Truth Magazine

By J.S. Smith

The year 1914 has great meaning to the Jehovah’s Witnesses. From an objective outsider’s standpoint, it is the fulcrum of that sect’s history: Before 1914 they anticipated it as the time of Christ’s return and judgment; since 1914 they call that year the time of Christ’s invisible presence and the beginning of the slide toward judgment. According to the Watchtower, Jesus appeared in 1914 to become king over Jehovah’s kingdom and begin the last times that will eventually lead to final judgment before the generation aware of events in 1914 completely passes from the earth.

Russell’s Ruminations

In 1879, Charles Taze Russell told his disciples that the Lord actually returned in “the character of a bridegroom in 1874” (Watchtower, Oct. 1879) and that the end of the time of the Gentiles would come in 1914 (Watchtower, Nov. 1880). To Witnesses, the phrase “time of the Gen-tiles” signifies the period between the fall of Judah and the supposed full establishment of the kingdom of God on earth.

As 1886 dawned, Watchtower proclaimed that the time was ripe for the “messiah to take the dominion of earth and to overthrow the oppressors and corrupter of earth” (Jan. 1886). Two years later nothing had happened and The Time Is At Hand was written to present the Bible evidence proving the full end of the times of the Gentiles . . . will be reached in 1914.” Then, they said the kingdom would be “firmly established, in the earth, on the ruins of present institutions” (76-77). Certainly, the Watchtower prophets had secured 1914 as the inauguration date.

In the 1889 edition of Studies in the Scriptures, Russell taught that earth’s present rulership would be overthrown in 1914: “In the coming 26 years, all present governments will be overthrown and dissolved” (98-99).

In 1894, in response to skeptics, Russell wrote “… that the end of 1914 is not the date for the beginning, but for the end of the time of trouble” (Watchtower, July 15, 1894). He steadfastly refused to change the date from 1914, claiming it was God’s.

1914 Comes and . . . Nothing Happens!

Throughout the next decade, the Watchtower continued to trump the same theme: 1914 was it. When the greatly anticipated year rolled around and then began to expire, Watchtower began to pull back. “We did not say positively that this would be the year” (Nov. 1, 1914). “Armageddon may begin next Spring” (Sept. 1, 1914).

Suddenly 1915 was the year. The Armageddon war was to “. . . end in A.D. 1915 with the complete overthrow of the earth’s present rulership” (The Time Is At Hand, 101). The Gentile times prove that the present governments must all be overturned about the close of A.D. 1915″ (242).

By 1917, the Watchtower was looking unreliable. So, they changed the date again, to 1925. “There will be no slip-up … Abraham should enter upon the actual possession of his promised inheritance in the year 1925” (Watch-tower, Oct. 15, 1917). “No doubt Satan believed the Millennial kingdom was due to be set up in 1915 . . . Be that as it may, there is evidence that the establishment of the kingdom in Palestine will probably be in 1925, ten years later than we once calculated” (Studies in the Scriptures, 7:128). “Therefore, we may confidently expect that 1925 will mark the return of Abraham, Isaac, Jacob and the faithful prophets of old, particularly those named by the apostle in Hebrews 11, to the condition of human perfection” (Millions Now Living Will Never Die, 1918, 89).

As 1925 drew near, enthusiasm grew strong. “The period must end in 1925” (Golden Age, 217). “1925 is definitely settled by the scriptures” (Watchtower, April 1, 1923).

1925 Comes and . . . Again Nothing Happens!

But when 1925 arrived, suddenly the Watchtower editors applied the brakes again and chastised people who had believed earlier articles concerning the momentous year that had now come. “Many have confidently expected that all members of the body of Christ will be changed to heavenly glory during this year. This may be accomplished. It may not be” (Watchtower, Jan. 1, 1925). Naturally 1925 passed and nothing happened to fulfill the Watchtower prophecies.

