Truth Magazine

By Cecil Willis

Truth Magazine is now well into its eighteenth year of publication. Throughout its history, it has never had any financial undergirding so as to guarantee its permanence. One might say that Truth Magazine has had a tenuous existence. However, I am not even sure that for a paper to have a tenuous existence is bad. There often comes a time when the cause of Christ would be better off if a particular paper were to fold up. History has been replete with instances of papers that served a detrimental rather than a helpful purpose.

But be that as it may, let me state that Truth Magazine appears to have more reasons to expect to continue than at any time in my association with it. When I became Editor of the paper in 1962, I really was not sure that the paper could continue throughout even one year. But a number of close friends and interested brethren rallied to our need to assist us in perpetuating what had been a useful teaching instrument. With the effort being made to complete the publication of the new “Truth In Life” Bible class literature series, more indebtedness by far is being incurred than at any time in our history. However, we have every reason to think that this indebtedness will, over a period of years, retire itself. It may surprise some brethren greatly to hear me state it, but it my opinion that it might well take fifteen years for this indebtedness being incurred to retire itself through the sale of the class literature. But it appears that the literature is going to be well received and will be widely used. We already have had to reprint the first quarter of the series, and have doubled our orders for succeeding quarters.

The only thing a religious journal like Truth Magazine has to sell and to result in its perpetuation is its contents. Thus we are ever indebted to those men on our staff and to other brethren who supply us the articles we publish. Without exception, these brethren serve without financial remuneration of any kind. In fact, most of them spend a good bit of their own money as they seek to expand the readership of Truth Magazine. Those of us who are charged with the day-to-day operation of the paper, the bookstore, and the Cogdill Foundation know how much we depend on our staff for our continued existence, and we deeply appreciate the years of faithful service so many brethren have rendered by supplying articles and encouraging others to subscribe. Some men who are not on the staff officially work as hard to promote the paper as do those of us who are on the staff, and these brethren likewise are much appreciated and by their efforts put us much in debt to them.

In recent years our editorial staff has been somewhat depleted, and we thus are making some plans now to add some other men to our writing staff. William Wallace, James P. Needham, and Connie W. Adams all have left the staff of Truth Magazine in order to edit other papers. All of them worked long and hard to promote Truth Magazine, and all of them were men of great ability. No paper could lose men of their competence without missing them.

In like manner, the toll of years has cut into the functioning capability of some on our staff. Brother Luther Blackmon apparently is rendered permanently incapable of writing any more articles. He was among the most popular of our writers. I might mention that I intend to leave Brother Blackmon’s name on our Masthead and will make an effort periodically to publish some writings from him that have not heretofore been published in anything other than church bulletins, which had very limited circulation. You will enjoy the spice of his pen as some of these articles are published.

Roy Cogdill was 67 years old April 24th. I might add that Luther Blackmon was 67 years old March 24th. During the last year Brother Cogdill has been severely hampered in his preaching endeavors and in his desire to write by malignancies in two parts of his body. The doctors give him every reason to believe that the growth of these malignancies has been curtailed. We therefore expect that Brother Cogdill will be able to write for several years to come. I do have plans, however, to occasionally run some articles that he has written in years long gone by, but which articles have not heretofore been published.

But it stands to reason that Brother Cogdill cannot any longer bear the heavy writing and preaching load that he has borne for so many years. Even if he could do so, those of us who consider ourselves to be his friends would prefer to see him voluntarily lighten his work load and slow his pace a bit in order to extend the years of his usefulness. No man among us more universally commands the respect for his soundness and ability than Roy Cogdill. But the necessity of him slowing down also limits the amount that he can write for Truth Magazine. Brother Cogdill now is finishing two class books in the “Truth In Life” series that I think will be invaluable for students for many years to come. He is writing a six month series of lessons, which will be published in two quarters, for a survey of the New Testament book-by-book for High School Students. He has all the lessons through 1 John finished.

But in addition to that, Brother Cogdill has five books in preliminary manuscript state. At least three of these books are transcriptions of series of related lessons that he has preached in gospel meetings, and constitute some of the richest preaching that he ever did. I often have said that when Roy Cogdill covered a subject in a sermon, I felt it had been’ more completely covered than any other man I ever heard. Sometimes I even could tell it had been completely covered by the seat of my pants! We hope to get into the publication of these books sometime later this year.

