Truth Magazine

By Jimmy Tuten

Those who seek truth with reference to certain Bible subjects often come face to face with apparent obstacles that seem to block all efforts of investigation. These obstacles are many times presented by well-meaning individuals who, because of previous teachings which have not been verified, are unconsciously following error. The question of the immortality of the soul is no exception to this matter and, when it is brought up, different objections are raised, which is the final analysis deny that man is not wholly mortal. These objections are sometimes based on certain passages of Scripture while some are based purely on materialistic concepts.

The Bible teaches that man was created in the image of God (Gen. 1:26-27). This could not have been a physical makeup, for God “is Spirit” (Jn. 4:24) and a “spirit hath not flesh and bones” (Lk. 24:39). Since “like begets like,” the image to which man was conformed was not physical, but spiritual. Then again, God is immortal (1 Tim. 1:17), i.e., He is an immortal Spirit. God is the Father of our spirits (Heb. 12:9); therefore our spirits (souls) are immortal, being in the likeness of God. Hence, inherent in the existence of the soul is endlessness, or immortality. Some deny that the souls of men survive death. It is said that the soul of man is naturally mortal and that the only hope for immortality is in Jesus Christ. As seen already, the souls of men are not naturally mortal; they are immortal, and those who deny this fact take a negative position with reference to what the New Testament teaches regarding the subject.

Other Statements With Reference To Immortality

God is immortal (1 Tim. 1:17). Through His personal ministry, Jesus Christ brought “to light life and immortality through the gospel” (2 Tim. 1:10). Based on these and similar scriptures, immortality for some denotes simply a redemptive concept. L. Berkof, in his Systematic Theology (pp. 672-678), argues for the indestructibility of the soul, but he says that this is not what the Bible means by immortality. He argues that immortality according to the Bible means nothing more than eternal blessedness. Closely related to this is the position taken by another writer (H. Hoeksema, In The Midst Of Death, pp. 98-99), who applies immortality only to those who are in Christ. O. Cullmann, writing in Christianity Today (July 21, 1958, pp. 3-6), substitutes “resurrection” for immortality. This demonstrates that for some there are different shades of immortality. But regardless of the denial of the immortality of the soul and various shades of understanding concerning it, the fact still remains that man has a soul that lives eternally. The soul is not only immortal, it is conscious from death till the resurrection. This is the position defended in this writing.

Man Is A Dual Being

Man is made up of body and soul. The soul and the spirit of man are used interchangeably many times in the Scriptures, as can be seen from such passages as Luke 1:46-47 (Cf. Thayer’s Greek Lexicon, p. 520). Pursuing this line of thought, the soul and spirit will be used interchangeably in this writing. Is man a dual being, made up of body and spirit? First, from the Old Testament, observe the account of the death of Rachel, about which it is said, “and as her soul was departing (for she died) . . .” (Gen. 35:18-19). The text says therefore, that her soul departed the body when she died! If, as some claim, the soul is the breath, they must explain how there can be life without breath (Lk. 1:41). Again, if the body is the whole of man, then the ridiculous assertion would be that Rachel’s body left her body! Something had to exist apart from Rachel’s body in order to leave it. That something is the soul which made its abode in the body. The body, as the dwelling place for the spirit, is referred to in the Scriptures as a “tabernacle” (2 Cor. 5:1). If, as in the case of the son of the widow of Zarephath, Rachel’s soul had returned to her body, she would have lived again (1 Kings 17:22), for she, like all humans was made of body and soul.

From the New Testament we learn that Jesus Christ, “being in the form of God, thought it not robbery to be equal with God: but made of himself no reputation, and took upon him the likeness of men: And being found in the fashion as a man, he humbled himself, and became obedient unto the death of the cross” (Phil. 2:5-7). This passage also clearly teaches that man is made up of body and spirit and that as such, there is a likeness of man in contrast to a likeness of God. Since God is a Spirit and Christ was in the form of God, the form that Christ had before coming to the earth was a spiritual likeness. When He was born of the virgin Mary, He took upon Himself an earthly body made of the dust of the ground (Jn. 3:3; Gen. 2:7). Jesus, who was spirit, became flesh and spirit. This is what is meant by “likeness of men.” He was a dual being like all other men (2 Cor. 4:16; Matt. 10:28).

