Truth Magazine

By Ken Sils

The word “witness” appears in God’s holy Scriptures more than one hundred times. It has widespread application and a variety of meanings depending upon the Hebrew or Greek word used and the context in which it is used. The most general definition for the word “witness” is to give testimony. In 2 Corinthians 8:3, Paul bore witness to the Corinthians of the Macedonians’ deep poverty. His witness (testimony) was true making him a true witness of the facts. Paul would have been able to convince a court of law with the facts that these people were poor because he had been there and saw the conditions in which they lived. He had the evidence necessary to convince the Corinthians concerning the truth of his testimony. Jesus used the word “witness” in the same manner in John 18:23. He stated, “If I have spoken evil, bear witness of the evil; but if I have spoken well, why do you strike Me?” Jesus demanded that they produce condemning testimony based on facts which would be proven to men. A true witness could produce some clear cut evidence that Jesus worked some type of evil, but we all know that there wasn’t any. Men who bear witness of a crime need ample physical evidence to prove their testimony to a court of law. If they do not have the evidence, their witness is ignored or they become false witnesses and are judged themselves.

Using the word “witness” in this sense, men today can bear witness or give testimony of Jesus through the Word of God. The testimony of the Holy Spirit has been proven and the Scriptures testify of Jesus truthfully and accurately. Even though we have not seen him, the testimony of Jesus given by the Holy Spirit will stand the litmus test of critics as a true historical account of the Son of God. We can persuade men with this testimony. It is important for us to remember that the testimony we bring forth is not of our own, it is the witness of the Holy Spirit, whose testimony is true.

Is it possible for men to be witnesses of Jesus Christ today? Simply because I am able to tell others the testimony of Jesus revealed in the Scriptures doesn’t make mea witness of Jesus. Even though I am able to bear witness of the Christ through the Scriptures doesn’t make me a witness of Jesus Christ. There were many witnesses of Jesus in the New Testament. Thayer defines these witnesses as individuals who have been eye or ear witnesses of Jesus’ extraordinary sayings, deeds, and sufferings which proved his Messiahship. Paul was not a false witness of Jesus in 1 Corinthians 15:15 for he had seen the resurrected Savior (1 Cor 15:8). The apostles were witnesses of Jesus because they had physically experienced the Savior’s life, death, and life again on this earth (Luke 24:48). They were witnesses of his resurrection because they saw him alive again after his crucifixion.

They soon would witness repentance and remission of sins being preached at Jerusalem and throughout the world because they would be the ones preaching it. These men were witnesses of these things, therefore making their testimony absolutely undeniable. As time went on, Peter told the world that they were witnesses of Jesus’ resurrection (Acts 3:15; 4:33; 5:32; 10:39-41) and the list continues to go through the book of Acts. They were able to confirm their witness because the Holy Spirit endued them with undeniable miraculous powers. This made their testimony come to life to the masses. Their mission was to testify of Jesus and their witness was true because they themselves were eyewitnesses of a resurrected Christ.

What about me as a 20th century disciple of Jesus? Can I be a witness of Jesus Christ? The answer is emphatically no! No matter how hard I want to be, I cannot be a witness of the things which the apostles and many disciples witnessed in the first century. I cannot be a witness of Jehovah either for I have not literally seen him nor heard him speak to me. We can all see the power of God and know that God lives through the things he has made and the revelation he has delivered. With all this, it still doesn’t make me a witness. However, on the flip side, we can bear witness (give testimony) of God through the revelation he has given us through the Holy Spirit. If our testimony is of ourselves, it means nothing; but if our testimony is nothing more than book, chapter, and verse; it is of God and needs to be obeyed. Paul told Timothy to preach the Word of God (2 Tim. 4:2). This was his only proper avenue of testimony to bring men to Jesus. We would do well if we followed the instructions of Paul, a witness and apostle of the resurrected Christ.

Guardian of Truth XLI: 10 p. 17-18
April May 1, 1997

By Leo Henry

A Christian is a unique individual. Bobby Holmes is a unique Christian evangelist, on the order of Titus 2:7-8. Bobby is spending February, March, and April (five meeting sites) in the state of Oregon. Between the months of May through November 1997, Bobby’s circuit takes him throughout the state of Washington and northern Idaho (seven meeting sites); then he crisscrosses the international border between Canada and Montana (four meeting sites); then on to Wyoming, Idaho, and Wisconsin (three meeting sites); next on to Ohio, West Virginia, and Mississippi (three meeting sites), and ends up in Texas and Alabama (three meeting sites). If you can read this descriptive sentence, not stopping to breathe, you have good respiration. Bobby’s preaching and teaching travels span ten months and five days, and cover 12,000 plus miles.