Except for Brother James W. Adams, who is 58 years old, the remainder of our staff of writers are nearly the same age. O. C. Birdwell, Irvin Himmel, Earl Robertson, Jimmy Tuten, Ferrell Jenkins and I are all about the same age. Ferrell would appreciate my telling you that he is a little younger than the rest of us. I think all of those men just mentioned are in their 40s. Presently Brother Larry Hafley is the youngest man on our staff, and he is just in his early 30s. Brother Adams’ health appears to be good, and we expect him to be the Dean of our editorial staff for some years to come, and hopefully Brother Cogdill can write substantially for the paper. Upon the wisdom and experience of these two men I have depended heavily for several years.

Basically we have men of two different generations on the staff of Truth Magazine. We have Luther Blackmon, Roy Cogdill and James Adams in one age group, and then we have the bulk of the remainder of our staff in a slightly younger age group. As we plan for the future, we feel the need now to reach back and bring on to our staff yet a third generation of preachers and writers. Sometimes brethren, as they grow a little older, seem to think that there are no young men of great ability coming on to replace them. Certainly that cannot be said of our time. There are a host of extraordinarily competent brethren who are younger than most of us. These young men do not lack for ability, knowledge, or fortitude. Indeed, they are the future for the church. And in like manner, they must bear the load for the future of a journal like Truth Magazine. As we look toward the future, we are looking to this younger group of men as the source for replenishing our staff. There is no dearth of competent young men. We could add 50 to our staff, if we were disposed to do so, and not compromise in soundness, ability, work out-put, or quality. But we cannot add that many. Even now we are in the process of talking with some younger men to see if they would be interested in “pitching in” with us to make Truth Magazine a better paper now and to guarantee its perpetuation. Some announcements regarding new staff writers will be made in a few months.

At this time, we want to announce the addition of Brother Mike Willis to the staff as one of our Associate Editors. Mike is my youngest brother; in fact, he is fifteen years younger than I. Brethren who know us both only casually often mistake him for my son. That never hurts my feelings, for I think so highly of him that I would be very glad to have him as a son. The Bible teaches that one should be humble but I must confess that having three faithful brothers who preach the gospel makes me very pleased. I am the oldest of three brothers and three sisters. My brother, Don, preaches for the Bellaire church in Houston, Texas. My next brother, Lewis, preaches for the Olsen Park church in Amarillo, Texas.

It was not my suggestion that Mike be appointed to our staff as an Associate Editor. It was first recommended by one of our staff members, and then approved by the others. Of course, I was very pleased by the recommendation, and most heartily concurred in his selection. At the time when Mike was growing up, my parents were having a period of ill health. They then owned a small grocery store. Mike almost was the manager and operator for a few years, while he was about High School age. He worked long hours both before and after school, in addition to active involvement in a High School athletic program. Yet he graduated as valedictorian of his class. During this period of time, he developed what I consider to be very good work habits which continue to be a valuable asset to him in his work as a gospel preacher. I have sometimes said that gospel preaching is about 10% ability and 90% work. Nearly any man can preach the gospel if he is willing to pay the price in expended labor for preparation. Of course, not all men would preach with equal ability due to varying inherent capabilities.

While at Florida College as a student, Mike not only carried a full college load, but much of the time worked a complete eight-hour shift in the school’s woodwork shop. He worked from 5 P. M. until 2 A. M. So he knows what work is. Mike moved to Indiana in 1967. Since then, he has worked with the church in Alexandria and Mooresville, and just recently moved to work with the church at Traders Point, a Northwestern suburb of Indianapolis. Mike has proved himself to be a very capable worker in personal evangelism. He also has good pulpit ability, and I think has demonstrated competent writing skills. He now serves as “Book Review” man for Truth Magazine. This job requires that he maintain a rigid reading schedule. Meanwhile, he has been working on a Master’s Degree, which he soon will have completed.