Judge J.F. Rutherford took over the organization and put an end to date setting for the time being as he saw that disappointment over failed predictions dealt great blows to membership numbers (Vindication, 1931). Still, the date 1914 maintained a prominent place in Watchtower philosophy, if only because it had become so noted and dear, it was impossible to jettison. The inside page of Watchtower magazine continued to proclaim that the end would come before the generation aware of events in 1914 passed from the earth.

But after eight decades and millions of deaths, that claim also began to lose its shine and in 1995, the Witnesses discreetly dropped it from such prominence.

The history of Watchtower date setting for the end of this earth is a very consistent one. Never have they gotten anything right.

You Can Live Forever In Paradise on Earth

Because the Jehovah’s Witnesses have made so much about the year 1914, they are compelled to attempt to prove their fascination by Scripture. What results is sophistry and mishandling of the word of God beyond any conception.

The Watchtower staff undertakes this dubious assignment in You Can Live Forever In Paradise on Earth. Starting with a prophecy snatched out of its context in Daniel4, the Witnesses tell us that the kingdom of God on earth would be established at the conclusion of the “seven times” mentioned by the prophet in chapter 4, verses 16 and 23. Turning presumptuously to Revelation 12:6 and 14, we are instructed that “seven times” equals 2,520 days and that 2,520 days is really 2,520 years by a Bible rule in Numbers 14:34 and Ezekiel 4:6.

Next, calculating from Daniel’s day in 607 B.C., a span of 2,520 years brings us to A.D. 1914 when “Jesus Christ began to rule as king of God’s heavenly government” (141). Were it not for a number of nagging truth issues, that would make for fine research.

Why Start With 607 B.C.?

First, why start our calculations with 607 B.C.? Witnesses claim that this was the year that Judah was destroyed (139). But that is untrue. Nebuchadnezzar in-deed invaded Judah and took Daniel captive about 606-605 B.C., but Davidic kings continued to reign on Judah’s throne until the actual fall of the nation in 587-86 B.C.

The Watchtower cites the prophecy of Ezekiel 21:25-27 to prove that Zedekiah was the last divinely anointed king of Judah and that the kingdom ceased to exist in God’s approval at this time. Indeed, Ezekiel tells Zedekiah to “lift off the crown” until the messiah comes to claim it. Unfortunately for the Watchtower, this event took place at least a decade after 607 B.C. Jehoiakim was actually the king when Nebuchadnezzar began to besiege Judah in 606 B.C. Daniel attests to that himself (1:1) and the record of the kings concurs (2 Kings 24:1). This explanation is more than a little off. Zedekiah did not even begin to reign until about 597 B.C. Oops!

What Does Daniel 4 Say in Context?

Second, does Daniel 4 say what Witnesses claim? In Daniel 4, Nebuchadnezzar explains that he had a dream and asked Daniel to interpret it. In this dream, he saw a great tree that a holy one commanded to be chopped down, leaving only the stump bound with a band of iron and bronze. Seven times were to pass over it before it could begin to grow again. Witnesses claim the tree represents God’s kingdom, chopped down when Nebuchadnezzar invaded and allowed to grow again when the messiah comes “seven times” later  1914.

But, we do not need to wait for a Witness to interpret this dream for us. Daniel gave its meaning immediately! He said the tree that originally grew so great represented Nebuchadnezzar himself (Dan. 4:20-22): “It is you, 0 king, who have grown and become strong.” Because of his insolence, God commanded that Nebuchadnezzar be cut down to size, but permitted the prospect of sprouting again one day. “And let him graze with the beasts of the field, till seven times pass over him” (Dan. 4:23). His grazing will end when the seven times are up, then.

Fortunately, Daniel’s record even gives the fulfillment of the prophecy, more than 2500 years before the Watch-tower permits. All this came upon King Nebuchadnezzar, Daniel claims, just as he dreamt. “And at the end of the time I, Nebuchadnezzar, lifted my eyes to heaven, and my understanding returned to me” (Dan. 4:34). He left his grazing and returned to his throne  the “seven times” were up!

