Truth Magazine

By Foy Vinson

Karl, the eldest son of Leslie Diestelkamp, recently called and asked if I would write a few things about his father. Having known Leslie for almost forty years and being privileged to be very closely associated with him during the years I spent in the Chicago area in the late fifties and most of the sixties. I am happy and honored to be a part of this tribute to a great and good man.

I first met Leslie in the late summer of 1956 when I was in the Chicago area for meetings in Moms and Elgin. During that three-week stay the first issue of Truth Magazine was printed and prepared for mailing and this began a practice (i.e., the preparation, addressing and mailing of the magazine) of which I was a regular participant after my move to Elgin the following spring. That practice brought several of us together of-ten and it was during this period that I came to be very close to Leslie along with Gordon Pennock and Ray Ferris among others.

Obviously there are many things that could be said about Leslie in an article such as this, but I shall limit myself to three things that especially impressed me about him.

A Man of Conviction

When I first became acquainted with Leslie the brethren in Chicago land were just becoming aware of the issues being raised by institutionalism and the sponsoring church. This awareness was later coming to that area than was the case in most of the southern states. Leslie, having preached in such states as Missouri, Illinois, Wisconsin and Minnesota for many years, was widely known, loved and respected by most of the brethren. However, as the aforementioned controversy became more pronounced and the men who stood opposed to institutionalism and its related errors be-came clearly identified, no man in the area suffered greater loss in terms of friends and approving brethren than did Leslie Diestelkamp because he had so many to lose! Yet in all of this he never wavered, even though he suffered a deep hurt as did all of us who similarly experienced such losses. Indeed, throughout his life he always exhibited a strong conviction for the truth of God. I believe his only thought in arriving at any conclusion relative to the word of God was simply this: “What does the Bible teach?” or “For what do we have authority in the New Testament?” And as a man of such deep conviction he has left an example worthy of imitation on the part of everyone who professes to be a follower of Christ, be he a preacher or not.

A Man of Zeal

Paul described Christians as the Lord’s “own special people, zealous for good works” (Tit.2:14). Leslie was certainly numbered among such because he always exuded an enthusiasm and zeal for the Lord’s cause that was a joy to be around. The first time I ever heard him speak was at the Abilene Lectures in the mid-fifties. This was before I actually met him, but I remember hearing him as he spoke on one of his favorite themes, evangelism. I have always remembered his closing remarks as he exhorted brethren to a greater effort. He said, “If you can push, push; if you can pull, pull; and if you can’t do either one, get out of the way!” Those words express graphically the zeal and positive attitude of the man I came to know and to appreciate. He not only preached zeal, but he lived it. He spent all of his years in the “mission field,” often in very difficult places and where the saints were few. He even spent some years in far away Nigeria and promoted the cause there until the end of his days. The church of which I am a member has supported a faithful Nigerian preacher for many years because he was known and recommended by Leslie. Truly he was “zealous in a good thing always” (Gal.4:18), and the apostle A Sad Thing, continued from front cover said that “is

A Man of Good Will

One other quality that stands out in my remembrance of Leslie was his good attitude in the midst of any kind of circumstance. As I mentioned earlier, during the controversy over institutionalism wherein he had many past friends to turn against him and often misrepresent him, and this during a time when I was very closely associated with him, he never succumbed to bitterness or rancor. In reading back over those early issues of Truth Magazine I noticed that well after many liberal brethren had cut him off, he was still mentioning many of them in his news briefs and keeping up with their activities.

I have observed in the past that “the issues” in the fifties and sixties never became as inflammatory or bitter as was true in the southern states. Having close family and close friends in the south, as well as reading the various papers written by brethren, I was well aware of the situation there. However, it is my view that attitudes never were as bad in the Chicago area and I attribute that in no small part to the good will and loving attitude of Leslie. I know that some brethren almost equate a “loving attitude” with softness or compromise, but we have already touched on the matter of conviction, and believe me Leslie was not lacking in that. However, he realized that there is no incompatibility between speaking the truth and at the same time being characterized by love and good will (Eph. 4:15). He truly loved even his enemies.