The term “circuit ride?’ is a familiar term. Bobby Holmes is a true modern day “circuit rider.” We coordinated his Oregon appointments. Bobby had never preached in the northwestern United States. He explained he would speak wherever the whole counsel of God could be preached with openness and candor. Oh yes! Priority was to be given to small or new congregations, or to congregations who seriously desire to better understand God’s word. Bobby was presented as a faithful gospel preacher to this area. He has fully filled our representation of him in this capacity.

Bobby traveled 2000 miles by motor vehicle before preaching his first sermon in Oregon. He purchased his coach and car-trailer for this trip with his life’s savings. Joann, his faithful and loving wife, and sister Sally Lee, Joann’s sister, accompany and support him. With his personal sacrifice and a modicum of support good brethren have provided, Christ’s gospel is being preached by

Bobby Holmes to a broad spectrum of Christian needs in this area. Bobby did not delay teaching God’s word until he arrived in Oregon. In Yuma, Arizona his coach broke down; one of his unexpected added costs. In God’s providence, a gentle-man from Lebanon, Oregon, was having his RV repaired at the same shop. This lost soul became interested in the gospel through Bobby’s kind yet bold account of the Savior. Bobby and his new friend traveled different routes to Oregon, but the stranger and his wife came to all but one of Bobby’s first series of meetings in Corvallis, Oregon. The couple are now entering a study of tape presentations of the gospel. They have plans to attend Bobby’s third meeting here at Wilsonville; a round-trip for them of 130 miles. Two were baptized in Bobby’s first meeting.

Bobby’s second site was at Oregon’s oldest incorporated Church of Christ at Mollala, Oregon. Over the years this congregation has been swept to and fro by the winds of doctrine. The congregation canceled a potluck in their building in deference to Bobby’s position on eating in the building. Presently there are some seeking the truth at Mollala, and thus Bobby’s opportunity. Five members of this liberal congregation have asked for Bobby’s sermon outline on “What is a Liberal.” They appear interested in further teaching.

Five families make up the Wilsonville, Oregon church of Christ. We first assembled January 19, 1997. Our gospel meeting with Bobby was March 9-14; the theme, “Marriage and the Family.” Besides Bobby’s preaching, Wilsonville has asked for classes on important issues in our area; e.g., Lord’s Supper, p.m.; Romans 14, indifference or doctrine; and fellowship per 1 John 1:3ff.

Christian integrity is Bobby Holmes’ hallmark. He stands for the truth and he confronts the devil when men present error. He “stands firm.” Hold up his hands. Pray for brother Bobby and his loyal companions on their “circuit.” Thank you, to all who support this ambassador for the Lord in his travels and labor. We will do all we can, and we invite you to do the same. God bless.

Guardian of Truth XLI: 10 p. 16
April May 1, 1997

By Donnie V. Rader

Tom O’Neal and John A. Welch met in debate on August 1, 2, 4, 5, 1994 in Bowling Green, Kentucky on the deity-humanity issue. This was the first oral debate on the subject. The proposition for the first two nights was “The Scriptures teach that Jesus was not a man as I am.” O’Neal affirmed and Welch denied. The last two nights the proposition was, “The Scriptures teach that Jesus was a man as I am, yet without sin.” Welch affirmed and O’Neal denied.

My purpose in this review is to let brethren, who may not be aware, know that this study is available in book form. It is not my intent to give a review of all the arguments that were made. Others have already written about the debate shortly after it was concluded (in Guardian of Truth, Walking In Truth, and Faith & Facts).

1. The value of a debate in book form. While there are many advantages of being present at an oral debate, there are certain advantages of being able to have the speeches before you in printed form. I was present at this debate, but found the arguments easier to follow with the book. The book allows the reader to focus on the arguments and the answers and then analyze them (at his own pace) rather than attention being given to the style, voice, ability, or personality of the speaker.

2. The styles of the debaters were different. Though more noticeable if you were present (or had the tapes), the differing styles of O’Neal and Welch are still obvious in the book. Both men are experienced debaters. On the one hand, Tom speaks slower and is more deliberate. Tom is more of an affirmative debater. He takes a few points and strives to drive them home. On the other hand, John works much faster and covers more ground. He is very effective with visuals. John is more a negative debater.

3. The basic arguments. Tom began by showing that this was not a debate about whether man has to sin, whether men are unconditionally cleansed or forgiven of sin or whether Jesus was fully human on earth. All of these John has tried to tie together throughout this controversy.

In his first affirmative Tom said, “It should be clearly understood that nothing I say in this discussion is intended to deny that John says that he believes in the deity of Christ on earth. He has said it repeatedly and I recognize that. But I will prove that he has made blatant statements that are hopelessly inconsistent with the deity of Christ on earth and which flatly contradict the deity of Christ on this earth. I will prove that the consequences of John’s teaching is a denial of the deity of Jesus and he makes statements which are unwittingly denials of the deity of Jesus” (p. 3).