Whatever was precisely meant by the seven times, Nebuchadnezzar saw the end of them himself in his own lifetime. The seven times cannot meant 2,520 years then.

Since God’s purpose was to show Nebuchadnezzar who was Lord, the writers of You Can Live claim that this tree actually represents the supreme rulership of God (139), but this is not at all what Daniel said. The tree represented the king; the holy one shouting “Timber!” represented God.

Conclusion

When one examines the prophecies of Daniel with an attempt to read knowledge out of the Scriptures, rather than opinion into them, it is simple to see when the kingdom of God was to be established. Clearly Daniel 2:36-44 points to the days of the Roman empire when Jesus came and lived and died. It was the fourth empire to rule the world, beginning with Daniel’s contextual starting point, Babylon itself, followed by Medo-Persia and Greece. In the midst of his mission, the Lord told one audience, “Assuredly, I say to you that there are some standing here who will not taste death till they see the kingdom of God present with power” (Mark 9:1). Unless some of those folks were still tooling around Palestine 1900 years later, the kingdom had to have come far earlier than Witnesses will allow.

Indeed, Peter announced the coronation of King Jesus, according to David’s psalmic prophecy in Acts 2:30-31: “Therefore, being a prophet, and knowing that God has sworn with an oath to him that of the fruit of his body, according to the flesh, He would raise up the Christ to sit on his throne, he, foreseeing this, spoke concerning the resurrection of the Christ” Jesus was resurrected to sit as King of kings (1 Tim. 6:15) on the throne over his spiritual realm, peopled by the spirits of the redeemed (Col. 1:13) and traversing all national boundaries and human treaties (Col. 1:23).

Guardian of Truth XLI: 16 p. 17-19
August 21, 1997

By J. Wiley Adams

In Acts 17:61-21 a record of Paul’s preaching in the city of Athens is given. Focus is given especially to his address on Mars Hill. Paul was really stirred up when he saw the city wholly given to idolatry. He did not fail to take issue with those elite, pseudo-intellectuals who regarded themselves as the “somewhat” citizenry in that godless society. And do you know, Paul was alone? It takes a lot of courage to stand up for the truth under such conditions. We could use more than a few good men like Paul today.

Paul attracted the attention of the curiosity people  namely, the Stoics who prided themselves on self-discipline (just for the sake of it), and also the Epicureans who had no scruples of any kind. Like the Jehovah’s Witnesses of our time they believe when you die you die all over like the dog Rover. So with this false idea why not just let your hair down and indulge oneself?

In contemporary circles the Epicureans were the “wine, women, and song” bunch. It seems unique that in today’s society we have far more of this crowd than Stoics for we have a generation on our hands who sneer at the idea of any kind of discipline in whatever form.

What Paul was saying to them sounded strange. They expressed a desire to hear more from this “babbler” for whatever reason. The “new doctrine” Paul preached at least got their attention and, once he had that, he really began to set them straight about the one God. He did not spend a half hour “leading up” to the subject. He got to the point at once. He told them what they needed to know. His point of emphasis was the one true God who had created the world and all things through Jesus Christ, his unique Son. Some that we could name today who call themselves gospel preachers are too timid and cowardly to manifest the courage of Paul, the fearless preacher. They wanted to hear some new thing. They had nothing to do except sit around and “tell or hear some new thing.” Paul took advantage of their curiosity.

We have among us today a flock of neophyte preachers coming on that make me extremely uneasy. They remind me of the philosophers on Mars Hill. They cannot content themselves with the pure and simple gospel of Christ. Maybe they do not know what preaching is all about. Sensationalism with them is the order of the day. Seeking their place in the sun by seemingly any means they show a flair for the unusual. The substantial things of the past like the King James Version from which most older preachers memorized their passages is now by some regarded as “inferior” as well as those who still use it as a basic text. Some who have a lot of trouble with “thee” or “thou” have no problem with the works of William Shakespeare. Is anyone for updating the literary classic about Romeo and Juliet? After all we could use current slang and say “Hey, man, where didja run off to?” I raise the question as to what is wrong with some dignity? We now have so many versions and perversions and paraphrases that it boggles the mind.