What Is The Soul?

The favored trite expression of some is, “man is a soul; man does not have a soul.” The latter statement is a falsehood. Man is a soul, but he also has a soul. Soul is used in various ways in the New and Old Testaments. In the Old Testament, it is translated from the Hebrew nephesh, which is translated “soul,” “life,” “living,” etc. In the New Testament it is the translation of psuche, which is sometimes translated “mind,” “life,” etc. The exact meaning of these two words must be determined from the context in which they are found. The following is a summary of the three most common usages of psuche, translated “soul”: (1) “That in which there is life, a living being”- (Thayer, p. 677). In this sense it means a person, such as “eight souls (i.e. persons, J.T.) were saved by water” (1 Pet. 3:20). (2) It is used to refer to animal life. This by no means is to be confused with immortal spirit of man, for as already indicated, the spirit and soul are used many times to refer to this same being. The rich man was told, “This night thy soul shall be required of thee” (Lk. 12:20). “Thy soul shall be required” simply meant that the man was to die, and that his life (animal life) was to be taken from him (cf. 1 Sam. 24:11; 2 Thess. 5:23). (3) The third use of the word has reference to that which is the immortal part of man (the immortal soul or spirit). “The soul is an essence which differs from the body and is not dissolved by death . . . . the soul freed from the body, a disembodied soul” (Thayer p. 677; cf. Acts 2:31; Heb. 13:17; Mt. 16:26). Having established that the soul differs from the body, let us now establish the fact that the soul is the spirit of man. Thayer’s Greek Lexicon defines spirit (pneuma, Gr.) as being among other things “a human soul that has left the body” (p. 520). In some reference then, the soul is the spirit, and the spirit is the soul. According to the Scriptures, the spirit and the soul have the same motions. Job said that the soul of man mourns (14:22). Daniel said that the spirit grieves (7:15). Grieving and mourning are the same emotions and since these are applied to both spirit and soul, one must refer to the other. Since the spirit of man expresses itself emotionally (Gen. 41:8; Deut. 2:30), it could not possibly refer to wind or breath as some assert.

The Spirit Of Man Is Immortal

Immortality is from the Greek word athanasia, which means deathlessness (a negative, thanatos, death). It is rendered “immortality” in 1 Cor. 15:53-54, and in 1 Tim. 6:16. While the body is described as being coruptible (2 Cor. 5:1-4), this is not the case with the spirit of man (2 Cor. 4:16-18). The mistake that some make is not only denying the existence of the soul of man, but in attributing to the entire man what is said of his body. The Bible teaches that the souls of men have deathlessness. In Matthew 10:28, it is said that man cannot kill the soul, though he can cause it to depart from the body by killing the body (Jas. 2:26; Eccl. 12:7). Of the spirit, Peter said, “let it be the hidden man of the heart, in that which is not corruptible (aptharto, “not liable to corruption or decay, imperishable,” W.E. Vine, Expository Dictionary, p. 249), even the ornament of a meek and quiet spirit” (1 Pet. 3:3-4). One is wrong when he says that there is not a soul in man that lives endlessly, and shows his ignorance of what the New Testament teaches when he claims that “the serpent is the one who originated the doctrine of the inherent immortality of the soul” (Let God Be True, p. 66).

Truth Magazine XXIV: 44, pp. 709-710
November 6, 1980

By Mike Willis and Earl E. Robertson

On 19 September 1980, the Gospel Guardian Company was sold to Cogdill Foundation. Elsewhere in this issue of Truth Magazine, brother James W. Adams, present editor of Gospel Guardian, gives the details of this announcement. Be sure to read his material which will also be printed in the Gospel Guardian. Though the sale of the Gospel Guardian Company was completed on 19 September 1980, Cogdill Foundation does not obtain possession of the company until 1 January 1980. Until then, the Gospel Guardian Company will continue under its present management.

