (Deut. 18:15; Acts 3:22). In His meekness, Christ was both the “lamb of God” and the “lion of the tribe of Judah” (John 1:29; Rev. 5:5). As a lamb, Christ was submissive to God’s will (Mt. 26:39; Jn. 5:30). As a lamb, Christ was gentle and forgiving to those who treated Him cruelly (Lk. 23:34; 1 Pet. 2:23; Isa. 53:7). As a lion, Christ rebuked sharply the Pharisees and scribes for they were “blind guides” (Mt. 23). As a lion, Christ drove out those who were making His “Father’s house a house of merchandise” (John 2:13-17).

“For They Shall Inherit the Earth”

The premillennialists believe this will be fulfilled when Christ comes again. They are wrong (2 Pet. 3:10). The word “inherit” implies that the earth is not bought, stolen, or earned, but given to the meek by God (Psa. 37:9-11, 22, 29, 34). The meek may not be actual title holders of the land, but they realize that the earth’s is Jehovah’s and all its beauty and riches are theirs to enjoy (Psa. 24:1; 1 Cor. 3:21-23). Who is richer, the man who owns ten houses, or the one who can knock on a hundred doors and be received with joy (Mark 10:29, 30)?

Meekness is essential if we are going to behave ourselves as true children of God (Col. 3:12; Eph. 4:1, 2; 1 Pet. 3:3, 4). The world would encourage you to develop an aggressive, domineering disposition which places itself above others. This attitude may help you obtain your worldly goals, but it will not make you really happy! The meek are happy because they are submissive to God. They are under His control. They are contented and at peace with God, their fellow man and themselves. Will you meekly obey the Lord?

Guardian of Truth XXV: 2, pp. 26-27
January 8, 1981