Truth Magazine

By Dennis Tucker

The title of this article is a takeoff from a book written by Lewis Grizzard, “Elvis Is Dead And I Don’t Feel So Good Myself.”

Regena came to me on March 22, 1994, to tell me that Lewis Grizzard had died. Keep in mind that the University of Kentucky Wildcats was in the process of losing to Marquette in the NCAA basketball tournament. This was a sad day indeed.

Who was Lewis Grizzard? He was a true southern humorist. Born in Georgia, he was of the opinion that the south was the only place to live. He took a job in Chicago that he later regretted. After one year, he quit and returned to Georgia. Later, he wrote that he promised God. that if he ever got back to Georgia he would never leave again.

I became acquainted with Lewis Grizzard in the early 1980s. This was when my family moved to Macon, Georgia. Lewis had a nightly time slot on the Atlanta television news. Many newspapers carried his syndicated column and he wrote about twenty books. The titles of his books told you something about the man. “They Tore My Heart Out and Stomped That Sucker Flat,” or “My Daddy Was A Pistol And I Am a Son of A Gun.” Do you see what I mean?

Through his writings I learned about his dog, Catfish and that Lewis’ father was an alcoholic and had abandoned Lewis when he was a child. I could read the sadness in many of the lines of humor that he wrote. Lewis’ failed marriages, poor heart, and his dog dying really broke his heart; all of this led to his sad and satirical writings.

I learned how Lewis thought. He believed that the Yankees should either stay up north or at least not try to ruin the south. He liked boiled peanuts. Actually, only a person in Georgia can relate to “(boled) peanuts” but he liked them. Now Lewis was not a racist or a bigot. He was old fashioned, practical, and many times he was right. Oklahomans had Will Rogers but the south had Lewis Grizzard.

Why am I telling you this about Lewis? By reading the writings of Lewis Grizzard I became familiar with him. I understood his logic and in a way he became a good friend. I knew that his heart was failing and he was supposed to have another operation. While I did not cry at the news of his death, I imagine many others did. All of this could happen only through reading his writings.

If you want to get to know God you have to read the Bible. You can learn about his Son and faithful servants by opening up the good book. You can hear the heart of Paul breaking as he writes how Demas left him and went back into the world (2 Tim. 4:10). We see Paul’s determination as he spoke of being beaten with rods, shipwrecked, stoned, left for dead, cast into prison and many other trials in 2 Corinthians 11:23-25. We can see the meaning of love as Jesus died on that cruel cross for you and me in Matthew 27. We see the astonishment of the audience in Acts 2 as they heard the sound of the mighty wind and saw the tongues of fire.

If you ever felt that the Bible is just not interesting, important, or just impersonal and not for you  try reading it!

Guardian of Truth XXXIX: 10 p. 8
May 18, 1995

By Steven Wallace

Some among us have argued for a subjective approach to unity with those who teach error on divorce and remarriage. This approach is different from simply seeking unity based on truth (Eph. 4:3; John 8:31-32) and allows for unity-in-diversity among brethren who teach and practice opposing views. A recent news story demonstrates the weakness of the subjective approach to unity:

Witches prompt walkout

CHICAGO  Diversity died in harmony when an Orthodox Christian group walked out of a religious conference because it included witches.

The goal of the 1993 Parliament of the World’s Religions was to promote harmony among the world’s major faiths, such as Christianity, Judaism, Islam, Hinduism and Buddhism.

But Orthodox Christian representatives dropped out of the eight-day conference that began Saturday to protest the participation of Wicca believers, or witches, and other neo-pagan groups.

“It would be inconceivable for Orthodox Christianity to establish a perceived relationship with groups which profess no belief in God or a supreme being,” the Orthodox Christian Host Committee said in a letter dated Monday (The Stars and Stripes, 3 September 1993).