Mike will be the only one of our Associate Editors who is very close by. As best I can remember, no one has gotten out a single issue of Truth Magazine without my help since I became editor. But it obviously may sometime be essential that someone do so. Frequently my work schedule has been such that it would have been a real boon if someone could have done the proofing and paste-up for an issue of Truth Magazine. Even when I make prolonged trips (such as the trip to the Philippines in 1970), it has been essential that I prepare in advance enough issues of the paper to last until I return. Sometimes the paper has been delayed due to my work and travel schedule, or to my being temporarily indisposed with sickness. I am hoping that Mike can work into the editorial position a little to at least assist in keeping the paper on schedule. However, I know he would want me to tell you not to blame him every time it is late. It is likely that I will continue to prepare each issue of the paper, unless some very unusual circumstance exists.

Most of our editorial conferring has been done by telephone and by rare occasions to visit together personally. In some ways, the position on our staff of “Associate Editor” is a misnomer. Editorial conferences have not been very feasible, except on very important matters and on an infrequent basis. It is my hope that Mike will stay close-by enough to be able physically to help with some of the editorial work. But whether he does that or not, he will make a valuable addition to our regular staff of Associate Editors.

We are going to create a new title for some who are going to be placed on the staff. Rather than to add others to the category of what we have called “Associate Editors,” we are going to add six to ten younger men to our writing force as “Staff Writers.” We hope to have these men chosen and their agreement to serve ready to announce within no more than six months.

Truth Magazine, XVIII:25, p. 3-5
April 25,1974

By Karl Diestelkamp

You have just quoted 1 Tim. 2:9, 10 and are making application of it to the sisters who come to worship in their mini-skirts and who sit with these, hiked up to mid-thigh or above. Before you finish, someone boldly proclaims, “If it bothers you, you must have a dirty mind.” Of course you are supposed to hang your head in shame and with red face retreat to some inconspicuous place to repent. You have been answered!

Says Who? Not So!

This is one man who refuses to surrender the fight to such flimsy defense. I challenge you to reread 1 Tim. 2:9, 10. Now, you define behavior relating to the word “adorn,” in the light of the words “modest, shamefacedness, sobriety” and “professing godliness.” Get your Bible out and defend what you practice.

Some would have us believe that a clear definition and understanding of “modesty” is forever vague and elusive. Of course, this is exactly the same approach effeminates use in reference to the word “long” (1 Cor. 11:14) when defending feminine hairdos on men, and that alcoholics use when discussing “much wine” (1 Tim. 3:3) to justify social drinking. But that smoke screen won’t work. We are still waiting for the definition that will allow the mini-skirt that at the same time will not allow for even more extreme nudity. Brethren, give us the rule by which you walk!

If some sincere brother asks to be excused from passing the Lord’s supper, because his sisters in Christ sit immodestly, he frequently gets the “dirty mind” reply. He is not admitting lust, he is simply seeking to avoid evil and resist temptation. Yet, one man was heard to remark, “If you have trouble with temptation when you see a sister in Christ in a short skirt at worship, you must really have problems when you are on the street where this is seen everywhere.” What is this supposed to prove? Is a man freed from the temptation of lust because the immodest woman claims to be a Christian? Isn’t this really an admission that immodesty is a problem everywhere?

I seriously propose the following comparison. When on the street-in the grocery store at the filling station-at school, etc., our ears are assaulted with profanity, vulgarity and obscenities of all kinds. We must guard our thoughts from any evil thus suggested lest we be led to think on those things. But, when we go to worship services, or into homes of our brethren in Christ, we never expect to hear such language we don’t talk like the world. Likewise, on the street, and nearly everywhere in the world, are to be found immodest women, suggestively displaying their bodies. We must guard our minds lest we be led to think on those things. But, when we go to worship services or into the homes of our brethren in Christ, we should find a haven from such sources of temptation – we don’t dress like the world – Do we?

There is no question that the man must control his thoughts. Jesus warned, “. . . whosoever looketh on a woman to lust after her hath committed adultery with her already in his heart” (Matt. 5:28). More men must do as Job did when he said, “I made a covenant with mine eyes; why then should I think upon a maid?” The man is cautioned to guard against lust at all times, regardless of the way the woman is dressed. Isn’t it logical to conclude that the woman ought to guard against being a source of that temptation, regardless of the kind of men who may be around?