With this kind of thinking, it is no wonder we are once again plagued on every hand with false doctrine from within. Brethren, I declare! Do we not have enough to do in seeking and saving the lost without having to stop and take up our time dealing with some damnable doctrine from our own brethren? Lately it has been the deity of Christ issue, the marriage, divorce and remarriage heresy, and now this new thing called the continuous covenant view.

I tell you, these things are devices of Satan to detour good men from reaching the lost with the pure gospel of Christ. Those who advocate such would count themselves to be good students of the Bible. How can it be so?

What do these fellows really want? What makes them tick? Can it be a lack of love for the unadulterated word of God? Or, could it be they want to be in the spotlight? Whatever their problem is, it would be better for them to go on out of the church so we will at least know what to expect, than to hang around in the church to create even more havoc among the brethren. Some new thing! If it is new, it is not true and if it is true, it is not new. We used to say that. We need to say it again and again. May God help us all!

Bible Banner, July 1938

The Spirit of Christ

Foy E. Wallace, Jr.

Other stock expressions of apologists for the soft-pedal cadences of sweet preaching are that we should manifest the spirit of Christ, and do things in the Christian way. The word “manifest” means to make clear and plain, apparent. Then to manifest the spirit of Christ means to make clear and plain what Christ thinks of the errors and shams of religion. This can be done by showing what he said and did regarding the teachers and institutions of error in his day. He said they were human plants and would be rooted up, and he called them all by name. A follower of Christ should always manifest the spirit of Christ; and a Christian should always do everything in the Christian way. There is no man whose soul senses a deeper desire for these Christ like traits than my own, unless he has a deeper soul. But how may we know the spirit of Christ save as he exemplifies it? Follow him from Nazareth to Calvary and hear him release his spirit in reiterated excoriation of religious blind guides and their blind alleys. To the divinity doctors and phylacteried Pharisees He had a bad spirit  the spirit of Beelzebub! If the very spirit of Christ in his own preaching was stigmatized as the spirit of the devil by pharisaical prater and pretenders who had their piety on parade, those who preach today as Christ and the apostles did, need not think to escape the same stigmatic criticisms. The Lord’s way of preaching is on record. He said those religious leaders did things “for a pretense” and should receive “the greater damnation”; he said their proselytes (converts) were “two-fold more the child of hell” than themselves; He said, “Ye fools and blind . . . ye blind guides, which strain at a gnat and swallow a camel” (the Lord even had a sense of humor and resorted to the ludicrous in exposing their shams); He said, “Ye serpents, ye generation of vipers, how can ye escape the damnation of hell,” and “upon you may come all the righteous blood shed upon the earth from the blood of righteous Abel unto the blood of Zacharias, son of Barachias, whom ye slew between the temple and the al-tar.” Such was the preaching of Jesus. Do those who talk so much about “the spirit of Christ” preach that way on anything ever? Rather do they seem to think that “the spirit of Christ” and “speaking the truth in love” means to be so gentle and love everybody so dearly as to let them die and go to hell before we would nettle their feelings by telling them the truth!

There are religious Pharisees with us yet whose sins and shams demand castigation “in the spirit of Christ.” Preachers today can choose between two courses: the course of the least resistance in preaching only that portion of the truth in a mild and affirmative manner which meets no opposition, or like Jesus and Paul, preach the will of God in all of its condemning as well as saving power, without thought of man’s fear or favor. But the praise and popularity that accrue from compromise and neutrality are empty, indeed. “He makes no friends who never made a foe.”

Guardian of Truth XLI: 16 p. 15
August 21, 1997

By Curtis Ray Hafley

Two families planted two seeds.

The seeds grew and made two trees;

They were frail and weak and needed love;

They were watered and grew with help from above.

The years passed and the trees took their form,

Both growing strong, withstanding the storms,

Each guarding the other from the cold and wind,

Sharing the sunlight, the best of friends.