While we recognize that the above mentioned “Christians” are not New Testament Christians, we believe that this story shows some weaknesses in the subjective approach to unity among brethren. Please consider the following lessons that it teaches:

1. The subjective approach to unity rests upon what man “conceives.” “It would be inconceivable … ” (above). The word “subjective” means, “of, affected by, or produced by the mind or a particular state of mind; of or resulting from the feeling or temperament of the subject, or person thinking, rather than the attributes of the object thought of; as, a subjective judgment” (Websters New Universal Unabridged Dictionary, p.1813). If the “Orthodox Christian Host Committee” had been using an objective standard, such as the Bible or their particular creed, they would have cited the place where their basis of judgment could be found (cf., “It is written,” Matt. 4:4). Instead they spoke of what they could “conceive.” Whether you are dealing with unity among the Lord’s people or relation-ships among world religions, the subjective approach to unity rests upon what man conceives. Let us all remember that “it is not in man that walketh to direct his steps” (Jer. 10:23).

2. The subjective approach is a rejection of the Bible as the standard for determining whom we should accept or reject. It is instructive that the above Christian group could apparently “conceive” of a “relationship” with Jews, Moslems, Hindus, and Buddhists. There is no more Scripture for unity with such people than there is for unity with witches (2 John 9-11). However, this manifestly shows that the subjective approach rejects the Bible as its ultimate grounds of appeal. This is similar to the position our brethren find themselves in when arguing for the subjective approach to unity with regards to divorce and remarriage: The Bible teaches that we should treat as erring brethren both those whose teaching leads others to commit fornication and those who commit fornication themselves (Rev. 2:14-16; 1 Cor. 5:11). However, brethren who use the subjective approach to unity will argue that we should accept such brethren. (Note: The definition of the word “fornication” includes adultery [Thayer, pp. 531-532; Arndt and Gingrich, p. 693].) There is no more Scripture for unity with those who teach or commit adultery than with those who practice homosexuality. (Note: The definition of the word “fornication” also includes homosexuality, Thayer, and Amdt and Gingrich, Ibid.) However, this manifestly shows that the subjective approach rejects the Bible as its ultimate grounds of appeal. Those who use the subjective approach may still use the Bible as a standard of appeal. The “Orthodox Christian Host Committee” rested their decision to reject the “Wicca believers” on the Bible principle that man must believe in God (Heb. 11:6). Ed Harrell has argued that the false teacher on divorce and remarriage whom he would accept must be “honest” (Christianity Magazine, Sept., 1989, p. 6; cf. Eph. 4:25). In both cases the Bible is reduced to being a standard for determining our relationship with others instead of being the standard for determining our relationship with others (Rom. 16:17-18; Gal. 2:14; Jas. 5:19; 2 John 9- 1).

3. When one gives up the Bible as the final basis of appeal anything is possible. The Bible is the only valid basis for Christians to use in determining with whom to have unity (2 John 4-6,9-11; Rom. 16:17-18). The above article shows us that the subjective approach allows for broader-than-Bible “relationships.” While we do not believe that brethren presently arguing for such an approach to unity among Christians will be so broad in their thinking as to accept Jews, Moslems, Hindus, and Buddhists, the point we make here is valid: If we stop using the Scriptures as our final basis of appeal, anything is possible (2 Tim. 4:4). With reference to unity-in-diversity, one need only look at where others have ended up who have gone down this road to see the validity of the point we make here: Such brethren have united with those involved in the errors of institutionalism, instrumental music in worship, and even denominationalism.

Conclusion

The appeal for unity with Christ and Christians begins and ends with the word of God (1 John 1:1-7). I plead with the lost to enter into this unity on the basis of at the word says (Mk. 16:15-16; Acts 2:38). We recognize that erring Christians have departed from the truth (Gal. 2:11-14; 1 Tim. 4:1) and exhort them to return to this unity based on what the word says (Gal. 1:6-9; Jas. 5:19-20). We base our common and individual efforts and lives upon the word of God (Eph. 4:3; Phil. 1:27; 2 John 4-6). To use the subjective approach in any of these areas is manifestly an appeal to something other than the word of God.

Guardian of Truth XXXIX: 9 p. 5-6
May 4, 1995

By William C. Sexton

Eight months have rapidly passed since I came to work with the congregation that meets at 711 Access Road in Van Buren, Arkansas. Some good things have happened:

1. We have had several families be identified with us. After observing and listening, they have decided to be a part of the congregation  to work and worship with us. Most of them are young families. For them we are so grateful and anticipate that the future looks bright for the Lord’s church in this location.

