Truth Magazine

By Dudley Spears

Earths Most Challenging Mysteries

After I read through this recent release of Baker Book House, I handed it to a public school teacher who has had many years of experience teaching science to elementary school children. Her comment was, “Every parent should have one of these books and read it often to their children.” She also thought it a good book to fill any teachers library shelves.

This is a book dealing with some of the scientific mysteries that are uncovered by students of our universe from time to time. Reginald Daly, the author, is a man that is very well qualified to mix with scientists on questions pertaining to the physical aspects of the universe. He was instructor in physics at the Missouri School of Mines. He also taught mathematics and physics at such colleges and universities as Bradley University, Western Illinois University, University of Grand Rapids, Ely Junior College, Mankato State College, Washington State University and Chico State College.

Daly deals with the seven mysteries listed on the front cover of the book, which are, The Origin of Life, The Cause of the Ice Age, Canyons and River Valleys in the Sea Floor, Six-Mile-Deep Ocean Trenches, The Formation Of Mountains, Fossil Graveyards in Siberia and Marine Fossils on Mountaintops. But these are only general topics that allow the author to delve into literally hundreds of problems that bewilder and confuse many scientists. As stated in the foreword, there are over 60 theories attempting to explain the ice age with no satisfying answer. There are over 25 theories that have been proffered by scientists trying to explain the extinction of the dinosaurs.

Daly begins this book with a negation to the theory of evolution. He strikes at the godless theory by a careful examination of the manner in -which the evolutionists try to patch up their gaps in the ragged theory. By direct quotations from recognized authorities in the scientific world, Daly clearly draws the issue between the creationist and the evolutionist. Then with unassailable logic and rhetoric he shows the failures of those who teach that man evolved out of lower forms of life. Oddly enough, many people think of the “missing link” in terms of some half-man, half-ape sort of being, but Daly shows all the links that evolutionists must produce in order to make their theory acceptable to honest and intelligent people.

This book is not merely a negation. It is a positive affirmation of the credibility of the creationist view. Daly piles historical evidence upon historical evidence to show that the Biblical account of the flood is geologically accurate. He quotes from many sources to show that “the early aborigines of nearly every country of the world have preserved records of the universal flood.” He also shows evidence to validate the Biblical record of the tower of Babel and its connection with the flood. He concludes, “The cumulative evidence furnished by all these records of the flood from so many independent sources serves to establish the flood as a historical fact.” (page 59).

Time and space forbid a detailed review of this book, but just a word should be said about some physical features of the book. For one thing it is a very readable book. Some books are printed with very small type, but this one has print large enough to make it quite easily read. Also, it is a medium length book that does not take too long to read, yet is a large enough book to challenge the serious student. It is very well arranged and documented.

In these days of skepticism and unbelief, every Bible student should take advantage of everything that will help one be qualified to do battle with the forces of atheism and evolution. This book is certainly a must on the list of anyone interested in equipping himself for such a fight. You may order your copy or copies today through our bookstore.

TRUTH MAGAZINE, XVII: 2, p. 2
November 9, 1972

By A.A. Granke, Jr.

The West Hobbs Street church (which apparently is a liberal church) at Athens, Alabama recently received International notoriety when an Associated Press news release was printed under the above title in the Pacific Stars and Stripes, a newspaper for Armed Forces personnel in the Pacific, which is also read by U.S. civilians abroad and by local foreign nationals. According to the article, the West Hobbs Street evangelist was dismissed by the elders because his seventeen-year-old daughter, a high school majorette, publicly wore a bathing suit while competing in the Miss Spirit of America beauty pageant at Decatur, Alabama on July 4th, 1972. The girl, who won the contest and intends to enter competition for the Miss Alabama title, is quoted in a subsequent article as stating, “My father has always endorsed everything that I have done, and he endorsed this. If I had to do it over I would do the same thing.” She said she wanted the title, was proud she got it, and she had no intention of resigning. The minister expressed his belief his daughter had done nothing wrong, adding, “I think the only mistake she made is that she won the contest. A competition circulated throughout the membership of the church was signed by 56 per cent of the 371 members, requesting the elders reconsider the ministers dismissal or resign their oversight. The second article closes, “The next step was uncertain, although some members are talking about starting another church.”