The trees grew so close together

That one couldn’t live without the other.

Their branches touched and their leaves grew;

Their trunks embraced and glistened in the dew.

The trees, they joined both body and branch,

Sharing all things on their own little ranch.

Together they stand, strong in the wind,

Neither allowing the other to break or bend.

You can see these two trees still standing strong,

Appearing as one after, 0, so long,

All because two families came to this place

And planted two seeds that time can ne’er erase.

Guardian of Truth XLI: 16 p. 11
August 21, 1997

By S. Leonard Tyler

Granville’s Settling Down to Real Life

Granville completed his high school work at the Tallahatchie Agricultural High School at Charleston, Mississippi and entered David Lipscomb College at Nashville, Tennessee in the fall of 1932. He soon had his time filled with gospel meetings in Nashville and Hickman County, his home county. In 1934 he completed his work at David Lipscomb College and after his meetings that summer, moved to Russellville, Alabama to work with the Washington Avenue church until the fall of 1935. He enrolled at Harding College. These were very meaningful years in his life.

Frances Elliott, from Pine Bluff, Arkansas, was in her junior year when Granville arrived. They soon became friends. This friendship grew as the school years passed and Granville asked Frances to become his wife. She accepted before they graduated. Granville returned to Russellville, Alabama and took up his work with the Washington Avenue church until October. That was the month arranged for the wedding, and he returned to Pine Bluff, Arkansas, to claim his beloved bride.

October 26, 1937, in a beautiful home wedding of her parents (Dave and Addle Elliott) in Pine Bluff, Arkansas, Granville and Frances were joined together as husband and wife. Brother Dean Sears of Harding College read the touching and appropriate ceremony. They promised to love, honor, cherish, and to keep themselves to each other only, so long as they both shall live. Avanelle, her sister, was her bridesmaid and I stood as best man as they said their vows.

Granville and Frances, after a short honeymoon trip, returned to Russellville, Alabama and Granville assumed his work with his true helpmeet. They enjoyed their first work together, and no people could have been more helpful and encouraging. Four years flew rapidly by and the time came when the decision was make to move and work with the Central church in McMinnville, Tennessee. Brother T.Q. Martin, a well known gospel preacher, was retiring and planned to live there. He and Granville had much in common and worshiped and worked very cooperatively together. Granville was writing Bible study lessons, handing them out, having members fill in the proper answers, and then studying them together. I was in a meeting with the Eastside church in McMinnville; and we, Sammie Ruth and I, stayed with Granville and Frances during the meeting. Granville and I discussed the need for such lessons to be published and agreed that he had started already. We commented on the type of questions, and he began his work. He designed and published as the years went by and he used them first in a class himself. His lessons became very popular and sold well. They are challenging and test one’s interest and knowledge of the Bible and offering more.

It was also here on June 24, 1942 that Elliott, their only child was born. It was a momentous occasion and the joy characterizing their heart was inexpressible. In 1944 they moved to Chattanooga, Tennessee to work with the Red Bank church for two years. This was a good work and the church grew and enjoyed unity. However, in 1946 an invitation came from the Washington Avenue church in Russellville, Alabama, and they decided to return to Alabama for another stay  this time almost four years, from 1946-1950. The work with the Washington Avenue church was always fulfilling and profitable. They next went to Birmingham, Alabama and worked with the 77th Street church. Their stay in Birmingham was three years  1950-1953. I was with them in a meeting during this time. They left each place in peace and with precious memories and friends never forgotten. Birmingham was a typical example. Their next move was Pampa, Texas for one year, 1954-1955. The weather didn’t help. A very big dust storm blew in and almost covered them up. When Frances dug out, she was ready to go somewhere the dust didn’t blow. Added to this, the unity of understanding was lacking among some of them. Granville thought another preacher could do a better job than he at this time and place.

Their next move was to West Helena, Arkansas, 1955-1958, for a three-year period. This was a very harmonious effort together. It also put them closer to us. We lived in Pine Bluff. Granville conducted a meeting for us, and I preached in one for them while they lived in West Helena.

