Truth Magazine

By Truman Smith

If my memory serves me right, it was in 1957, while I was preaching for the Lacey Lakeview Church of Christ in Waco, Texas that I first met Kenneth and Sammie Hoyle. While Kenneth had been preaching full time for some five years prior to that time, he and Sammie had moved to Waco where he had gone into secular work and was preaching part time. Though I do not recall the exact time or place of our first meeting, I am almost certain that it was at a gospel meeting somewhere in the Greater Waco area, for wherever there was a gospel meeting in progress, if it was at all within driving range, Kenneth and Sammie were in attendance. As a matter of fact, they would often drive many, many miles to hear the gospel proclaimed in such efforts. As many of you know, those were the years before institutionalism and related issues had brought about the major division among the churches of Christ. His first full- time work with a non-institutional congregation began in Borger, Texas in 1960. They always remembered with much fondness the pleasant years spent in their work at Borger. Kenneth was a Texas preacher. He also did local work with such churches as La Porte, Nacogdoches, Rosenberg, Texas City, and West Orange. However, in 1991 they left their native state of Texas and moved to Louisiana to help in the establishment of a faithful church in the city of Lake Charles. They started meeting in the Kinder Care Learning Center, where they met for nine months before finding the present meeting place, 3919 Auburn Street, a facility belonging to a denomination. They were able to purchase that place in May 1993. Sammie said that this work was Kenneth’s “joy and crown.” She said, “He was never, never happier, for unity and love abounded and it was all based on ‘a thus saith the Lord.’”

However, it was while engaged in the work in Lake Charles, Louisiana that he developed a very strange type of pneumonia, and though they were able to bring the pneumonia under control, it had weakened his body to the point that he became unable to recover from the damage it had done. He struggled for forty days in the Intensive Care Unit of St. Elizabeth Hospital in Beaumont, Texas. His faithful wife, Sammie, was ever by his side. Finally, when he had used up all of his strength to fight any longer, on February 25, 1998, his immortal spirit slipped away from his body and went back to God from whence it had come more than seventy years ago.

Kenneth was born on September 12, 1927 near Abbott, Texas. He and Sammie met in Hillsboro, Texas and were married there on June 1, 1947. They celebrated their Golden Wedding Anniversary last year. Two adopted children, Jan and Lynn, preceded Kenneth in death. After waiting many years from the time they were married, two lovely daughters, Karen and Mary, were born to them. Now they have six grandchildren and two very fine sons-in-law, David Kibodeaux and Norman Harrison.

Kenneth Hoyle was my friend. I cherish the memories of the many precious moments we spent together discussing Scripture, worshiping and working together for the cause of Christ. We both served on lectureships and gospel meetings in places where we were each located through the years. We spent many happy hours together, visiting and conversing socially along with our wives. He was a joy to be with and a true fellowlabourer in gospel work. I never knew a more dedicated soldier of the cross. His wife, Sammie, was a faithful companion. I do not remember ever seeing Kenneth at a gospel meeting without Sammie by his side. And they worked together in the Lord’s work. Upon learning of his passing, I had difficulty controlling my emotions, for I knew how we would miss him. And, I knew that the ravages of ill health had brought to an end the life of a good man and the work of a fine preacher of the gospel at a time when the likes of him are sorely needed.

There were six speakers at his funeral service which was conducted on February 27: Norman Harrison, Tim Paschall, Tony Noll, Carl Vernon, Hayes Reneau and Larry Ray Hafley. David Kibodeaux led congregational singing. A grave side service was held for him in Hillsboro, Texas on February 28 with Billy Dollar, a long-time friend, conducting the service. It was there that his frail body was laid to rest. Yes, we will miss our friend, but we “sorrow not, even as others which have no hope” (1 Thess. 4:13). And, “Blessed are the dead which die in the Lord from henceforth: Yea, saith the Spirit, that they may rest from their labours; and their works do follow them” (Rev. 14:13).

Just here I wish to make a sincere plea to our vast brotherhood. Through all of those years, Kenneth and Sammie Hoyle gave their lives to the work of spreading the gospel. And, like so many, they just trusted the Lord for their future. The only income Sammie has is a Social Security check she is to receive each month, which is not very much. But with the help of her two wonderful sons-in-law, she will not go hungry. However, she hopes to raise enough money to build a small, modest home on a daughter’s place. If there is anyone reading this who happens to have a little money to spare, you may send it to Mrs. Kenneth R. Hoyle, 4310 Dean, Lake Charles, LA 70605. Sammie will very much appreciate just whatever amount you might be able to send. If you are unable to send any funds, but would just like to write her a cheerful note, please do so. And let us all remember her and her good family in our prayers.