There are several tragedies in this episode. It is unfortunate that early in her life this sister has hardened her heart against the will of the Lord, and will not repent. The scriptures clearly establish the nature of feminine attire. “In like manner, also, that women adorn themselves in modest apparel, with shamefacedness and sobriety; not with broidered hair, or gold, or pearls, or costly array; but (which becomes women professing godliness) with good works” (1 Tim 2:9-10). Hear also Peter, as he discusses the womans adornment: “But let it be the hidden man of the heart, in that which is not corruptible, even the ornament of a meek and quiet spirit, which is in the sight of God of great price” (1 Pet 3:3-4). Who considers a woman attired in a swimsuit to be modestly adorned and exhibiting the chaste meekness and quietness of spirit required of women professing godliness? In her violation of this precept, this sister has also erred by causing lust for her beauty (lust of the eye, 1 Jn. 2:16) in the hearts of her fellow travelers to eternity. Paul declared that “when ye sin so against the brethren and wound their weak conscience, ye sin against Christ” (1 Cor 8: 12). While her example will not encourage non-Christians to turn to Christ, it has succeeded in tearing asunder the church of which she is a member.

The young woman is not solely responsible, however. Rather than endorse everything his daughter has done, the preacher should have brought her up “in the nurture and admonition of the Lord” (Eph 6:41). How can he effectively “preach the word; be instant in season, out of season, reprove, rebuke, exhort with all longsuffering and doctrine” (2 Tim 4:2), and oppose sin in others when lie endorses it among his own family? How can he perform his appointed responsibilities in the care of the church of God when he knows not how to rule his own house and keep his children in subjection with all gravity? 1 Tim 3:4-5 applies not only to the bishops qualifications, but is one of the principles upon every Christian man manifests his maturity in the faith.

To the older women is given the responsibility of teaching them who are younger various aspects of Christian womanhood, among which is named sobriety and chastity (Tit 2:4-5). The youthful child of God may not have given herself to her error, had her mother carefully fulfilled this trust over the years.

Many grave responsibilities are laid upon elders shoulders in the Lords house. Could their attention to some of these matters have made them fail to notice it was their younger sister who was leading the band at Athens High School? While there is nothing necessarily wrong with being a majorette, the position usually implies short skirts and high steps; and investigation to be sure nothing harmful to her spiritual growth was being engaged in, would have been well in order. Perhaps her public clothing styles would have indicated the direction she was heading. When word circulated about the church that she was entering the beauty pageant, well-intending elders should have offered constructive guidance, rather than contribute to her error as one did in taking photographs of the event. He later realized his mistake and repented, but she who won the contest is now swallowed up with pride, and will not repent.

The church is to be blamed for its open rebellion against the elders, and therefore, against God by whom their authority was given. Its support of this error has placed it precariously on the brink of division. Are momentous matters such as this, in which it must be resolved what spiritual food the flock will be fed and by whom this feeding shall be administered, to be decided by a majority vote in which newborn babes in Christ and spiritual weaklings have as much power as seasoned Christians? Or are elders encouraged to exercise their authority and rule well (I Tim 5: 17)? Each bishop is responsible before God for “holding fast the faithful word as he hath been taught, that he may be able by sound doctrine both to exhort and to convince the gainsayers” (Tit. 1: 9). This is the manner in which the flock is to be protected, but it appears the flock has been lured into the den of a grievous wolf. Perhaps he has been tickling their itching ears, until now they will not heed their shepherds warning cries. Although many will probably not return, a few may be spared, but the wounds are deep and the scars will be slow healing.

Each of us needs to examine himself and resolve to do not what others approvingly sanction, but what God has approved. You or I may be the one who can prevent a beloved sister or brother from failing into worldliness, or awaken parents from their apathy, or encourage and support the preaching of sound doctrine, or stop the undermining of the elders authority, the engendering of strife within the church of Christ, and the exposure of our Lord and his house to public reproach. Perhaps we can prevent such an unhappy occurrence, elsewhere.

TRUTH MAGAZINE, XVII: 1, pp. 12-13
November 2, 1972

By Billy W. Moore

“No prophecy of the scripture is of any private interpretation. For the prophecy came not in old time by the will of man: but holy men: God spoke as they were moved by the Holy Ghost.” (2 Peter 1: 20-21). The Old Testament scripture is indeed the inspired word of God. At a time when many misunderstand and misuse the Old Testament, we need to understand the proper use of that scripture. Paul charged Timothy to study to show himself approved unto God … “rightly dividing the word of truth.” (2 Tim. 2:15) We too must rightly divide, or handle aright, the word of truth.