A few years ago a man, whom I know, was as strong as the proverbial “horse-radish” on the subject of modesty. Then his “little girls” became “big girls” and his attitude changed. He says he could force his daughter to wear longer dresses, but if that was the only reason she wore them it wouldn’t help her. That conclusion is debatable-But, to say the least, he did not stop to consider the boys and men that might be helped if she covered up properly. Are you so naive as to think that every boy or man tempted to lust after your immodest, grown up, “little girl” is possessed of a “dirty mind” while she is as pure as the driven snow? If she doesn’t know what purpose the mini-skirt serves, isn’t it high time you repent of your own negligence and direct her into the right course of conduct? We need more husbands who know their place in the family (Eph. 5:23) and who will instruct their wives and daughters regarding modesty. Likewise we need more wives who know their place (Eph. 5:22; 1 Pet. 3:1-51 who will “submit” to such instruction and more daughters who will “honor” and “obey” (Eph. 6:1,2) their fathers.

No doubt there are some brethren with “dirty minds,” but you won’t hear them complaining about immodest clothing. We do not defend one with a “dirty mind” and neither do you. Then why, pray tell, are so many so eager to defend the sister who wears immodest clothing when they know and she knows that such exposure of her body may be a stumbling block to some brother in Christ? We are tempted to ask, “Who cares about whom?”, but we won’t ask. Since when is it a sign of a “dirty mind” to try to “abstain from fleshly lusts, which war against the soul” (1 Pet. 2:11) and to “abstain from all appearance of evil” (1 Thess. 5:22) or to try to get other brethren (sisters included) to “have the same care one for another” (1 Cor. 12:25)? Wives, mothers, daughters, sisters-just what does your apparel indicate you are professing?

Truth Magazine, XVIII:24, p. 13-14
April 18, 1974

By Jeffery Kingry

“Suppose you had the opportunity to talk with a leading Biblical scholar on a man-to-man basis. Suppose that he was willing )or the conversation to be published. Now, suppose the scholar was the world renown commentator and author Dr. F. F. Bruce, of England’s Manchester University – what would you ask him . . . .” (Fudge, Edward, Gospel Guardian, “Interview With F. F. Bruce,” Jan. 31, 1974, Vol. 25, No. 38)?

Brother Fudge asks an interesting question. What would one ask a world-wide known scholar? Here is an opportunity given by the Lord’s providence which never again may be presented. If one were interested in ingratiating oneself, the question might be designed to draw out a favorable response. If one wanted to build up a reputation as a great scholar, the question might reflect those ostentatious desires. But if one sincerely desired to lead a soul to life, the question might have been, “Why are you not a Christian?”

Questions asked in the Word of God by teachers of truth have always been ultimately designed to lead the sinner unto truth and salvation, no matter what the fame and worldly power of the sinner: “Understandest thou what thou readest” (Acts 8:30)? “Saul, Saul, why persecutest thou me” (Acts 9:4)? “O full of all subtilty and all mischief, thou child of the devil, thou enemy of all righteousness, wilt thou not cease to pervert the right ways of the Lord” (Acts 13:10)? “Sirs, why do ye these things? We also are men of like passions with you, and preach unto you that ye should turn from these vanities unto the living God” (Acts 14:15).

It is with a great sense of weariness and shame that we find our brethren more interested in intellectual exercise, the “exegesis,” the “theology” of the Bible – the “mental hike” – rather than the application of God’s truth. We are truly “disciplined” in the word of God when we do his commandments (1 Jno. 2:3,4). The man who claims to “know” the Bible and yet does not practice its precepts, deceives himself, and in truth “knows” nothing (1 Jno. 2:5,6).

The Gospel is the power of God unto salvation – not the intellect, the effort, or the charisma of man. What is important, good brethren? Is it the learned commentaries, the sublime books of theology, the college degrees and all they entail? “And I brethren, when I came unto you, came not with excellency of speech or of wisdom, declaring unto you the testimony of God. For I determined not to know anything among you save Jesus Christ and him crucified . . . and my speech and my preaching was not with enticing words of man’s wisdom . . . that your faith should not stand in the wisdom of men, but in the power of God” (1 Cor. 2:15).

There is so much wrong with what you did, good brethren . . . but basically what is most tragic is that you let a man who perhaps is “not far from the Kingdom of God” leave without ”reasoning of righteousness, temperance, and the judgment to come” (Acts 24:25). What is so unutterably sad, is that you had something to give to him, not he to you . . . and you did not even know it. The truth that could have saved him eternally was not as important to those who should be declaring it as the scholarship of the one they should have taught.

Paul could say, “Wherefore I take you to record this day, that I am pure from the blood of all men, for I have not shunned to declare unto you all the counsel of God” (Acts 20:26, 27). We have nothing to learn from the unprofitable works of darkness, we are rather to reprove those in darkness that they might see the light (Eph. 5:11). A man’s scholarship is nothing if it costs him his soul. Yet, honor and deference, praise and glory are given to one who is not even least in the kingdom of heaven. There was no love or respect shown unto F. F. Bruce. If you love a man, you give him what he needs. Mr. Bruce needed the blood of Jesus, and those who could have given, did not.

“Unto you, O men, I call: and my voice is unto the sons of man. O ye simple, understand wisdom: and ye fools, be ye of an understanding heart . . . the fruit of the righteous is a tree of lifee; and he that winneth souls is wise” (Prov. 8:1,5; 11:30).

Truth Magazine, XVIII:24, p. 9-10
April 18, 1974

By Herschel Patton

We have been saddened lately by a few brethren, mostly among the young, abandoning strict adherence to a “thus saith the Lord” and casting their lot with liberal brethren, even to the extent of “open fellowship” with the denominations – as advocated by Carl Ketcherside. Several young preachers, who were brought up on “soundness,” are numbered with these. The question naturally arises, how and why did this happen? What led to this radical change in their belief and actions?

Conditions A Contributing Factor

Most of these young people grew up in the “thick of the fight” against liberalism. Their parents (some of their fathers were preachers) stood firm for truth, demanding a “thus saith the Lord” for everything, and consequently were opposed, ridiculed, slandered, maligned, and sometimes made to suffer socially and economically by the liberal minded who pressed for unscriptural practices. These young people grew up with “trouble in the church,” and were, themselves, made to suffer as their parents were among those hated “antis,” in the minority, and in many cases put in economic straits. They were sick and tired of all the bickering, contending, debating, and disfellowshipping, going on. They wondered about the love and unity they had heard so much about. They knew true love demanded exposure and dethronement of soul destroying things, and that loyalty to Christ must be maintained, even to the alienation of father and son, mother and daughter, brother and brother, etc., but in the midst of such standing, love and unity seemed obscure. It was a confusing situation. These conditions made those who thus grew up ripe for a teaching (theory) that would allow fellowship in the midst of differences. This is exactly the teaching of Carl Ketcherside. He tells the confused young, there was, and is, no need for all this contending, charging (you are liberal – you anti), and disfellowshipping, and consequently, the suffering you have endured because of it, for the Lord’s word provides for love and fellowship even though there are differences. But, just how does he argue this?

Gospel And Doctrine

It is argued that “the gospel” only involves the things about Christ, the scheme of redemption, and does not include the epistles or instruction given to saints. Such passages as Jude 3 (“Contend for the faith”) and 2 Jno. 9 (“Abide not in the doctrine of Christ”) have only to do with things about Christ and His mission. Therefore the only differences that would break fellowship would be a failure to believe in Christ and obey the gospel. As long as one believes that Christ is the Son of God and obeys the commands of the gospel, he is contending for the faith and abiding in the doctrine. Questions about the worship of saints, organization and work of the church are no part of “the faith,” but merely human opinions and should never divide those in Christ. Now, if these contentions be true, then indeed, what brethren have been contending about, and dividing over, for the past two decades are immaterial. But, are these contentions so?

The Scriptures do not bear out the claim of a difference between the gospel, doctrine of Christ, and teaching in the epistles. Some perverted the gospel Paul preached to the Galatians, not by denying that Jesus had come in the flesh, died, was buried, and resurrected, but by trying to bind practices of the Mosaic law on Christians (Gal. 1:6-7). The “gospel” Paul laid before the apostles and elders in Jerusalem (Gal. 2:2; Acts 15) involved Jewish practices not being bound on Christians. Paul’s charge that, at a certain time, Peter and others “walked not according to the truth of the gospel” had to do with their refusing to fellowship Gentile Christians (Gal. 2:11-14). Truly, the gospel involves more than just things having to do with the divinity of Christ. “Observing all things whatsoever I have commanded you” is just as much “gospel obedience” as being baptized (Matt. 28:19-20). Paul addressed Christians, people who had obeyed the gospel, in Rome and said “I am ready to preach the gospel to you that are at Rome also” (Rom. 1:15). This gospel that Paul preached in Rome was God’s power to save (vs. 16) and revealed the “righteousness of God from faith to faith.” Are all that is needed to be saved and be the righteousness of God in Christ included in the acceptance of the fact that Christ came in the flesh and compliance with the commands to repent and be baptized? What about the matter of being “raised to walk in newness of life” (Rom. 6:4), and “henceforth we should not serve sin” (vs. 6)? Paul says “the wrath of God is revealed . . . against all ungodliness and unrighteousness of men, who hold the truth (or gospel Paul preached) in unrighteousness” (vs. 18). Paul’s gospel, therefore, embraced not continuing the practice of sin or uncleanness (vs. 24). The teaching that gospel or doctrine of Christ only involves things about the Christ and not the’ teaching in the epistles, which would allow fellowship among all obedient believers while differing on the name, worship, organization, and mission of the church, is simply false teaching, based on a perversion of the Scriptures.

Romans 14 Also Perverted

In this chapter, Paul teaches that brethren who differ about observing days and eating meats must not “set at naught thy brother.” Likewise, it is claimed by “open fellowship-minded-brethren” that those who differ over the use of instrumental music in worship, the organization and mission of the church must not disfellowship one another. After all, they say, brethren differ over many other things (war question, the covering, posture in prayer, etc.) and continue fellowship, so why not with reference to matters over which we do disfellowship?

According to the teaching in this chapter, brethren may differ over things which are personal and individual in their nature, wherein “to his own master he standeth or falleth” (Rom. 14:4), and continue fellowship. For one to press his feeling on others to the violation of their conscience in so acting would be wrong. To apply this passage to actions that do involve others, as worshiping with instruments of music, contributing funds to be used in unscriptural endeavors, or being a part of unscriptural body functioning, is to misapply it, or pervert it. The passage is properly applied, however, to such private, individual matters as the war question, posture in prayer, and the covering. This is why brethren may continue in fellowship with those who differ with them on individual matters, but not with those who would involve them in unscriptural actions.

Love, Peace, And Harmony

These desired virtues, we are told are found among the liberals but lacking among the conservatives (antis), and are impelling motives for identifying with the liberals. The majority having embraced unscriptural practices, and believing them to be matters of indifference, naturally feel no need to contend or furnish proof for their actions. All opposition is brushed aside with “just a bunch of antis” and their teaching involves platitudes on love and declarations of “the good we are doing.” On the other hand, we are charged with spending our time discussing the issues, examining every thing in the light of Scripture, and seeking to “cast down every imagination” contrary to truth, which,, we are told, creates confusion, animosity, and indicates a lack of love.

Love, peace, and harmony are indeed necessary virtues. But, love will not close it’s eyes to destructive and damning forces, and there can be cries of “peace, peace, when there is no peace.” And, there can be an ecumenical harmony that is a far cry from the “unity” taught in the Scriptures. Paul loved and desired peace and harmony as much as anyone could, but he “would give place by subjection, no, not for an hour,” to some who would bind unscriptural practices on others, “that the truth of the gospel might continue” (Gal. 2:5).

True love, peace, and unity are exhibited more by those who are continually “proving all things,” “contending for the faith,” “convicting the gainsayer with sound words,” “pulling down strong holds,” “casting down imaginations,” “speaking the truth in love,” and “marking them that cause division contrary to the doctrine learned” than by those who wrap themselves in the contented blanket of deception or self-righteousness, beaping out ear-tinkling platitudes.

These perversions of Scripture and feigned virtues have, indeed, led some away from truth, and our hearts ache for them. Our efforts and prayers are aimed at opening their eyes with the eye-salve of God’s word that they might see, and turn, before they die.

Truth Magazine, XVIII:24, p. 8-9
April 18, 1974