Early in the debate John tried to show that Tom (and those who agree with him) in reality denies the humanity of Jesus. He attempted to tie this question with the continuous cleansing issue.

At the heart of the discussion was the question of whether Jesus gave up the attributes of deity or merely limited his use of them when he came to earth. Tom con-tended that if Jesus gave up any one of his attributes, he no longer has the nature of God (Gal. 4:8). Tom pointed out that there is a big difference in giving up his attributes and in limiting his use of them. John repeatedly said to Tom, “I agree with you!” provided you are talking about Jesus limiting his attributes. However, John shifted back and forth in the debate between Jesus not using his at-tributes of deity and not having them.

4. A few things in this book that are different than most debates. (a) John Welch’s charts do not appear in the book. In the front of the debate book Tom wrote, “John Welch has copyrighted his charts, so they do not appear in this printed form. However, the reader is not at a great disadvantage because as he read the material on his charts, line by line, they were being put on the screen line by line as he read them. Thus, the text contains the words that were on his charts. I have tried to be extra careful with his speeches in getting them just as accurate as possible.” John’s charts are available on CD-ROM (“The Humanity of Jesus”  $49.95 from Faith & Facts Bookstore). (b) There are numerous quotes from brethren. Much of John Welch’s time was spent quoting from brethren in an effort to show that what he taught is no different than what others have always taught. In one speech John quoted from 19 men. In another, 14 men. Other speeches contained nine, eight, and seven quotes. (c) On the third night when Tom gave a quote from Herman Black on how to identify a modernist, John’s moderator called a point of order, went to the platform, called for charts and proceeded to answer Tom O’Neal (pp. 55-56). Few, if any, had ever seen that happen in debate. (d) A question and answer period that took place after the last session is included in the book.

Guardian of Truth XLI: 10 p. 14-15
April May 1, 1997

By Linda Maydell

I will never forget the day almost exactly 14 years ago that I walked smiling into the doctor’s office for a routine pregnancy check-up. The doctor pulled out his stethoscope and listened. “There’s no heartbeat,” he said. “I’m afraid your baby is dead.”

I was stunned. Slowly tears began to trickle down my cheeks. The doctor looked at me and said, “Why are you crying over such a little thing?”

To me, my baby was a precious gift of God, a lost life to be mourned. To my doctor, it was a thing, a growth needing surgical removal because I had not yet suffered a miscarriage.

Today, 1 February 1997, I am crying again. Our parliament has now decided that from today onwards, unborn babies are things. They are just growths that can be surgically removed if the mother so wishes.

You, my sisters, are one day very soon going to know someone dear to you who is pregnant and who does not want to be pregnant. You may even know someone like that at this very moment. I pray not, but this person may even be you. The law of our land says that any such person may go have an operation called an abortion. After the operation, she will no longer be pregnant. She will no longer have to worry about who will look after the baby. If she is still at school, she will not have to worry about interrupting her school work. If she is working, she will not have to worry about missing work or losing her job. If she is unmarried, she does not have to bear any shame in the eyes of men. No one will ever see her swelling belly. She will be able to carry on her life as normal. Perhaps she will even be able to marry someone else and not have to worry about whether or not her husband will accept another man’s child. What are you going to say to such a person? My sisters, I want you to be firmly convinced of how God feels about this before you are tempted to give or accept wrong advice. Is abortion really murder? Is an unborn baby really a human life? What does the Bible have to say about this?

First of all, the Bible calls the unborn baby a “child” or “babe” in Luke 1:41-44. Notice that this particular unborn baby (John the Baptist) was already filled with the Spirit of God to leap for joy when he heard the greeting of Mary, the mother of Jesus. The same Greek word is used for newborn children (Luke 2:12-16; Acts 7:19) and even older children (2 Tim. 3:15). The Bible speaks of unborn children as living persons. In Genesis 25:21-23, God told Rebekah that two nations were in her womb. Samson (Judg. 13:5), John the Baptist (Luke 1:15), and the apostle Paul (Gal. 1:5), were all chosen to be spokesmen for God when they were still in the womb. David said of Jesus, “From My mother’s womb You have been My God” (Ps. 22:10). “He (God) is not the God of the dead but of the living” (Luke 20:38).

When does a person receive his soul? The Bible says that the body without the spirit is dead (Jas. 2:26). We have seen already that the Bible considers an unborn child to be a living person. Can you be sure that the unborn child has no soul? From what the Bible says, I am convinced that an unborn baby does have a soul. If you cause someone’s soul to depart from his body, have you not committed murder?