This was not a new experience for us. We often worked with one another in meetings wherever we lived. We had one meeting at Fairfield, Tennessee, Hickman County, a little north of Centerville on Highway 100 when he preached one night and I led the singing. The next night I preached and he led the singing. This was very enjoyable and profit-able to us.

In 1958 they moved to Decatur, Alabama to work with the Summerville Road church and forgot about moving. They lived and worked with the church for some eighteen or nineteen years. While living here, Frances taught school until she retired. Granville retired as local evangelist and went into “full time” meeting work. It is thought by some, that, perhaps, he held more meetings than any living preacher during his lifespan. He held some 21 or 22 meetings with the Market Street church in Athens, Alabama. Preaching and especially conducting meetings were his first love.

It is my firm conviction  Granville confidently under-stood, believed, and preached that everyone capable of circumstantiating their reasons and choices for their own behavior is obligated before God to do so. This is an innate and an awesome responsibility and liberty common to all of us. No one can shirk or shift these life and soul determining factors with impunity. Each individual must and will make his or her own determinations and follow them  God being the judge will pronounce the verdict.

Herein lies the answer, “Why was he so devout, emotional, and fervent in his preaching?” Granville truly believed the word of God to be the absolute rule of faith and practice. One must preach “what is revealed in his Word and leave the secret things to God.” Faith stands upon what is said and not in the unrevealed. One must never assume that he can with his imaginative, ingenious, and finite, humanistic mind fill in the blanks of divine knowledge.

Granville’s and Frances’ love always reached out to Elliott and when Kay became his wife, their love was freely and fully extended to her. When David and Derinda were born to Elliott and Kay, Granville and Frances could hardly contain themselves. They were “proud” grandparents until death summoned them home. However, Derinda became the magnet of her grandfather’s eye.

Elliott completed high school at Decatur and went to Harding College, Searcy, Arkansas for his degree. He received his Master’s degree in math from Vanderbilt University, Nashville, Tennessee. He is at present serving as head of the Math Department at John C. Calhoun State Community College, Athens, Alabama.

One of the best choices Elliott made in life was when he and Kay were married. This enforced, seasoned, and settled him to accomplish his true purpose and design for life. Kay is a very faithful companion, wife, and mother. Her ability and energy seem almost unlimited. Granville and Frances could not have had a more sharing and caring daughter-in-law, and they both dearly loved her. She accepted the responsibility for Granville’s care when he became ill, even his book business. Granville’s confidence in Kay was ex-pressed to me on an occasion concerning his book business. He assured me, “Kay can handle it.”

David, their son, is happily married to Amy, a lovely young lady, deeply involved in journalism. David is approved as a medical student to enter the University of Arkansas at Fayetteville. Derinda is in her second year at David Lipscomb University and enjoying it.

Elliott and Kay were lovingly responsible for Granville during his illness. All of the family showed their love and respect to Granville as father, father-in-law, and grandfather. Granville could not have had a better nurse in charge than Kay. Elliott and Kay manifested great consideration to me when I visited with Granville while he was sick. They offered to all of us their greatest respect and consideration at his death. A warm family relationship has always existed between our families, and this same relationship is projected for the future.

Some Questions Answered

What motivated Granville to have a passionate desire to preach? I do not claim to have all the answers, but perhaps we can observe some fundamental influencing practices which afford well-hewn building stones for his desire. Parental example must have weighed heavily in molding the desire to serve the Lord. His grandparents on both sides were Christians and his parents regularly attended all the services of the church, sometimes traveling three or four miles in a two-horse wagon to get us there. Papa took an active part in the services and thanked God for the privilege of serving. The church and her purpose in the world was a pleasant subject of conversation in our home. They impressed God’s expectation of each member of his church to use his ability in serving the Lord. And when one gives his best effort, God gives his blessing.