Outside of my own family, there is no man whom I have respected more or has had a greater influence on my life than Lesllie Diestelkamp. He was truly one of my heroes, and I shall miss him here, but I don’t expect to miss him over there! Thank You, Lord, for his good life.

Guardian of Truth XXXIX: No. 23, p. 20-21
December 7, 1995

By Karl Diestelkamp

Preaching the gospel is what Leslie Diestelkamp did. It was not a “job” or a “profession,” but a labor of love in service of the Lord and Savior to whom he had given his life and soul in 1925. Early memories are of Dad farming  and preaching; working in construction at Ft. Leonard Wood, Missouri  and preaching at the Fort, in CCC camps and at Waynesville and Rolla, Missouri; working in factories in St. Louis and Green Bay, Wisconsin  and preaching; moving a lot, or so it seemed to this boy, never because we “had to,” but  to preach where there was a special challenge or need. Later we would find ourselves standing in a railroad station watching Dad, Mom and “little Roy” leave on the first leg of the first two-year stay in Nigeria, West Africa  to preach to those great people in that great and fruitful land. Much later, after Mom died, we would see him off at the airport as he left for two years in Australia  to preach wherever he could, “down under.” Then it was meeting him at the airport following his two month stay in the Philippines and finding him almost unable to walk due to the effects of malaria, amebic dysentery, malnutrition, dehydration and exhaustion, requiring twelve days treatment in the hospital be-cause he had been preaching and “living with the brethren.” Yes, he always seemed to be going some-where to preach, but that is what he understood Mark 16:15 said preachers should do, and he was a preacher, so that is what Leslie Diestelkamp did.

In the last 41 years many people heard my Dad preach much more than did most of us in the family, for we were in scattered places and some of us were also preaching. He encouraged many men to preach whenever, wherever and however they could but he never pressured. When I wasyoung, people would ask Dad, in front of me, “Is Karl going to preach when he grows up?” Dad’s answer was, “My boys can do anything they want to do as long as it is an honest occupation.” No pressure, but once a decision was made to do so, he was a great source of strength, help, and counsel. To him, the greatest work a man could do was to preach the gospel to save lost souls so he tried to help those who demonstrated faith, ability, desire, and moral character to do what they could. He urged men to “go” even if they had to support themselves and he challenged churches to “send,” re-minding them that the church was in the”spending” business and not the “saving and storing up” business. He was truly disappointed that many churches, with much money in bank accounts, would not respond to worthy appeals. His usual approach was to put emphasis on “world” evangelism, reminding his brethren that “the field is the world,”and while some-one needs to go others also need to send. He would tell churches of the real opportunity they had “to have a part” in this great work and assure them that the local church would tremendously benefit once they got involved, scripturally supporting de-serving preachers, in some other part of the “field.” Response was usually generous and, taking no credit him-self, he would say, “My brethren are the greatest.”

I do not know of anyone who ever questioned Dad’s moral integrity. In the family we never doubted that he would try to do what was right, regardless of what it was. When he made mistakes he was eager to make things right. He loved preachers and loved to be among them to learn from them and to share the experiences, excitement, and satisfaction of seeing souls saved and churches growing. But Dad was always deeply grieved to hear of some Christian who had been overtaken in doctrinal error, indifference or immorality, and that motivated him to write articles and letters of warning and gentle admonition to benefit everyone. He was alarmed at the number of preachers who were unfaithful to their wives and lamented not only the sin, but also the wide damage done to the cause of Christ. He begged such brethren to repent for the sake of their own souls even if they would never “preach” again. He regularly taught that a preacher should not study with (or do anything else with) a woman without his own wife or a reliable man also present. He said it was “precaution against rumor and false accusation, to say the very least, and possibly a deterrent to temptation, sin, scandal, destroyed homes, and the loss of souls, at the worst.”