The Old Testament Is Not For

1. Doctrine or Law. It is true that the Old Testament scripture is inspired. It was Gods message to the fathers (Heb. 1: 1-2), but it is not to be used for doctrine today. Some in the apostolic days used parts of the Old Testament to authorize their teaching concerning circumcision. Unto the Gentile men they said, “Except ye be circumcised after the manner of Moses, ye cannot be saved.” (Acts 15: 1) This caused no little stir among brethren. The apostles had a meeting regarding this false teaching and a letter was sent forth unto the Gentiles in Antioch and Syria and Cilicia to correct the teaching. (Acts 15:23-29). These false brethren went into the region of Galatia with their doctrine and Paul rebuked them, and pronounced the condition of those who would be justified by the law: “Christ is become of no effect unto you, whosoever of you are justified by the law; ye are fallen from grace.” (Gal. 5:4)

Today, when men appeal unto the law of Moses to justify a teaching or practice, they declare that they have not learned that the law ended when Christ died on the cross. It had stood as a wall of partition between the Jews and Gentiles, but that wall was broken down when Jesus died on the cross. (Eph.2:12-16). That law had been given unto the People of Israel (Jews) as a schoolmaster to bring them unto Christ that they might be justified by faith. But after that faith is come they were no longer under it schoolmaster. (Gal. 3: 16-25) Thus, the Jews no longer under the Law of Moses, for Christ has become the mediator of a better covenant, which was established upon better promises (Heb. 8:6-13). The Gentiles were never under that law, thus, could not be under it today. Surely we are safe in concluding that the Old Testament is not to be used for doctrine.

2. A Source Of Authority. Moses was the lawgiver -a man of authority. God had chosen him for the job, and he served faithfully. But he was a source of authority only for that dispensation, i.e., for the Jewish age. While Moses was the authority among the people of God, God punished those who would dare to rebel against that authority. (See the punishment of Miriam, the sister of Moses, Numbers 12; and the punishment of Korah, Dathan, Abiram and On, Numbers 10.) But that authority is no longer Moses, for Jesus has all authority in heaven and earth. (Matt. 28: 18)

3. It is not Gods Message to us. It is true that the Old Testament was the message of God unto some men in ages past, but Moses spoke of another prophet whom God would raise up front among his brethren. “And the Lord said unto me. They have well spoken that which they have spoken. I will raise them up a Prophet front among their brethren, like unto thee, and will put my words in his month; and he shall speak unto them all that I shall command him. And it shall come to pass that whosoever will not hearken unto my words which lie shall speak in my name I will require it of him.” (Deut. 18:17-19). Bible students know that Jesus was that Prophet. Just a few months before the death of Christ, at the mount of transfiguration, Moses and Elias (Elijah) appeared and talked with Christ. Peter, James and John witnessed that scene. Peter said, “Lord, it is good for us to be here: if thou wilt, let its make here three tabernacles; one for thee, and one for Moses, and one for Elias.” While he spoke, a bright cloud overshadowed them: and behold a voice out of the cloud, which said, “This is my beloved Son, in whom I am well pleased; hear ye him.” Matt. 17:1-5) The God of heaven and earth declared that men should no longer hear Moses, that great lawgiver, or Elijah, the courageous prophet, but must now hear his Son. It was Peter who proclaimed unto the Jews that Jesus was that prophet of whom Moses spoke in the long ago, and that all must hear him. (See Acts 3:22-23)

Whatever the proper use of the Old Testament may be, it is not for doctrine; it is not the source of authority for Gods people; and it is not Gods message to its. In the balance of this article, and others to follow, we shall note some things for which the Old Testament may be used.

God Will Keep His Promises

One of the great lessons we can learn from the Old Testament is the fact that God will keep his promises. This lesson we need to learn, for as Christians we are the recipients of “exceeding great in precious promises” from God. (2 Peter 1:4). While Peter assures us that “the Lord is not slack concerning his promises, as some men count slackness” (2 Peter 3:9), and the writer of Hebrews declared “he is faithful that promised” (Heb. 10:23), we can learn through Gods dealings with men in ages past that his promises are sure. (It should be remembered that in Old Testament days God was dealing with men in a physical way, whereas, today he deals with us spiritually. We need to learn from Gods dealings with men in a physical sense, when they could see and take hold of his promises fulfilled, that he is faithful to keep his promises, and when he makes a promise regarding our spiritual well-being we can be sure he will keep it.)