Gospel Guardian To Be Discontinued

The Gospel Guardian will continue to be published until the end of this calendar year. Throughout this period, it will continue to be under the excellent editorship of brother Adams. At the close of this year, the Gospel Guardian will have completed thirty years of publication. Its defense of the truth against the introduction of the sponsoring church arrangement, church support of colleges and benevolent institutions, and church sponsored recreation was of tremendous value to the Lord’s people. Brethren owe those responsible for its publication a debt of gratitude. We are thankful for their labors and want to publicly express appreciation to all of those responsible for teaching this generation the “faith which was once delivered to the saints” in its purity.

We see no reason for us to be publishing two papers at the present. The Gospel Guardian and Truth Magazine, so far as we are able to determine, are publishing material which is directed to the same “old paths.” To continue publishing two papers would double our expenses and labors. Consequently, the Gospel Guardian will end its publication as of December 31, 1980.

In order to avoid anyone starting a new paper under the name Gospel Guardian and perhaps misusing the confidence which brethren have had in the old Gospel Guardian, the Cogdill Foundation is copyrighting the name of the Gospel Guardian. This gives us the exclusive right to publish a paper with this name.

Truth Magazine To Be Renamed

The Cogdill Foundation will continue to publish Truth Magazine but will rename the paper Guardian of Truth in order to retain a portion of the Gospel Guardian’s name. Consequently, as of 1 January 1981, Truth Magazine will become Guardian of Truth. We shall continue our present volume numbers, so the 1981 volume will be listed as volume twenty-five.

As is being done with the name Gospel Guardian, the Cogdill Foundation is also securing a copyright on the names Truth Magazine and Guardian of Truth in order that we might have the exclusive right to publish a magazine with these names. We do not want someone starting a new paper named Truth Magazine which might depend upon the past stand for truth of Truth Magazine for its support.

Financial Arrangements

A word needs to be said with reference to those who are presently subscribing to Gospel Guardian and/or purchasing church ads to be published in the Gospel Guardian. Upon purchasing the Gospel Guardian, we purchased their mailing list; hence, everyone who is presently receiving Gospel Guardian will begin receiving the Guardian of Truth as of 1 January 1981.

In working out the following arrangements, we have sought to be as fair as possible to those who are presently subscribing to Gospel Guardian. Here is what we are proposing to do. Gospel Guardian is a thirty-two page monthly; Guardian of Truth will be a sixteen page weekly. Hence, we are extending any subscriptions to the Gospel Guardian on a two-for-one basis – the subscriber will receive two issues of Guardian of Truth for every one issue of Gospel Guardian which he has paid for. In addition to this we are going to add one extra free month to receive Guardian of Truth to be sure that the readers of Gospel Guardian are given a fair deal. This same formula will be used to extend the subscription of those who are presently receiving both papers.

Those who have purchased church ads in the Gospel Guardian will have their ads continued in Guardian of Truth. Inasmuch as the circulation of Gospel Guardian has been below 1500 and the circulation of Guardian of Truth will be nearing 5000, advertisers in Guardian of Truth will be receiving a great deal more exposure through the pages of Guardian of Truth than they received through Gospel Guardian. Nevertheless, we are still going to give advertisers in Gospel Guardian the same bargain which we offered their subscribers. We will give advertisers a two-for-one bargain with one month bonus given. This will mean that ads which appeared in one issue of the Gospel Guardian will appear in two issue of Guardian of Truth; inasmuch as our ads appear twice each month, this will work out to a month-for-month exchange. Those who have ads appearing in both papers will simple have their ads extended on the same ratio.

Gospel Guardian Bookstore

We will make an announcement very soon as to the fur lure of the Gospel Guardian Bookstore. We want the Cogdill Foundation to render the greatest and best services to its many customers in the most efficient way possible. The Cogdill Foundation has produced many excellent literary works and plans to continue even with escalation; however, this is not possible without bookstore outlets and good customers. We are thankful that we have both. Our sales continue to climb and we thank each customer for buying from us. What profits we realize from the sales are returned into the creation of additional materials. We covet your continued goodwill and patronage in these functions.