2. We baptized one person in the community. She worships and works with us. In addition, I had the privilege of baptizing one of my granddaughters (Sheryl Harden) over the new year’s week end holiday. She was visiting from Wichita, Kansas and desired to be baptized. That’s a thrill for a grandfather to be able to baptize his granddaughter.

3. On the last Lord’s day of February (the 26th) elders were installed. Two men, Louis Brown and Bill Sexton, were appointed to serve as elders/bishops in the congregation. We hope that shortly deacons can be installed and we’ll become a “fully scripturally organized congregation.”

The congregation is at peace: each member manifests love and respect for each other. We are a family of the Lord, wanting to serve him faithfully as the Bible teaches. The congregation meets in a new building, in a growing part of the city and county. New houses are all around the building, new houses are going up all the time.

We are located at a good place for anyone traveling from Little Rock to Oklahoma City on Route I-40. We hope if you are traveling this route, that you’ll plan to worship with us. Where is Van Buren Arkansas: Just across the river from Fort Smith, about five miles or so east of the Oklahoma line. Should you be moving to the area, please investigate the congregation here at 711 Access Road. I was surprised to find that this part of the country is growing as fast as it is. Crawford county (of which Van Buren is the county seat) is one of the fastest growing places in the vicinity, I’m told. We believe that the church here is poised to stand firmly for the truth of God’s word for time to come.

Last summer we had a number of visitors from other parts of the county. We hope that this year we’ll have the privilege of meeting more of you passing down I-40, either going east or west. Also, should you be traveling north or south on Highway 59 or 71, we would be easily found. You’ll find a very friendly group of God’s people glad to have you visit with us, determined to hold fast to the teachings of the New Testament (1 Thess. 5:21). There is a large “Truck Stop” at I-40 and 59. Last summer a few truck drivers left their truck at the stop and walked down to worship with us. There are two motels located at this intersection: Motel Six and Motel Eight I believe they are. So, come by and see us.

If we can be of help to you, let us know (ph. 501-474-2617). Call (501) 471-5801 and you’ll get a recording that tells of our times of worship, etc., if we are not at the building.

Guardian of Truth XXXIX: 9 p. 12
May 4, 1995

By Larry Ray Hafley

The poignant words that serve as our title were taken from Matthew 26:75. They are found in a passage that will serve to recall the situation to the mind’s eye. “And Peter remembered the word of Jesus, which said unto him, before the cock crow, thou shalt deny me thrice. And he went out and wept bitterly.” Doubtless the great fisherman apostle never forgot that moment. Tears and time did not erase the agony and remorse of the regretful event.

Perhaps there is no connection; it may be but a coincidence of Scripture, if there be any such thing, but in the second epistle by the same apostle we find the repetition of the word “remembrance.” “Wherefore I will not be negligent to put you always in remembrance of these things, though ye know them, and be established in the present truth. Yea, I think it meet, as long as I am in this tabernacle, to stir you up by putting you in remembrance. . . . Moreover I will endeavor that ye may be able after my decease to have these things always in remembrance” (2 Pet. 1:12-15). “This second epistle, beloved, I now write unto you; in both which I stir up your pure minds by way of remembrance: That ye may be mindful” (2 Pet. 3:1, 2). Peter once forgot the word of Jesus. It came crashing to his remembrance in a painful manner. When the Lord looked at him after that rooster crowed the third time, it pierced his heart, “and he went out, and wept bitterly.”

Could it be that Peter wanted no one to endure the thing that haunted him? He knew what it meant to be reminded of the words of Jesus. He understood the way of sin when the word of Jesus is forgotten. Therefore, he was not negligent to put the brethren “always in remembrance” of the word of God as delivered by the apostles and prophets. It is an engaging and intriguing thought. But regardless of whether or not that was the compelling idea behind Peter’s words, let us not fail to do as he urged, that is, remember the word of Christ. “Thy word have I hid in my heart, that I might not sin against thee” (Psa. 119: 11).

Guardian of Truth XXXIX: 9 p. 4
May 4, 1995