God’s Word is most important, but before any woman goes for an abortion, she should also know what is going to happen to her and to the baby.

If a woman is three months pregnant or less, the baby is less than four-inches long. The baby is, however, very much alive. He is almost fully formed, he swims, he sucks his thumb, and he even has facial expressions. The results of a study of unborn babies in London was released about six months ago. The study said that a baby may feel pain already at the 6th week of pregnancy. In the United States (and I assume South Africa will follow the same procedures), the doctor uses an instrument to force open the muscle that holds the womb closed (the cervix). He then cuts the baby and the afterbirth into small pieces so that all the pieces can be sucked out of the womb. He uses an instrument some-thing like a small vacuum cleaner to do this. The pipe of the vacuum cleaner is not large enough to suck everything out at once. That is why the baby must first be cut in pieces. This operation is called a D&C.

Some mothers do not go for an abortion when they first find out about their pregnancy. They think, “Maybe I just skipped my time this month,” or “Maybe I will miscarry,” or “Maybe my boyfriend will marry me.” Many are ashamed and frightened and worried. They only go to the abortion clinic after they are 13 weeks pregnant. If the mother is more than three months (13 weeks) pregnant, but less than seven months pregnant, the baby will be from 4-12 inches long. With modern medical help, some of these babies can survive if they are born prematurely. There are basically three different ways used to abort these babies.

(1) A solution of very salty salt water is injected into the womb. The salt burns the baby’s skin and causes the baby’s veins to burst. The baby thrashes around inside the mother for about an hour until it dies. Once the baby is dead, a woman will usually go into labor within about 24 hours and give birth. This operation, however, is not always safe for the mother.

(2) New drugs, called prostaglandin, have been developed which cause the woman to go into labor without harming the baby. The labor pains are, however, much worse than normal birth pains. The drug also causes diarrhea and vomiting. This operation is safer for the mother than the salt injection, but women do not like it because it is so painful. Another big “problem” is that, because the baby is not harmed, quite a few of the babies are born alive. Then the medical staff has to smother them or leave them alone to die gradually. The mother may never stop feeling guilty if she hears her baby crying. Many of the doctors and nurses who perform this operation develop severe emotional problems.

(3) The most common operation of these three in the United States is called D & E. However, I will be surprised if it is used much in South Africa be-cause it is the most expensive. The mother is put to sleep. Then the hole of her womb is forced open much wider than with a D & C. The doctor then uses instruments to cut the baby in pieces, but the pieces are too big for the vaccum-cleaner-type instrument. The doctor must take the baby out, piece by piece. The nurses must keep track of the pieces to make sure none of the baby is left behind. If a baby who is born at this time cries, do you think he feels no pain when the doctor cuts him up?

Are you feeling sick from reading this article? Think how God must feel! “The darkness and the light are both alike to You. For You have formed my inward parts; You have covered me in my mother’s womb. . . . Your eyes saw my substance, being yet unformed” (Ps. 139:12-16). Do not be deceived, God sees each unborn baby in each womb. He sees each abortion and knows the pain that each baby goes through.

I do not have the latest statistics, but in the United States in 1982, for every 1000 babies born, 359 were aborted. That means that out of all women who get pregnant, including women who wanted to get pregnant, more than one fourth of them will choose to cause the death of her own child. Between the years 1973 and 1982, over 10,000,000 babies died in the United States through abortion. I shudder to think how many have died since. What will happen in South Africa?

My sister, we all know that fornication is sin and that murder is sin. “… Murderers, and fornicators, .. . their part shall be in the lake that burneth with fire and brimstone” (Rev. 21:8). If someone commits fornication, she can be forgiven if she repents. But is such a person truly penitent if she chooses to commit murder to escape the consequences of her sinful deed?

“(They) shed innocent blood, even the blood of their sons and daughters, Whom they sacrificed to the idols of Canaan; And the land was polluted with blood” (Ps. 106:8). Many women choose to have an abortion simply be-cause they feel they do not want a child at this time or they feel they have enough children. Are not such women now sacrificing their sons and daughters to the idol of their own selfishness?

“There are six things the Lord hates, Yes seven are an abomination to Him: A proud look, A lying tongue, Hands that shed innocent blood . . .” (Prov. 6:16-17). Is there any blood more innocent than that of an unborn child?

Sisters, let us teach others so that our blood-polluted land will be turned from its sinful ways and escape the vengeance of God. Sister, I am crying, are you?

Note: The medical information and statistics in this article come from the book, The Least of These  What Everyone Should Know About Abortion, by Curt Young

Guardian of Truth XLI: 9 p. 10-11
April May 1, 1997