When God called Abraham from Ur of the Chaldees he made two great promises unto him: (1) I will make of thee a great nation, and (2) in thee shall all families of the earth be blessed. (Genesis 12: 1 -3) Though Abraham was seventy-five years old, his wife was barren, so he had no sons, yet he was “fully persuaded that, what he had promised, he was able also to perform.” (Rom. 4:21) Over twenty years had passed and Abraham did not have that promised son, the beginning of a great nation. Would God keep his promise? At the age of one hundred years Abraham and Sarah had a son, Isaac. Isaac had twin sons, Esau and Jacob. Jacob became the father of twelve sons, who later were the heads of the twelve tribes of Israel (Jacobs name had been changed unto Israel, Gen. 32:28), and the Israelite nation became the great nation of God in Old Testament times. Truly, God kept his promise unto Abraham. However, you may read the Old Testament from Genesis through Malachi and not one time will you read of God blessing all families of the earth through Abraham, or through his seed. Two thousand years had passed since the promise was made. Would God keep that promise? Then, Jesus was born of the Virgin Mary, a descendant of Abraham. Jesus died for the sins of mankind, and through him all families of the earth are blessed. Remember: it is through Jesus, this promised seed (Gal. 3: 16), that all shall be raised from the dead. When we read of Gods dealings with Abraham and his family after this, we should be impressed with the fact that God keeps his promises.

Abraham had a son by the bondwoman, Hagar (Gen. 16). He thought this was the son God had promised. But God said, “Sarah thy wife shall have a son.” (Gen. 18: 10). Could God keep this promise? Sarah was now old, and it ceased to be with her after the manner of women. Even she thought, “After I am waxed old shall I have pleasure, my lord being old also.” (Gen. 18: 12) But at the appointed time she conceived and brought forth a son, Isaac. Indeed, God had kept his promise.

When God had called Abraham he promised to give unto him a land as an inheritance. By faith Abraham, when he was called to go out into a place which he should after receive for an inheritance, obeyed; and he went out, not knowing whither he went.” (Heb. 11:8). Why did Abraham think he could inherit the land of Canaan? It did not belong to his fathers. Other peoples now possessed it. Yet, he believed it would be his because God had promised it unto him. Some years later when he was in that land God commanded him to “Arise, walk through the land in the length of it and in the breadth of it; for I will give it unto thee.” (Gen. 13: 14-17). On a later date God said, “Unto thy seed have I given this land, from the river of Egypt unto the great river, the river Euphrates.” (Gen. 15:18) On the day God changed Abrams name unto Abraham (which means “Father of a great multitude”), he said, “And I will give unto thee, and to thy seed after thee, the land wherein thou art a stranger, all the land of Canaan.” (Gen. 17:8) Abraham dwelt in that land. Thereafter his seed became bondmen in Egypt, but God heard their cry and remembered the promise he had made unto Abraham, and sent forth Moses to bring them from Egyptian bondage to inherit the promised land. (Exodus 3:7-10) While some, of our generation, deny that this promise has ever been fulfilled, and thus talk about the land promise being fulfilled at some future time, Joshua declared that “the Lord gave unto Israel all the land which he swore to give unto their fathers; and they possessed it, and dwelt therein.” (Joshua 2 1:43) Truly, God kept his promise.

Upon the death of Moses, when Joshua became the leader of Israel, and under Gods instruction led them through the river Jordan on dry ground, the city of Jericho was the first to be conquered by the Israelites. God promised unto Joshua, “See I have given into thine hand Jericho, and the king thereof, and the mighty men of valor.” (Josh. 6:2) Then he instructed Joshua regarding the taking of the city. They followed Gods orders and the city was taken. But before it was taken God has said, “I have given unto thine hand Jericho.” Gods promise was sure.

When Joshua had sent the two spies to spy out the city of Jericho, the officials of the city were after them, and Rahad hid them. Later she asked for her life to be spared when the Israelites came to take Jericho. The promise was made, “When we come into the land, thou shalt bind this line of scarlet thread in the window which thou didst let us down by,” and when the city is taken this house shall be spared. (Josh. 2: 18) God saw to it that this promise was kept. In the destruction of Jericho the two spies went into Rahabs house and brought forth Rahab and her fathers household and all that she had. (Josh. 6:25) Indeed, Gods promises are sure.