Leslie Diestelkamp was blessed with a clear voice that carried well outdoors as well as in most meeting houses. His message was always serious, but delivered with a smile and through the years he suggested to several preachers that they needed to learn to smile  after all, preaching the gospel was a joyful opportunity. In the last several years his voice was substantially weakened with age and doctors told him that his vocal cords were virtually worn out. When Dad’s hearing began failing, he was especially frustrated when a speaker would drop his voice so he could not hear. I suggested that perhaps some men did this for “effect.” He said, “The `effect’ is that people did not hear him! A preacher’s first responsibility is to be heard. If people can not hear him or understand him, it matters little whether he has the truth or not.” If there was a meeting in reasonable driving distance he would be there to hear and any preacher would have his undivided attention. When we were going through the suit he would be buried in, we found some business cards with his name and address on them, some tracts he had written including one titled, “Advice For Beginners,” and a meeting announcement from a nearby congregation  that is all  just what we would expect to find.

In speaking and writing, Dad was not known for lofty oratory, profound vocabulary or “deep, scholarly” presentations, though he was personally “deeper” than some imagined. His preaching was clear, plain, straight to the point, and liberally punctuated with illustrations that helped nail down the point he was making. He would say, “Illustrations should illustrate, not just take up time and space.” His goal was to present lessons everyone could understand. Writing of his own early preaching efforts he said, “I learned to preach a little by studying my Bible a whole lot, and finally launched out to take the gospel to as much of the world as one man could do.” He expressed concern that it seemed that some men were “studying a lot of books about the Bible, while not studying the Bible much at all.” He had no use for what he termed “sermonizing” where little or no Scripture was used and where no applications were made. A preacher’s task was to “preach the word” and get the truth across with clarity.

One of the great joys of my life was to accompany him to his beloved Nigeria in January 1985. His voice problems caused him to promise he would not preach more than twice a day  a definite frustration. In spite of that limitation he could not preach at all the last few days of the month we were there. It was thrilling to see him reunited with so many faithful brethren he had known for so many years and to see their genuine appreciation of their old teacher. On several occasions someone would approach him and say something like, “You will not remember me, but I was baptized after hearing you preach on the streets of Lagos in 1959 (or some other year). Thank you for coming then.” One preacher who was taught by another man Dad had taught said to me, “I am appalled to think where we would be in western Nigeria if brother Diestelkamp had not come to our country when he did. I would not be a Christian, because there would not have been anyone to teach my own teacher. I thank God.” Certainly his labor in Nigeria was his most fruitful work. In two tours of service, totaling three and one-half years, 17 churches were established and over 1300 people were baptized. He had spent four fruitful months in the east and then moved to Lagos to pioneer work in the large cities and small towns in the west and midwest. Four strong Nigerian preachers went with him to the work: E. Ekanem and D.D. Isong Uyo (both now dead), E.J. Ebong and Solomon Etuk. Upon learning of the death of Dad, E. J. Ebong, now a veteran preacher himself, wrote our family: “. . . Thank God that you had a godly father who brought all of you up in a godly way . . . That gallant soldier in the forefront of the army of Christ, who arrived Nigeria June 30, 1959… had done marvelous work among us. Through him, thousands are led out of error of which I am one also today in the fore-front battle. I thank God that I worked with him and had many things to learn from his life. May his precious soul rest in peace.” Many, many of the faithful in poverty-stricken and politically oppressed Nigeria will mourn their loss of a true brother and friend and rejoice that he has departed “to be with Christ; which is far better” (Phil. 1:23).

I am certain that Dad’s message to all his friends and brethren would be, “Preach the word!” He is missed al-ready, but he would want others to “fill the gap” left by his death and carry on the fight for truth with zeal and purity.