By P.J. Casebolt

Both the Bible and society recognize the advantages, privileges, and responsibilities of fleshly relationships. These relationships can be the cause of much delight, or they can put us in a dilemma from which we cannot, or will not, extricate ourselves.

“But if any provide not for his own, and especially for those of his own house, he hath denied the faith, and is worse than an infidel” (1 Tim. 5:8). Husbands, wives, parents, and children enjoy a relationship that is as old as the human race, and a source of delight which cannot be duplicated by any other means. By virtue of this relation- ship, we even obtain an extended family which comes under the heading of “in-laws.” While these in-laws can also provide their share of dilemmas, we automatically extend and receive blessings which can be realized in no other way.

By virtue of inheriting privileges which belong to fleshly relatives, we also inherit responsibilities which are primarily ours. It may have been that because of this relationship, Barnabas entertained a responsibility to (John) Mark which the apostle Paul did not have (Acts 15:37-39; Col. 4:10). It is sometimes easier to say what we would do concerning someone else’s relatives than what we would do if they were of our own household.

When we are faced with a dilemma that arises because of a fleshly relationship, we may have to look to our spiritual relationship with the Lord in order to resolve such a dilemma. Under the law of Moses, when a relative put you in a position where you were tempted to deny the Lord, you had the unpleasant but plain responsibility to side with the Lord (Deut. 13:6-11). And other households in Israel were to “hear and fear” and allow “no more any such wickedness . . . among you” (v. 11).

In my own personal experience, I am noticing a trend which seems to be developing into a pattern of alarming proportions. An isolated case may not imply a trend, but when several such instances arise in different congregations within a short period of time, it is time for alarm. And the Lord is concerned over even one instance when it concerns the welfare of his children (Luke 15:4-10).

Digression among the Lord’s people has always alienated not only brethren, but also fleshly relatives. It was so among the Israelites, it was so in the first and 19th centuries, and it has been so in the 20th century. But as a rule, families were divided because of their personal convictions with respect to those issues which divided brethren and churches. Now, I see families being united, but united in doctrinal error due to fleshly relationships. Some can discern truth from error, and in the past have taken their stand for truth, but now they are taking a position which is influenced by their fleshly relatives and not by truth.

In the majority of these cases, I am noticing that it is the children who are having an adverse effect upon their parents, instead of the other way around. Traditionally, whether by human tradition (Matt. 15:3), or by divine tradition (Deut. 6:7), the parents and grandparents have exercised influence upon children and grandchildren, not vice versa.

I can sympathize with relatives who face the dilemma of seeing other relatives identified with false doctrine and practice, and who are forced to decide between their loyalty to the Lord and loyalty to fleshly relationships. And any relative who puts another relative in the position of having to deny the Lord in order to please man is not a relative who loves either his Lord or his own relatives as he should. Paul said that charity “seeketh not her own . . . but rejoiceth in the truth” (1 Cor. 13:5, 6). If we claim to love God, then we prove that love by keeping his commandments (John 14:15, 23). If we love our fleshly relatives, our brethren, or our neighbors, we will do what is best for their souls, not that which is convenient or popular.

Are we the only ones who ever faced the dilemma of having to decide between our love for the Lord and our love for relatives? Certainly not, and neither should we think that the Lord will make an exception in our case.

David’s own son, Absalom, “stole the hearts of the men of Israel” and usurped his father’s throne (2 Sam. 15:6ff). David mourned for Absalom to the extent that Joab had to rebuke the king because he was showing more concern for his son than he was for those who had remained faithful to David (2 Sam. 19). When our relatives put us in such a dilemma, the best way out is to side with the Lord and those who are on the Lord’s side (Exod. 32:26-29).

The apostle Paul loved his kinsmen in the flesh so much that he would have sacrificed himself on their behalf (Rom. 9:1-3;10:1-3), but he gave up his fleshly relationship with all (Phil. 3:7, 8) of its benefits in order to win Christ (Gal. 2:10-14). And Jesus himself taught that if we deny him in favor of any fleshly relative, that he will deny us before the Father (Matt. 10:32-39). In any such dilemma, “We ought to obey God rather than men” (Acts 5:29).