Truth Magazine XXIV: 44, pp. 707-708
November 6, 1980

By Ron Halbrook

In the recesses of memory echo referenced by gospel preachers to an article by J.B. Briney in which he warned, “Ephraim is joined by his idols, let him alone.” This was probably the taproot of our decision to name a column on the meandering of the recent liberalism “Ephraim’s Idols.” In the early years of controversy among brethren in this country over instrumental music in worship, Briney (1839-1927) was a lion in opposition to the practice as a perversion of worship. In the American Christian Review (Vol. XIII, no. 7 [15 February 1870], p. 50), he reacted to N.A. Walker’s report of many baptisms resulting from efforts to teach which included instrumental accompaniment in worship. Briney wondered if Walker’s infatuation with the instrument grew out of a new, improved edition of the Great Commission. The true source of such paraphernalia as musical instruments and mourner’s benches is sectism and denominationalism, as Briney noted. When the gospel of Jesus Christ is preached in fulness with love, these gimmicks are not necessary. The man who introduces perverted worship borrowed from denominationalism causes division among Christians for the sake of a practice not authorized in the apostolic writings of Scripture. Romans 16:17-18 says to mark such a man and avoid him. When Ephraim is joined to his idols in hardness of heart, there is nothing we can do but “let him alone.”

The sad sequel to the story of Briney’s article is that he was later swept along by the strong tide of popular demand for the instrument. Briney defended the practice in written debate with J.W. McGarvey in the Apostolic Times, orally debated W.W. Otey in Louisville, Kentucky, during 1908, and tried to answer M.C. Kurfee’s Instrumental Music in Worship (1911) by publishing the book Instrumental Music in Christian Worship in 1914. Failing to heed his own warning, Briney joined himself to the idol and was finally let alone by faithful brethren. Briney’s article from the 1870 American Christian Review was entitled “The Organ, Or the Gospel – Which?” It is here reproduced for our admonition.

The Organ, Or The Gospel – Which? J.B. Briney

N.A. Walker, in reporting meetings recently help by himself in Kansas, Ohio, and Indiana, says: “We used the musical instrument at every meeting during the year save one, by the harmonious consent of the brethren.” He also reports Oar three hundred additions during the year. The obvious intention of this report is to make the impression that the instrument was a means, if not the main means, of bringing these persons into the church.

It appears that this son of Jabal carries his instrument with him all the time, and plays it wherever he can get the “harmonious consent of the brethren.” I suppose he has an improved edition of the commission to this effect: “Go preach the gospel and play an instrument to every creature!” What a mistake the Savior made in leaving the instrument out of our commission, when N.A. Walker can convert (?) three hundred persons per annum by the use of the instrument, while he might fail altogether with the simple gospel! I can not account for this blunder upon the part of the Son of God, only upon the supposition that he never dreamed that such men as N.A. Walker would ever attempt to preach the gospel. The fact is, he does not tell us in his report whether he preached the gospel. He only says that he used the instrument. Now, by his permission, I will make a suggestions to N.A. Walker, by which I think he can swell his figures considerably for the present year. Let him combine a mourner’s bench with his other instrument, and I think his usefulness (?) will be greatly increased. Most any carpenter can make one, and it would not cost much.

With N.A. Walker I am personally unacquainted, but how to reconcile a disposition to travel through the country sowing the seed of discord and strife among brethren with the spirit of the Master, I know not. N.A. Walker knows that the use of an instrument in the worship is an offense and a source of deep mortification to many of his brethren in all parts of the country.

He knows that its introduction has caused strife and contention in various places, and, in some degree, injured the influence of some congregations. He knows that some of his preaching brethren can not conscientiously preach for a congregation where an instrument is used. He knows that leaving the instrument off can do no harm, while taking it on must work mischief. He known all this and much more, and yet he is going through the country introducing the instrument wherever he can, and organizing churches with it in. Not only so, but he publishes the fact to the world. He glories in this work of mischief. But he says it is done by the “harmonious consent of the brethren.” Certainly. This “harmonious consent of the brethren” is understood in these parts. I have no idea that N.A. Walker will ever change his course. He will evidently lose the respect of many of his brethren. It may be, however, that he cares as little for the respect of some of his brethren as he cares for the conscientious protestations against his course.

Concerning him, I can only say to the brethren, “Ephraim is joined to his idols, let him alone.” Especially let him alone.

Truth Magazine XXIV: 44, p. 706
November 6, 1980

By James W. Adams

The news which follows may bring joy or sadness to the heart of the reader depending upon your attitude toward Gospel Guardian. Whatever your reaction, we want you to know that it is not something that was done without due consideration and prayerful thought. Due to Brother Theron N. Bohannon’s advancing age, his health, Sister Bohannon’s health, and his personal affairs, the editor of Gospel Guardian has been for the past year urging Brother Bohannon, is some way or the other, to get himself out from under the burden which continued publication of The Gospel Guardian imposed. Several courses of action were considered. The editor of the paper had first chance at buying and continuing to operate the paper himself. He considered it, but ruled that course out due to insufficient capital and his own age. Had I been ten years younger, I would have bought the company and continued to publish it myself, despite my finances, but unfortunately I am not ten years younger. The paper could have been given or sold to a Non-profit Corporation which we had set up with that it view. In fact, the corporation had already achieved both State and Federal (IRS) 4pproval and was ready to be activated. Several considerations caused this to be rejected. Brother Bohannon finally decided to sell The Gospel Guardian, Inc, lock, stock, and barrel, to The Cogdill Foundation. This became an accomplished fact, September .19, 1980, but it will not pass from one to the other until December 31, 1980. Until that time, the company and paper will continue to be operated as it has been for the past five years.

Theron N. Bohannon has unselfishly underwritten the company and the paper for five years. He has sacrificed thousands of dollars of his personal funds to do this. He has given the editor an absolutely free hand with the paper’s publication. Our relationship has been close and brotherly in every sense of the word. It remains so at this moment and w”continue to remain so as the years pass whether few or many. I regret that we did not achieve our goal of getting the paper operating in the black financially. We were approaching this goal, but only by the editor giving his time to the task without remuneration, except for reimbursed expenses. This is how we have operated throughout 1980. I leave the paper with no regrets and by choice. My reasons are strictly personal, hence no person’s business except my own. Beyond this statement, I plan to make no comment. I would appreciate not being asked, and I shall consider any speculation, publicly or privately voiced, as unwarranted meddling in other men’s matters, hence will dignify all such with the contempt of silence which it deserves. I regret the necessity for having to say this, but knowing the disposition of some, I deem it proper and necessary.

I shall make no comments concerning the future, either of the paper or the bookstore, but shall let the new owners of the company and paper make whatever statements they care to make and reveal whatever plans they have in mind for the future. I shall only assure our subscribers that all subscriptions will be fulfilled satisfactorily by those who assume ownership. This was a part of the sale agreement. We have no unpaid obligations beyond current operating expenses which will all be satisfied.

During my tenure as editor of the paper, my daughter, Patricia Spivey, has efficiently and faithfully operated the bookstore. It has been a great experience for her. She is a university graduate and competent, hence could have made more money elsewhere. I could not have managed the operation without her, so she made a large contribution to my editorship in this respect. I enjoyed writing for the paper and doing the work of an editor, however imperfectly. I trust that good was accomplished. May the Lord bless the good and overrule anything that was otherwise. A special thanks to our faithful readers for the hundreds of letters I have received encouraging me in my efforts, for those who may have respectfully written criticizing this or that about our efforts, and for your subscriptions and book business that helped us continue.

As to my future: I shall continue, as I have for more than forty-five years, to “do the work of an evangelist.” I work fill time with the good church at Huntington, Texas, in which labor I am most happy. I shall continue in this capacit~, will hold a few meetings each year, and plan to do some writing of a more permanent nature that I have contemplated for a number of years. When I perceive, as I will inevitably if I live long enough, that my powers of mind and body are waning to such an extent that my work is no longer productive, I shall retire from public work and dedicate the remainder of my life in simply living for God so as to go to heaven when I die and to take as many with me as possible. I hope it will be in the Piney Woods of East Texas that I spend these years. Though not a native of this section, I regard it as home!

Truth Magazine XXIV: 44, pp. 705, 715
November 6, 1980