Guardian of Truth XXXIX: No. 23, p. 12-13
December 7, 1995

By David A. Girar

“You know, I never thought of that,” he said … I was a new Christian back in 1974, when a man who had been preaching for some 40 years was in our home for dinner. I had been commenting on some scripture (I don’t even re-member which one). His reply impressed me with the realization that a study of God’s word is a lifelong journey. Also, the preacher impressed me with his humility and willingness to encourage and build up another Christian.

“He will live on in the influence he had on others”, some-one said … It was September 14, 1995, and I was at the funeral of a gospel preacher who had just died at the age of 83. The funeral home was full with family, preachers and other brethren from many states, and at least three other countries. More than 330 people attended the visitation and emorial service. We were there to remember the life of Leslie Diestelkamp, the same man who had been in our home 21 years before, and had made such an impression on me; the same man who had such a profound influence on my life in so many ways, not only in person, but through the teaching and association of his sons and grandsons, daughters and granddaughters. Most of them were there, his extended family, his wife Myrtle, and so many of his friends (their minds I am sure occupied with the same thoughts as mine). Leslie’s body was there, but he had finally gone to his reward. He is now among the “great cloud of witnesses, (Heb. 11:1) and his influence was evident in the words of so many who spoke that evening in Aurora, Illinois, and the next evening in Saint James, Missouri. The atmosphere was one of joy and thanksgiving. The talk was not of grief and hopelessness, but of hope and comfort and peace. We were not there to praise a man, but to praise God!

The memorial service in Aurora, Illinois began with the obituary read by Al Diestelkarnp, followed by remarks and a prayer by Bob Leigh, an elder for the church in Aurora, Illinois, where Leslie and Myrtle were members. Four grandsons, Rob Speer, Kyle Speer, David Diestelkamp, and Andy Diestelkamp then spoke followed by Robert Speer, Leslie’s son-in-law, and Karl Diestelkamp. Roy Diestelkamp then preached a sermon titled “It Is Worth-while To Be A Christian,” one of his dad’s sermons. It was fitting that the sermon preached would be one exhorting people to obey the Lord; Leslie’s life was dedicated to just that cause. The closing prayer was led by Ray Ferris, gospel preacher in Lockport, Illinois and a cousin of Leslie’s.

The memorial service in Saint James, Missouri was at-tended by close to 200 people. Once again the obituary was read by Al Diestelkamp. A prayer was led by David Girardot, after which David Diestelkamp spoke, on behalf of all the grandchildren. Then Roy Diestelkamp spoke of his dad Leslie’s rich prayer life. In one of the most moving moments of the day, Roy said that the thing that he would miss most is that his dad would never pray for him again. The sermon preached by Karl Diestelkamp was another lesson directed at the living, exhorting them to faithful service to God. A final prayer was led by Raymond Breuer, a cousin of Leslie’s. Congregational singing was led at both services by grandson-in-law Alan Lindsey. Songs were: Have Thine Own Way; Amazing Grace; The Solid Rock; and The Gospel Is For All.

A short grave side service was conducted the following morning at the Oak Grove cemetery. Pallbearers were five grandsons Kyle and Rob Speer, Andy, David and Duane Diestelkamp and Leslie’s cousin Ray Ferris. The body was laid to rest in the very grove of oaks where he had confessed faith in Christ so long ago and near the graves of so many loved ones and brethren who had had so much influence on his life.

The memorial services were some of the most moving experiences of my life. The meaning of the following verses were brought vividly in focus: Ecclesiastes 7:1-4 “A good name (is) better than precious ointment; and the day of death than the day of one’s birth. (It is) better to go to the house of mourning, than to go to the house of feasting: for that (is) the end of all men; and the living will lay (it) to his heart. Sorrow (is) better than laughter: for by the sadness of the countenance the heart is made better. The heart of the wise (is) in the house of mourning; but the heart of fools (is) in the house of mirth.” As I listened to Leslie’s children, grandchildren, and friends, I thought of my own four daughters, my sons-in law and grand-children. What kind of an influence was Ion them, would they stand at my grave site and glorify God, would they remember my concern for the lost, and follow my example as I followed Christ? May God allow me time on this earth to spread the Gospel at home and around the world as this faithful soldier of God had done!