Not only can I sympathize with those who face a difficult decision with respect to fleshly relatives, but at least in this one area, “I bear in my body the marks of the Lord Jesus” (Gal. 6:17), figuratively speaking. So, allow me to offer some advice which may help others to resolve their dilemma.

“Rebuke not an elder, but entreat him as a father; and the younger men as brethren; the elder women as mothers; the younger as sisters, with all purity” (1 Tim. 5:1, 2). Paul referred to both Timothy and Titus as his sons “in the faith” (1 Tim. 1:2; Tit. 1:4).

I come from a large family, and it is a wonderful thing to see peace, unity, and love in either a fleshly family or in the Lord’s family (Ps. 133:1). And when possible, our spiritual relationship in Christ enhances even a delightful fleshly relationship. But if we have never known, or must forego the delights of a fleshly relationship, we can have multiplied numbers of fathers and mothers, sons and daughters, brothers and sisters in the family of God in this life and eternally in that life which is to come. But the rich man did not want his own fleshly brethren to follow him into torment (Luke 16:28), and fleshly relationships will not hinder our status in the resurrection (Matt. 22:30).

By Greg Litmer

Over the years there have been many occasions when I have been asked to talk to different married couples who were experiencing problems in their marriages. On many other occasions my input was not sought or wanted, yet I could stand on the side lines and watch as another family disintegrated. Even those who are Christians are not immune to these kinds of problems and it seems to be happening more and more all the time. Very few congregations of any size and that have existed for very long have escaped the heartache that comes from watching a beloved married brother and sister decide to go their separate ways in violation of God’s word. Very few congregations have escaped the pain of watching a family that is loved by all degenerate into unhappiness, bitterness, and disharmony. These kinds of things take place rather frequently. Sometimes you can see it happening. Other times there is no obvious indication that something is wrong until it is too late to help.

What kind of problems seem to come up most often? I would have to agree with most experts (and I do not put myself in their company; I simply have the benefit of being able to read what they say) that the number one problem in marriages is money. Sometimes problems arise that have to do with the intimate side of marriage. At other times moral issues come up, when one or the other desires to engage in activities that are sinful. There are problems with the children and how they are to be raised. Sometimes couples just don’t talk to each other and when they do talk, it is not about things that really matter. There are a host of different problems that can and do come up.

It has been my experience that in each and every situation that has led to an unhappy marriage, or even to the dissolving of a family, there has been a failure to abide by Ephesians 5:21 where Paul wrote, “Submitting yourselves one to another in the fear of God.” The word translated as “submitting” (hupotassomenoi) has an interesting etymology. Originally it was military in meaning, describing the coming together of troups for battle under a commanding officer. Each individual soldier was to understand and stay in his proper place in the formation as instructed by his superior. Eventually the word came to mean subordination in any relationship under discussion. If a person was “submitting,” he was placing himself under the influence of authority and that could be a person or a position, as far as obedience was concerned. There was the subjection of one’s will to that of another.

This could be either voluntary or involuntary. If I were to be captured by an enemy and forced into a life of slavery, there would be submission, but it would not have been entered into voluntarily. But when we talk about the kind of submission required by the gospel of Christ, we are talking about submission entered into by choice. I voluntarily submit myself to Christ. I voluntarily submit myself to the oversight of the elders of the congregation of which I am a member. Indeed, I voluntarily submit myself to my brothers and sisters in Christ.

There is another aspect of hupotassomenoi that needs to be considered. In some instances, and context would make this determination, it goes beyond authority and involves the “motive” behind the submitting. It involves as unselfish concern for the desires and the wishes of another, even when that other person has no real authority over you. It is the antithesis of selfishness. Paul, in Ephesians 5:21, was instructing the brethren to voluntarily “submit” to one another, meaning to always take the needs and feelings of others into consideration even more than ourselves. He was telling them and us not to be selfish, not to always demand our own will and our own way. That kind of attitude was necessary one to another in the body of Christ; can we not see how important it is in the family relationship at home? In fact, Paul goes on in Ephesians 5, and shows how it works in the home. In verses 22-25, we find, “Wives, submit yourselves unto you own husbands, as unto the Lord. For the husband is the head of the wife, even as Christ is the head of the church: and he is the saviour of the body. Therefore as the church is subject unto Christ, so let the wives be to their own husbands in everything. Husbands, love your wives, even as Christ also loved the church and gave himself for it.” In verse 28 we read, “So ought men to love their wives as their own bodies. He that loveth his wife loveth himself.”