On and on we could go with this lesson. Gods promise to Noah to save him from the flood. Gods promise to King Hezekiah to add fifteen years to his life (Isa. 38:1-8). Sometimes the promise of God was not good for man, but still God kept his promise. Unto the first man God said, “Of every tree of the garden thou mayest freely eat: but of the tree of knowledge of good and evil, thou shalt not eat of it: for in the day that thou eatest thereof thou shalt surely die.” (Gen. 2:16-17) When Adam and Eve ate of the fruit of that tree they began to die, for they were cast out of the garden, separated from the tree of life, and from the presence of God. That day they began to die physically, and that day they died spiritually. Gods promise was sure.

There are hundreds of other examples in the Old Testament, which show that the promises of God are sure. When you read and study the Old Testament, be impressed with this lesson. Use these stories to teach others this great truth. Remember: “Whatsoever things were written aforetime were written for our learning, that we through patience and comfort of the scriptures might have hope.” (Rom. 15:4)

Today the Lord says, preach the gospel to every creature, he that believeth and is baptized shall be saved. (Mark 16:15-16) When you believe and are baptized, do not doubt your salvation. The Lord has promised it. Unto us God has promised an inheritance incorruptible, undefiled and that fadeth not away (I Peter 1:4). In this life we live in hope of the fulfillment of that promise. This hope is an “anchor of the soul” (Heb. 6:18), for we know that “he is faithful that promised.” And like Abraham of old we can be “Fully persuaded that, what be had (has) promised, he was (is) able also to perform.” Thus, let us with great confidence look forward to eternal life with God, for he has promised such to all them that love him and serve him faithfully even unto death. From studying the Old Testament let us learn that God will keep his promises.

TRUTH MAGAZINE, XVII: 1, pp. 7-9
November 2, 1972

By Larry Ray Hafley

“The Kind of Baptist I Am”

Our heading is the title of a regular series, which is written by L. D. Foreman and appears monthly in The Baptist World magazine. The section is devoted to various and sundry doctrines and practices of Missionary Baptists. After reviewing a certain aspect of Baptist teaching and tradition and expressing his Baptist views, Editor Foreman invariably with the words, “Thats the kind of Baptist I am.”

There are, it may be, “gods many, and lords many” as Paul said, but now we see there are Methodists many, Presbyterians a-plenty, Lutherans a-lot, and Baptists a-bunch. Like the rest of the above, when Mr. Foreman writes of his “kind” he speaks of a species unknown to the New Testament order. We frequently read of “Christians,” “disciples,” and “children of God,” but never of Baptists, whether of Mr. Foremans variety or any other. When one classifies “the kind of Baptist” or any other “ist,” “ite,” or “ian,” he is, he shows he was not raised in a garden sown with the seed of the New Testament. Could any Bible writer author a column entitled, “The Kind Of Baptist I Am?” Whether Northern, Southern, American, or Missionary, choose which direction or title you will, the apostles and prophets were not Baptists, were not known as Baptists, and tried not to persuade anyone else to be more or less than what they were (Acts 20:28, 29). Should we today presume to be or do more or less than what they were and did along this or any other line?

Is This Mr. Foremans Kind?

The Baptists of Mr. Foremans stripe teaches that baptism is not essential to the remission of sins; that it has nothing whatever to do with the salvation of the soul. “Thats the kind of Baptist” Mr. Foreman and his brethren are. Even if there were such a thing as Baptists in the New Testament, Mr. Foreman and his brethren would not be their kin or “kind.”

The Bible says, “He that believeth and is baptized shall be saved” (Mk. 10: 10). “Repent, and be baptized every one of you in the name of Jesus Christ for the remission of sins” (Acts 2:38). “Arise, and be baptized, and wash away thy sins, calling on the name of the Lord (I Acts 22: 16). “For ye are all the children of God by faith in Christ Jesus. For as many of you as have been baptized into Christ have put on Christ” (Gal. 3: 26, 27). “The like figure whereunto even baptism doth also now save us” (I Pet. 3:21).

Is that the “kind of” doctrine Mr. Foreman and his Baptist brethren teach? No, it is not. Is that the kind of thing they tell penitent believers? No, it is not. But it is the New Testament “kind,” and “Thats the kind of Christian I am.”

TRUTH MAGAZINE, XVII: 1, p. 2
November 2, 1972