Truly, it can be said of Leslie Diestelkamp: Hebrews 11:4 “… he being dead yet speaketh. “

Guardian of Truth XXXIX: No. 23, p. 22
December 7, 1995

By Harry R. Osborne

In the previous article, we noted that God spoke though the prophet Isaiah of his power to show man about events to come. God used this power as a proof of his existence and his guidance of Bible writers. The prophecies are of such a detailed nature and so contrary to the probability of fulfillment in many cases that they cannot be explained as merely an example of human insight. Today, we will continue with further instances of fulfilled prophecies regarding the nations.

Tyre

The case of Tyre is a good example. In Ezekiel 26, several prophecies are made regarding this ancient city. It is said that Nebuchadnezzar would defeat the city, but also said that many nations would come against it (vv. 3, 8). The degree of its destruction is made clear when it is said that the city would be made like “a bare rock,” a place for fishermen to spread their nets, and its stones and timbers would be thrown into the water. This was said between 592 and 570 B.C.

When Nebuchadnezzar defeated the city of Tyre in 573 B.C., he killed a number of the inhabitants, but found that the majority of the people had fled on ship to an island just off the coast. For more than 200 years, the inhabitants of Tyre returned to the site of the mainland city in an effort to restore it and make it their habitation. Each time an enemy would come against them and they would be forced to re-turn to the safety of their island city.

In 332 B.C., Alexander the Great demanded the citizens of Tyre to submit to him, but they refused. When the people of Tyre fled to the island fortress as they had done to escape other enemies, Alexander determined to overthrow the is-land city as well. To accomplish that end, he made a causeway from the mainland to the island city. The material for that causeway came in part from throwing the materials which made up the mainland city into the sea, leaving it bare.

Historical accounts of Alexander’s conquest of Tyre tell us that his seven month Beige of the city ended when his forces succeeded in reaching the island fortress and batter-ing its walls down. Over 8,000 of the inhabitants of Tyre were killed by Alexander’s armies and some 30,000 of the citizens of that city were sold into slavery. Though a few later attempts were made to restore the city, the site was finally abandoned and left desolate.

Today, the modern city of Tyre is built down the coast from the ancient site. Upon the original site, no city exists despite the fact that ample water is present from a spring which could supply the needs of a large modern city. In-stead, that ancient site is a place of bare rock where fishermen daily spread their nets for mending. Notice the words of the prophecy stated over 2500 years ago and its stunning fulfillment even to this day:

And I will make you a bare rock; you will be a place for the spreading of nets. You will be built no more, for I the Lord have spoken, declares the Lord God (Ezek. 26:14).

Though it may have been relatively safe to predict that Nebuchadnezzar would defeat Tyre, how could the prophet have foreseen in such detail the things that would happen hundreds of years in the future? How could the prophet have known that his predictions would still be a correct representation of the situation over 2500 years later? What are the odds of such?

Sidon

Peter Stoner in Science Speaks estimated those odds at one in 75,000,000 by verified calculations. When Ezekiel spoke, Tyre was a major center for merchandising due to her chief place among seafarers in ancient times. When he spoke of the defeat of Sidon in Ezekiel 28, he did not say Sidon would never be built again. How could the prophet have foreseen by mere human ability that the lesser city would not be totally destroyed in defeat, yet correctly predict that the greater city would never be rebuilt? Human wisdom would reverse the two. The facts suggest the great probability that something beyond mere chance is needed to explain these predictions. If God was behind such as the prophets claimed, a rational answer is seen. When one admits that God so inspired the writers of the Bible, one must see that the message of that Bible in all things must be the instruction of an omnipotent and omniscient God, not the words of mere men.

The prophecies made by Bible writers regarding ancient Nineveh and Babylon are amazing in large part due to the time in which those prophecies were made. The destruction of each city was predicted, not after the powers had begun to fall apart, but at the height of power. The specific details given in the prophecies make a powerful case for their ultimate author being more than a mere man with human insight.

Nineveh

Less than 50 years before the destruction of Nineveh in 612 BC, the Bible prophet Nahum predicted its downfall. At that time, Nineveh was the capital of the Assyrian kingdom, the dominant power. Nineveh was more heavily fortified than any ancient city to that point in history. It had walls 100 feet tall and 50 feet thick. Three chariots could ride abreast on the walls. Its towers were 200 feet tall. A moat 150 feet wide circled the seven miles around the city.

Though it seemed an impregnable fortress, Nahum said that the city would be totally destroyed and never rebuilt (3:19). The prophet added that it would be taken during a state of drunkenness (1:10), that the city would be flooded (1:8; 2:6) and that it would be burned (3:13). All of these predictions were fulfilled in the conquest.

The seemingly impenetrable walls were weakened by a flood in the rainy season causing a collapse of one section during 612 BC. The Assyrians, however, were so confident in their ability to defeat any attackers that they became lax. During a siege of the city that had only been in progress for three months, the Assyrians had a drunken feast. The con-federated armies of the Chaldeans and Medes under Arbaces found out about the feast and attacked through the breach in the wall. During the conquest of the city, Nineveh was devastated by fire. Such a mighty fortress falling after a siege of only three months was unparalleled. For instance, Ashdod was a far smaller and less fortified city. But it took Psammetichus 29 years of siege to take that city.

How could Nahum know that such a strong city would fall with relative ease in the height of its power? How could he know it would happen due to a flood and the drunkenness of its defenders? How could he correctly predict that such a fortress would never be rebuilt?

Babylon

Much the same thing is seen in the prophecies regarding Babylon. Isaiah and Jeremiah both have much to say about the destruction of Babylon. Isaiah wrote about 100 years before Babylon became the dominant power. Jeremiah wrote during the peak of Babylon’s reign as the leading power. Both predict with amazing accuracy the fate of this powerful city. Isaiah foretold the fact that it would come to belike Sodom and Gomorrah (13:19). He said it would never again be inhabited, nor would the Arab even pitch his tent or feed his sheep there (13:20). Instead, it was predicted to be a place for desert creatures to dwell (13:21) and a place covered with swamps of water (14:23). Jeremiah said that its stones would not be removed for other building projects (51:26), but that it would be as “heaps” (51:37).

These prophecies were made even though Babylon was fortified beyond Nineveh. Babylon’s walls enclosed a 196 square mile city including vast acreage for food supplies. Each side was 14 miles long. The outer walls were 311 feet high with 250 watchtowers 100 feet above the outer walls. The walls were 87 feet thick  wide enough for eight chariots to ride abreast on top. It had 100 gates of solid brass. Such massive fortifications, however, did not help Babylon when the Medo-Persian invaders diverted the river flowing through its walls and conquered the city while the Babylonians were involved in a drunken feast to one of their gods as the book of Daniel records.

So complete was the devastation of Babylon that it was left in ruins and eventually became uninhabited. Through the years, one part of the ancient city became a harbor for desert animals while another part became a swamp area due to the effects of the continually shifting river. Though many building projects took place around Babylon, its materials were not used to build any of them. The old city now lies under tons of silt about 54 miles outside of modern Baghdad.

The prophecies of the Bible regarding these cities came true with 100% accuracy despite the fact that many of the prophecies were totally contrary to what a rational person would have predicted at the time. The accuracy of the prophets cannot be explained by human insight or luck. The odds of the predictions about Babylon alone coming true by chance have been calculated by Stoner as one in 5,000,000,000! Think about the odds of all Bible prophecies concerning all ancient events coming true without fail. Reason and probability suggest that God must be behind the Bible.

(For further documentation see Evidence That Demands A Verdict by Josh McDowell)

Guardian of Truth XXXIX: No. 23, p. 8-9
December 7, 1995