Granville’s faith in and love for the Lord moved him to become a Christian early in life. He soon developed a desire to tell others about Jesus. He felt a responsibility for the lost and was convinced that their greatest need was the gospel of Christ. He also determined somewhat like Isaiah 6:8 expresses it, “Here am I; send me” and perceived that God expected him to take the gospel message to the lost. Thus he accepted the commission and faithfully and dutifully put himself to work. He preached for his own salvation while simultaneously seeking to touch the hearts of others and lead them to Christ. What motivated him to preach? His faith and love for the Lord and love and concern for the sinner. This motivated him to quit his job, go back to school and start preaching  not knowing what the future held, but believing the Lord was with him and that he was engaged in the greatest work on earth.

Why Was He Exemplified as a Preacher?

Let us accept the fact that he made an extraordinary impression as a young preacher. Why? Some factors are unknown but some are self-evident. He was the first young man, to my knowledge, in our community to manifest a real determining desire to preach, although there were, at that time, over fifty churches in Hickman County. Granville, some way, overcame the traditional barrier that only middle-and old-aged members should preach. However, a very short time after he began, several other young men started, of which I was one, some sixty-five years ago. I don’t know about the others but I often “light-heartedly” said, “I know, if he can preach, I can.” Maybe others really thought that, too. Nevertheless, he became an example that it could and should be done even by young men, and we followed his example.

He always manifested a humble, sincere conviction and devotion in his preaching There was not an arrogant molecule in his body. It was not just making a speech to him, but preaching the gospel of Christ as “the power of God unto salvation.” He spoke these things, exhorting and rebuking with biblical authority. He kept a sense of humor, an honest, loving feeling toward others, but a life committed to the Lord from his youth until pulmonary fibrosis, the sickness of death, took charge. This, I believe, helps answer the question of why he became exemplified as a gospel preacher and preached faithfully until death.

How Did He React to the Dividing Problems?

The institutional and centralized sponsoring church theories were soul searching, emotional problems which severed friendship, family, and even church relationships. The proponents of these ideas were persistent even to the dividing of the church of our Lord. The human reasoning faultily concluded: what the individual can do, the church can do. One group of elders stated, “If it is a good work, and we decide to do it, the church can do it.” Many radical statements, theories, and doctrines became alive and so definite that if one differed  no more fellowship. The orphan institutional home furnished the emotional feelings sufficiently to override biblical knowledge and sway the support. If and when one’s understanding of the Bible led him to conscientiously believe that the church could not do her work through a human institution, he was an “anti.” This meant to them that he was opposed to all these good works. If one believed and contended that the church of our Lord was sufficiently authorized, organized, and equipped to do whatsoever God commissioned her to do, that individual was marked as one refusing to do missionary and/or benevolent work. Granville notwithstanding believed, practiced, and taught that the church of our Lord was authorized, organized, and fully equipped to accomplish whatever God commissioned her to do. He believed the inspired word of God furnished the man of God completely unto every good work and that the doctrine of Christ is the absolute authority for the church. Therefore, one must have a “thus saith the Lord” for her worship and work. (See Eph.3:11, 20, 21; 4:16.)

Granville irrespectively stood upon the word of God in belief and practice. He had many meetings canceled and was falsely accused of having no love and cared not for “the poor little orphan children.” Regardless, Granville, in full consideration of what the Bible taught, stood unequivocally and faced the issues with conviction, confidence and love for the truth. He had absolute trust in God, his authority and power to accomplish his own purpose upon the earth in his own eternally planned and revealed way (1 Cor. 1:20-25, 29-31). Thus he stood assuredly, happily, and prayerfully praying, “Thy will be done,” and gave himself wholly to preaching the gospel.

Granville sincerely sought, in my judgment (without a brother’s prejudice, if possible), and accomplished the ad-monition, “Take heed to yourself and to the doctrine. Continue in them, for in doing this you save both yourself and those who hear you”(NKJV), God being the judge.