Whenever there is a failure to “submit” one to another in the home, problems will arise, and this lack of submission is selfishness. Yes, money often creates major problems in a marriage, but how? Several different scenarios related to this have been played out in families over the years. Sometimes there is a wife who is not satisfied with what the husband is able to provide monetarily and she becomes bitter. Sometimes there is a husband who will not work to provide for his family. Sometimes both of them work and live way beyond their means or their needs, hence there is constant pressure to make more money. If one of them gets sick or loses his job, then they are in deep financial trouble. You don’t have to look too hard to see that selfishness plays a role in each of these situations.

I have been aware of times when, through no fault of their own, families have gotten into significant money problems. There may have been an accident, sickness, a layoff, or some other unfortunate occurrence. Even as the situation became very difficult, it did not create problems between the husband and the wife because each one was more concerned about the feelings and needs of the other. They were submitting one to another. So instead of fussing and fighting, they pulled together to confront their difficulties.

On occasion, problems will arise in a marriage that have to do with the intimate side of the relationship. If there is no physical cause creating the difficulty, then it seems that most often it is possible to trace the disturbance back to a failure to embrace and abide by Ephesians 5:21, “Submit- ting yourselves one to another in the fear of God.”

In 1 Corinthians 7:1-5, some very basic principles dealing with this side of marriage are set forth. Paul wrote,

Now concerning the things whereof ye wrote unto me: It is good for a man not to touch a woman. Nevertheless, to avoid fornication, let every man have his own wife, and let every woman have her own husband. Let the husband render unto the wife due benevolence: and likewise also the wife unto her husband. The wife hath not power of her own body, but the husband: and likewise the husband hath not power of his own body, but the wife. Defraud ye not one the other except it be with consent for a time, that ye may give yourselves to fasting and prayer, and come together again, that Satan tempt you not for your incontinence.

There have been instances where the intimate side of marriage has been used as a weapon. What I mean by this is that one or the other will defraud the mate, depriving him of his God-given right, until the other one gets his own way about some matter. Surely we can all see that such behavior is as ungodly as can be and in direct violation of the principle of Ephesians 5:21, and many others.

I have had people tell me over the years that they no longer find their mate physically attractive or appealing. Sometimes the mate, thinking only of himself, has allowed his physical appearance to deteriorate, no longer even trying to make himself particularly clean, much less attractive to his spouse. Sometimes it is just that the complainer thinks the grass is going to be greener on the other side. They don’t stop to think that maybe the stretch marks came from the bearing of children or that little bit of a belly, no matter how hard you try to hold it in, is just nature’s way of saying you are getting older. Instead of thinking of what a joy it is to go through all of those stages of life together, they think only of the physical things which are not what true love is all about anyway. So often this kind of complaint and problem has its birth in just plain selfishness and a failure to understand Ephesians 5:21.

How many marriages of brethren over the years have been torn asunder by adultery? More than I care to think about. When all of the rationalization has been done and all of the excuses have been given, 99.99% of the time it boils down to selfishness. How can there possibly be unselfish concern for the desires and the wishes of the spouse when adultery is committed? How can the one guilty of such a thing be considering the feelings and the needs of his mate? This is all part and parcel of “submitting one to another,” and the Holy Spirit through Paul used marriage to illustrate how it is supposed to work in Ephsians 5.

I have known of marriages among brethren destroyed because of moral issues. One or the other decides he wants to engage in some activity that is contrary to God’s word. It might be drinking, or gambling, or pornography, or any one of a number of other things that Christians should stay as far away from as possible. When the one spouse refuses to violate God’s law to placate the selfish and unholy desire of the other, trouble comes. But who causes the trouble? Is it the one who refuses to sin or the one who demands his own way, even to the extent of trying to lead his spouse into sin with him? These kinds of things are the result of a failure to apply Ephesians 5:21.

Problems with the discipline of the children? Why is it that some couples refuse to sit down and talk out their differences about how certain parental responsibilities should be handled? Could it be that one or the other is determined that it will be his way or no way? I understand that the man is the head of the family, yet at the same time I recognize that Ephesians 5:21, “Submitting yourselves one to another” also applies to his relationship with his wife: and not just hers to him. The woman was created as a help “meet” for man. That means complementary and compatible in every way. If her opinion isn’t worth anything, than neither is the man’s. When there is genuine submission, real concern for the desires and the wishes of the spouse, these kinds of problems won’t prove to be problems for very long.