His appreciation and humility are shown in a letter writ-ten after the people of the church of Decatur gave him a birthday party. Brother Ken Mitchell wrote “A Tribute to Brother Granville Tyler.” His letter to me explains his attitude. He would gratefully say about the same of my memories and most likely would add  “Aww, Leonard!” Here is his letter:

Dear Leonard and Ruth,

Thought you might be interested in the poem read to me at the “Surprise Birthday Party” on Mon., Sept. 11. It was indeed a surprise when I walked in and 98 people started singing “Happy Birthday.” This took place at Cullmen. And being a little vain in my old age, I wanted you to see the poem.

I’m doing as well as common. Hope all goes well with you. Love,

Granville

Granville and Frances enjoyed a true loving companion-ship for fifty-seven years, three months and fourteen days from October 26, 1937 until February 10, 1995. Each felt a vital part of the other and shared all their joys, sorrows, disappointments, successes, and accomplishments in tears or smiles together. Frances was a true helpmeet to and for Granville, and he was a faithful and caring husband. Frances stood by him in his preaching and helped by teaching Bible classes. She was the teacher of a class at death. She welcomed their friends into their home and enjoyed “keeping” the preacher during meetings when she could. Frances was a very pleasant hostess.

Frances never tired of hearing Granville preach. Frankly speaking, she appeared to think Granville was the best preacher around. Granville’s jokes appeared to be new to her each time told and she often suggested some to narrate. Frances didn’t hesitate to let one know what she thought. She was genuinely Frances  and he dearly loved her until her departure Granville and Frances moved to Decatur, Alabama in 1958 and settled down for life. He was working with the Summerville Road church. Frances was soon employed by the Decatur Public School System as a teacher and she continued until retirement. Granville was the local preacher for the Summerville Road church for eighteen years and retired to conduct meetings. After retiring, they lived in Decatur for some nineteen years and worshiped with the Summerville Road church, taught Bible classes, and he preached as opportunities came. They loved the people at Summerville Road and continued with them until death called them home.

Granville and Frances ware married in a beautiful home wedding of her parents in Pine Bluff, Arkansas, October 26, 1937. Avanelle, her sister, (now Mrs. James Baird of Oklahoma City, Oklahoma), was her bridesmaid and I stood as the best man when they repeated their vows, “I will love, honor, cherish, care for you, and keep myself to you only, so long as we both shall live.” This was a joyful occasion to them and we welcomed them into our families with pleasure.

They shared this relationship for fifty-seven years, three months and fourteen days. On February 10, 1995, Frances was laid to rest and on April 16, 1996, Granville was laid by her side, just fourteen months and three days afterwards, in the Roselawn Cemetery in Decatur, Alabama. Avanelle Baird and I, with their loved ones and friends, stood by the grave side of each one, as we had done at their wedding as brother Charles Littrell closed the service with an expression often used by Granville at a funeral service. “Now we have gone as far as we can, let us pray” and God’s blessings were asked to be upon us as we of necessity committed Granville and Frances to his care. The necessity was we had to give them up, but consigning them to God gives the hope that we shall meet again. As we walked away, I thought, God keep you until we meet again with the Lord in the air so shall we forever be together with him.

I would like to express our appreciation to those who had a public part in the funeral services for Granville and Frances. Brother Irvin Himmel for the obituary and observations; brother Marvin Hale, a very close friend, for his heartfelt thoughts and leading two songs; brother AI Bowers for leading two hymns; brother Eugene Britnell who spoke of his memories, gave one of Granville’s outlines, “Paradoxes of Death,” and complimentary tribute; brother Ed Bragwell’s eulogy and a biographical listing from Granville’s personal notes with appreciative expressions. The service was closed with the song “Amazing Grace” and prayer. Brother Charles Littrell closed the services at the Roselawn Cemetery with appropriate comments and thoughts. He closed with a prayer. Brother Eugene Britnell and brother Ed Bragwell were friends of Granville and Frances from their youth. The services were planned by Granville and Frances to use the same personnel and were carried out as they requested. Allow me to say within this paragraph, for all of us to each of these men, “Thank you and Amen and Amen.”

Objection Raised To My Article: