1Corinthians 13:1-13 comments: Charity

13:1 ¶  Though I speak with the tongues of men and of angels, and have not charity, I am become as sounding brass, or a tinkling cymbal. 2  And though I have the gift of prophecy, and understand all mysteries, and all knowledge; and though I have all faith, so that I could remove mountains, and have not charity, I am nothing. 3  And though I bestow all my goods to feed the poor, and though I give my body to be burned, and have not charity, it profiteth me nothing.

Charity, the love a Christian should have for their brothers and sisters in Christ, is the highest level of gift, more important than speaking in other languages, discerning spirits, or any other ministry. As Peter wrote;

1Peter 4:8  And above all things have fervent charity among yourselves: for charity shall cover the multitude of sins.

Remember this verse in Proverbs;

Proverbs 10:12  Hatred stirreth up strifes: but love covereth all sins.

2Peter 1:1 ¶  Simon Peter, a servant and an apostle of Jesus Christ, to them that have obtained like precious faith with us through the righteousness of God and our Saviour Jesus Christ: 2  Grace and peace be multiplied unto you through the knowledge of God, and of Jesus our Lord, 3  According as his divine power hath given unto us all things that pertain unto life and godliness, through the knowledge of him that hath called us to glory and virtue: 4  Whereby are given unto us exceeding great and precious promises: that by these ye might be partakers of the divine nature, having escaped the corruption that is in the world through lust.

    5 ¶  And beside this, giving all diligence, add to your faith virtue; and to virtue knowledge; 6  And to knowledge temperance; and to temperance patience; and to patience godliness; 7  And to godliness brotherly kindness; and to brotherly kindness charity. 8  For if these things be in you, and abound, they make you that ye shall neither be barren nor unfruitful in the knowledge of our Lord Jesus Christ. 9  But he that lacketh these things is blind, and cannot see afar off, and hath forgotten that he was purged from his old sins. 10  Wherefore the rather, brethren, give diligence to make your calling and election sure: for if ye do these things, ye shall never fall: 11  For so an entrance shall be ministered unto you abundantly into the everlasting kingdom of our Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ.

Paul wrote that this love for the brethren makes us complete or perfect.

Colossians 3:12 ¶  Put on therefore, as the elect of God, holy and beloved, bowels of mercies, kindness, humbleness of mind, meekness, longsuffering; 13  Forbearing one another, and forgiving one another, if any man have a quarrel against any: even as Christ forgave you, so also do ye. 14  And above all these things put on charity, which is the bond of perfectness. 15  And let the peace of God rule in your hearts, to the which also ye are called in one body; and be ye thankful. 16  Let the word of Christ dwell in you richly in all wisdom; teaching and admonishing one another in psalms and hymns and spiritual songs, singing with grace in your hearts to the Lord. 17  And whatsoever ye do in word or deed, do all in the name of the Lord Jesus, giving thanks to God and the Father by him.

Jesus Christ Himself said this;

John 13:34  A new commandment I give unto you, That ye love one another; as I have loved you, that ye also love one another.35  By this shall all men know that ye are my disciples, if ye have love one to another.

Considering how we know many of us to be; our personalities, fears, prejudices, personal baggage, etc. this is the single most difficult thing for a Christian to express toward other Christians. It cannot be expressed consistently without the fruit of the Spirit permeating our lives, as evidence of the Holy Spirit’s indwelling.

Galatians 5:22  But the fruit of the Spirit is love, joy, peace, longsuffering, gentleness, goodness, faith, 23  Meekness, temperance: against such there is no law. 24  And they that are Christ’s have crucified the flesh with the affections and lusts. 25  If we live in the Spirit, let us also walk in the Spirit. 26  Let us not be desirous of vain glory, provoking one another, envying one another.

 

Charity is greater than faith, greater than what we normally call charity, giving to those in need, and greater than martyrdom. This is a powerful statement. If a Christian does not have a love for their brothers and sisters in Christ, no matter what their works or devoted deeds for Christ on this earth, they will stand naked before Him in a spiritual sense.

1John 4:20  If a man say, I love God, and hateth his brother, he is a liar: for he that loveth not his brother whom he hath seen, how can he love God whom he hath not seen? 21  And this commandment have we from him, That he who loveth God love his brother also.

Considering how Christians can be a backstabbing lot and how churches can have dominating people vying to see who can control others in them this is a tough, tough mandate. Paul is next going to define the nature of Christian love.

    13:4 ¶  Charity suffereth long, and is kind; charity envieth not; charity vaunteth not itself, is not puffed up, 5  Doth not behave itself unseemly, seeketh not her own, is not easily provoked, thinketh no evil; 6  Rejoiceth not in iniquity, but rejoiceth in the truth; 7 Beareth all things, believeth all things, hopeth all things, endureth all things.

For Christians to love each other as Christ loves the church they need to consider what Paul is saying here. Our love is to be longsuffering and kind. It puts up with a lot but is kind and gracious in return.

Think of how God has been longsuffering toward you and how kind He has been to you in spite of your sin against Him each day.

It does not envy, the affection that makes people grieve and fret at the prosperity or success of others. Envy was murderous in this culture in ancient history.

Proverbs 27:4  Wrath is cruel, and anger is outrageous; but who is able to stand before envy?

It made the high priests jealous of the influence Jesus had and the love the people had for Him.

Mark 15:9  But Pilate answered them, saying, Will ye that I release unto you the King of the Jews? 10  For he knew that the chief priests had delivered him for envy.

Charity does not encourage a person to lift themselves up.

1Peter 5:6  Humble yourselves therefore under the mighty hand of God, that he may exalt you in due time:

Matthew 23:10  Neither be ye called masters: for one is your Master, even Christ. 11  But he that is greatest among you shall be your servant. 12  And whosoever shall exalt himself shall be abased; and he that shall humble himself shall be exalted.

Charity will not permit you act unseemly, to be possessed of a vile, immoral affection toward another. Charity also doesn’t permit you to, “look out for number one,” or to go after just what you want.

Charity looks out for others, not just ourselves.

Philippians 2:4  Look not every man on his own things, but every man also on the things of others.

Charity is not easily provoked and doesn’t always think the worst of someone and their motives. In fact, the implacable spirit of many Christians is not pleasing to God. For some, everyone has an evil, or malicious, motive in their words and deeds from their pastor to their spouse to their family members to their employer and they are never happy with the efforts of others. In fact, an implacable, unmerciful spirit is a key component to being a miserable, joyless Christian. An implacable spirit is easily provoked and questions everyone’s motives, assuming the worst from them at all times.

In verse 6 iniquity is contrasted with truth as opposites. Iniquity is defined Biblically as transgression against God and sin. Notice how in the following verse from Exodus the word and joins things as synonyms as it often does in the Bible.

Exodus 34:7a  Keeping mercy for thousands, forgiving iniquity and transgression and sin, and that will by no means clear the guilty…

Notice also elsewhere how truth is linked with Christ.

John 1:17  For the law was given by Moses, but grace and truth came by Jesus Christ.

John 14:6  Jesus saith unto him, I am the way, the truth, and the life: no man cometh unto the Father, but by me.

Ephesians 4:21  If so be that ye have heard him, and have been taught by him, as the truth is in Jesus:

Notice also how, in another of the Bible’s ways of presenting truth the word substitution between an Old Testament verse and the New Testament rendering of it giving the meaning in context of the words.

Isaiah 42:3  A bruised reed shall he not break, and the smoking flax shall he not quench: he shall bring forth judgment unto truth.

Matthew 12:20  A bruised reed shall he not break, and smoking flax shall he not quench, till he send forth judgment unto victory.

1Corinthians 15:57  But thanks be to God, which giveth us the victory through our Lord Jesus Christ.

Charity between brothers and sisters in Christ is to be patient, putting up with a lot, not doubting the intentions or motives or words of others, hoping for the best, but enduring the worst, in love.

1Corinthians 6:7  Now therefore there is utterly a fault among you, because ye go to law one with another. Why do ye not rather take wrong? why do ye not rather suffer yourselves to be defrauded?

   13: 8 ¶  Charity never faileth: but whether there be prophecies, they shall fail; whether there be tongues, they shall cease; whether there be knowledge, it shall vanish away. 9  For we know in part, and we prophesy in part. 10  But when that which is perfect is come, then that which is in part shall be done away. 11  When I was a child, I spake as a child, I understood as a child, I thought as a child: but when I became a man, I put away childish

things. 12  For now we see through a glass, darkly; but then face to face: now I know in part; but then shall I know even as also I am known. 13  And now abideth faith, hope, charity, these three; but the greatest of these is charity.

  

True Christian charity will not give up, will endure, as God’s love for us endures. Prophecies will come up short, gifts unique to the time of the Apostles will fail, and presumed knowledge will vanish like a puff of smoke. The gifts we have are unique to us and not complete and perfect. We are all frail beings who know Christ only imperfectly on this earth, in this life. Loving your brothers and sisters in Christ, next to loving God Himself and showing your love for God, Charity is the highest most complete expression of the Christian faith.

We see Christ now through a glass that is dim and we can’t make out all of His features. Our finite existence and flesh distort our view. But, soon, we will see Christ face-to-face and know Him as He knows us.

There are three things to consider here but charity outshines them all in the doctrine of Christ. It is often the hardest of the three. There are abusers in a congregation, socially dominant men and women, sometimes narcissistic sociopaths, control-freaks, people possessed of an implacable spirit and a self-righteous nature. It is not always easy to love Christians. It is a gift from God to be able to do so.

Are You are Rebel or a Remnant? - sermon notes - part one of three

            The Bible is the word of God, the written word of God. It is absolutely essential to our sanctification, being set apart for God’s purpose. Its importance cannot be overestimated. But, what is a Bible? Is it a New American Standard Version? A New King James Version? The King James Version? After all, each of them say different things at key points and each of them are translated from different manuscripts with in some cases only slight variations and in others extreme changes.

I believe that the Authorized Version of the Bible, the King James Version, is the preserved word of God and the last of what can truly be called an authentic Bible. If you read it over and over, and I am on my 63^rd reading of it, God will use His words to change your heart and mind, not only answering your prayers but giving you a greater understanding of His purpose in your life. This book is my final authority in all matters of faith, practice, and doctrine and that most, if not all, modern Bibles are perversions of God’s word made possible by Satan who, from the beginning, has caused mankind to question what God said. Those of us who still hold to the King James Bible as God’s word in English, or any other language for that matter, are often derided by modern evangelicals as being reactionary and ignorant. Some of your brothers and sisters in Christ might even call you a rebel, and not in a very complimentary way, if they are not mocking your refusal to go along. But, are you are rebel or are you really a remnant, holding on to the faith of your spiritual forebears with regard to God’s words? This series is going to contain some historical information that might seem dry to you but I hope you will pay attention so you know some of the background of why you believed what you believed about the Bible. Take your time and try to understand what you can. It will be helpful for you to know from whence you came in regards to the question of “What is the Bible?”

            This session we’re going to lay a foundation and get some background on the people and events that led us to where we are. It may seem a bit dry for you but please bear with me. I think this information and this appraisal is important.

A movement began among Independent Baptist churches in 1964 that regarded the King James Bible as the very word of God in print, with all other modern translations being counterfeits and frauds. The founder of the movement, and for decades its most outspoken proponent was Dr. Peter S. Ruckman of the Bible Baptist Church in Pensacola, Florida. Dr. Ruckman fired the first salvo in the movement with a book published by his church’s bookstore entitled, Bible Babel. This book was the beginning of a movement that split many Independent Baptist churches apart and struck at the heart of fundamentalism in America. First published in 1964, the book was reprinted in 1981, revised in 1987, and reprinted again in 1994. There are at present approximately one thousand, five hundred congregations in the U.S. and abroad that hold the King James Bible to be their infallible guide in all matters of faith, practice, and doctrine.[1] The central themes of the King James-only Movement are that the King James Bible (KJB), also known as the King James Version (KJV) or the Authorized Version (AV), was inspired by God (or in that Bible’s expression, “given by inspiration”), no less than the original autographs, or is God’s word providentially preserved in English, at the very least, with any Bible translated after 1611 an unreliable substitute or counterfeit.[2] If you believe this there are many Christians who will insist you are being rebellious and are nothing but a divider, working against the gospel of Christ and, in fact, are somewhat of an embarrassment to mainstream evangelicals. But, are you a rebel or are you simply, and more importantly, a remnant, someone standing on the faithfulness of past generations who were responsible for the greatest movement of evangelism since the first century on the truth of the Bible?

            Dr. Ruckman began in his, “Introduction,” to Bible Babel an attack on noteworthy fundamentalists who upheld modern Bibles based on the Westcott and Hort Greek text that resulted from the Anglican revision of the AV completed in 1881. His diatribe against prestigious fundamentalist schools such as Bob Jones University, Tennessee Temple, and Hyles-Anderson was written, not in a scholarly fashion, but in a manner designed to appeal to and be understood by the average church-going Independent Baptist. The central focus of Ruckman’s books was his anger at traditional fundamentalism’s perceived contempt for the Bible whose authority he accepted without question.

            Let’s talk a little about the beginnings of American fundamentalism. In the late 1800s, a series of meetings of conservative Protestant Christians in America began, some of which, being held at Niagara, New York, resulted in them being referred to as the Niagara Conference. The clergy and laymen that attended these meetings are referred to as, “the founding fathers of fundamentalism.”[3] The label, “fundamentalists,” was not coined until 1920 to describe conservative Protestants of varying denominations who were actively militant in defending the basics of what they perceived was orthodox Christian belief.[4]  The term came from a series of essays published in the first decade of the twentieth century as The Fundamentals,  provided free to the Christian public.[5] Noteworthy evangelical R.A. Torrey figured prominently among the authors.

            Fundamentalists rose to national prominence in their involvement in a judicial proceeding in the mid-1920s that is popularly known as, “The Scopes Monkey Trial,” over the teaching of evolution in the public schools. Although it was a legal win for those opposed to evolution being taught, the resultant negative publicity drove fundamentalists further from mainstream America. It resulted in the development of fundamentalist universities such as Bob Jones University, whose faithfulness to the critical text of Westcott and Hort and the inerrancy of the unseen original autographs figured prominently in the origins of the King James-only movement.[6] After the 1920s, fundamentalism ceased to be a powerful political movement and retreated from engagement with the majority of the public who did not share its views. By the 1960s virtually all fundamentalist churches were Baptist.[7]  The movement rose to prominence again in the 1970s with Jerry Falwell’s, “Moral Majority,” and the courting of the movement by the 1980 Ronald Reagan presidential effort.[8]

            Fundamentalism, as a movement within conservative Protestant churches, was ultimately made possible by the doctrines set forth early in the Reformation by Martin Luther. Luther’s exchange of the authority to access and interpret Biblical texts from the organization of the Roman Catholic Church to the individual Christian ultimately allowed for the existence and justification of modern Protestant fundamentalism.[9] Luther expressed a new line of thought in opposition generally accepted Christian belief, that took access to Biblical texts and interpretation of them from the priest or an elite consisting of the educated and gave this to the individual Christian. For Luther, every man was a theologian.[10]  

What is the traditional fundamentalist view of the Bible? The foundational importance of the Bible in Protestantism was expressed very clearly in the seventeenth century by Anglican divine, William Chillingworth, when he declared emphatically, “The Bible, I say, the Bible only, is the religion of Protestants!”[11] In the nineteenth century, Presbyterian theologian Charles Hodge, in his three volume work  Systematic Theology, stated in 1873, quoting Martin Luther’s 1537 Smallcald Articles, that, “All Protestants agree in teaching that ‘the word of God, as contained in the Scriptures of the Old and New Testaments, is the only infallible rule of faith and practice.’”[12]    

Again, this view was affirmed by Baptist theologians in the twentieth century as fundamentalism was moving away from a cross section of conservative Christian denominations and was focused more and more in the Baptist faith tradition. This traditional view of the Bible’s importance in fundamentalism was expressed in an even more extreme manner by Henry Clarence Thiessen in his Introductory Lectures in Systematic Theology: “It [what he called the true Church] bases its view on the belief that the Bible is the embodiment of a divine revelation, and that the records which contain that revelation are genuine, credible, canonical, and supernaturally inspired.” [13]

The fundamentalist view of the divine inspiration of the Bible had its origins in the Princeton Seminary, in the nineteenth century. In 1879, a doctrine was expressed that insisted that the original autographs of the presumed Bible writers, and those writings only, were inspired by God, inerrant and infallible.[14]  All subsequent translations attained to varying degrees of reliability and trustworthiness. This allowed a fallback position from the assault on the truth of the Bible narrative by German Biblical criticism and the acceptance of Darwin’s version of the theory of evolution to a Bible that didn’t actually exist in reality, as the original autographs were never in one Bible, and were themselves not extant so they could not be questioned. The mark of fundamentalism in America was a conservative, literal approach to scriptural interpretation and a belief in the divine inspiration of the original autographs with translations being trustworthy but not perfect. It reduced divine inspiration to mere transmission from God to writing on a single occasion.[15] Presbyterian Pastor Archibald Alexander Hodge, son of Princeton Seminary theologian Charles Hodge, wrote in 1863 that what the Bible calls, “given by inspiration,” is revelation, while inspiration referred only to the process of writing an infallible and inerrant document.[16] That this did not include any translation is apparent. American Baptist minister and author Dr. Wayland Hoyt, speaking at a conference held on Biblical inspiration in Philadelphia in 1887, said, “But neither for version nor for manuscripts is Inspiration to be claimed. Inspiration is only to be claimed for the primal sacred autographs …We affirm Inspiration and authority of the original Scriptures, the sacred autographs, but not of the copies or versions.”[17]

But, the King James Bible, says in 2 Timothy 3:16 that all scripture is given by inspiration and in the only other place where inspiration is mentioned, Job 32:8, states that God’s inspiration gives men understanding. Peter, writing in 2 Peter 3:15, said that Paul wrote by the wisdom given to him, both understanding and wisdom implying God’s revelation of Himself to the writers as well as the wisdom to write. In Jeremiah 36:32 the originals, being burned in a fire, are rewritten, with the addition of many words, so the question of God inspiring only the original autographs is apparent. Which originals? Also, in 2 Timothy 3:16, “all scripture,” is not likely referring to original autographs as it is highly unlikely Timothy had access to the original autographs of Moses’ more than one-thousand-year-old writings but to only copies and translations.

Added into the mix was the effort to revise the AV completed by the Anglican Church’s Bishops Westcott, Hort, and company in 1881, unrelated either to the Niagara Conference or the Princeton Seminary’s thoughts on the inerrancy and infallibility of the original autographs. New manuscript discoveries of a non-Biblical nature that were believed to shed light on the original Bible languages and dissatisfaction with the perceived archaic English of the Authorized Version led to the Anglican Church’s 1881 Revision of the King James Bible. The Revision was the first effort in two hundred and fifty years with any Anglican Church authority behind it to revise the King James Version.[18]

            Plans for a revision of the AV were in the works since at least 1820, when Anglican Bishop Herbert Marsh, in a lecture on the interpretation of the Bible at Cambridge, published in 1828, called for it as necessary.[19] This struggle to have the idea of a revision seen through happened in fact, even though many, such as philologist and pioneering American environmental conservationist, George Perkins Marsh, said that a multitude of Bibles would result from such a revision, dividing Protestantism and causing more harm than good .[20] The Revision committee, laboring for over a decade, published its work in 1881. The Revision efforts consisted of an English committee headed by Anglican bishops Westcott and Hort, and an American committee headed by Bible scholar and historian, Philip Schaff.

            The resultant Revised Version of the Bible and its American counterpart, the American Standard Version, were not so much revisions of the Authorized Version but new versions of the Bible based on an entirely new background text for the New Testament and a departure from the traditional Old Testament text. The effort did not escape criticism. John Burgon, a noted expert on Greek language and manuscripts, panned the revision efforts in writing in 1883. He wrote, “…’the New Greek Text,’ – which, in defiance of their instructions, the Revisionists of the ‘Authorized English Version’ had been so ill-advised as to spend ten years in elaborating, - was a wholly untrustworthy performance: was full of the gravest errors from beginning to end….”[21]  Philip Schaff, the head of the American revision committee, acknowledged that one reason for the difficulty the new text had in being favorably received was that “for the great mass of English readers King James’ Version is virtually the inspired Word of God.” [22]

            Nevertheless, fundamentalists in America took to the new versions of the Bible quite readily. Evangelist R.A. Torrey wrote that, in his estimation, “the Revised Version is manifestly much more exact,” than the Authorized Version.[23]  It was not until another contributor to The Fundamentals, lawyer Philip Mauro, began to express serious reservations about the Revised Version’s background text in the early 1920s that fundamentalism began to break down into two camps on the Bible translation issue. One camp followed the Westcott-Hort Greek text (representing the Alexandrian line of manuscripts) and the Bibles that flowed from it such as the Revised Version, the American Standard Version, and later the Revised Standard Version, the New American Standard Version, the New International Version, etc., with the second camp using and uplifting the Textus Receptus, in English the Received Text. This was the traditional textual line of manuscripts, called the Byzantine, that were the background texts for the Authorized Version, with that Bible version simply being considered, not inspired, but the most trustworthy translation of an inspired Greek text.  Although the Old Testament text was also different it was not usually the subject of much argument until later. Both parties felt that their version of the Greek text was representative of the originals, which only were given by inspiration of God. Translations were reliable, trustworthy, or, in the case of the Authorized Version, the best, but most definitely not inspired by God and merely the devoted work of skilled and faithful translators. The battle within fundamentalism was not over the authority of the Bible but over the question, “What is the Bible?”  

This is a fundamental question for you. Remember what God has said about his words.

Psalm 138: 2  I will worship toward thy holy temple, and praise thy name for thy lovingkindness and for thy truth: for thou hast magnified thy word above all thy name.

John 17:17 ¶  Sanctify them through thy truth: thy word is truth.

Next, Peter Ruckman throws a monkey wrench into the wheel of fundamentalism in America with regards to the Bible.

---

                             [1] “Bible Believers’ Church Directory,” Bible Believers. Accessed 1.1.2014,  www.biblebelievers.com.

                             [2] 2 Tm 3:16 ; Jb 32:8 AV

                             [3] Ernest Sandeen, “Toward an Historical Interpretation of the Origins of Fundamentalism,” Church History 36, no. 1 (March 1967): 72.

                             [4] James M. Ault, Jr., Spirit and Flesh: Life in a Fundamental Baptist Church (New York:

Random House, 2004), 372.

                             [5] Sandeen 77.

[6]  Elijah G. Dann, Leaving Fundamentalism: Personal Stories (Waterloo, Ontario: Wilfrid

Laurier University Press, 2008) 7.

                             [7] George Marsden, Understanding Fundamentalism and Evangelicalism (Grand Rapids,              MI.:Wm. B. Erdmans Publishing, 1991), 3.

[8] James M. Ault, Jr., Spirit and Flesh: Life in a Fundamental Baptist Church (New York:

Random House, 2004),1 & 6 .

                             [9] Robert Glenn Howard, "The Double Bind of the Protestant Reformation: The Birth of Fundamentalism and the Necessity of Pluralism," Journal Of Church & State 47, no. 1  (Winter 2005): 96.

[10] Ibid.

                             [11] William Chillingworth, The Religion of Protestants: A Safe Way to Salvation (1638, 

repr.,London: Henry G. Bohn, 1846), 463 .

                             [12] Charles Hodge, Systematic Theology (1873, repr., Grand Rapids, MI: Wm. B. Eerdmans, 1940),

Kindle edition, ch. 6.

                             [13] Henry Clarence Thiessen, Introductory Lectures in Systematic Theology (Grand Rapids,

MI: Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Co, 1949), 79.

[14] Sandeen, 74.

                             [15] Kern Robert Trembath, Evangelical Theories of Divine Inspiration: A Review and Proposal  (New York: Oxford University Press, 1987), 15.  

[16] A.A. Hodge, Outlines of Theology (New York: Robert Carter & Bros, 1863), 68.

                             [17] Wayland Hoyt, “Questions Concerning Inspiration,” In The Inspired Word: A Series of

Papers and Addresses Delivered at the Bible Inspiration-Conference, Philadelphia (1887, ed. by A.T. Pierson. New York: Anson D.F. Randolph & Co, 1888), 14, 15..

                             [18] David S. Schaff, The Life of Schaff: In Part Autobiographical (New York: Charles Scribner  & Son, 1897), 354.

                             [19] Herbert S. Marsh, Lectures on the Criticism and Interpretation of the Bible (London: J. Smith, 1828), 279.

                             [20] George P. Marsh, Lectures on the English Language (New York: Charles Scribner’s Sons, 1885), 549.

                            [21] John William Burgon, Preface to The Revision Revised  (1883 reprint, New York: Dover

Publications, 1971), xi.

                            [22] Philip Schaff, A Companion to the Greek New Testament and the English Version (New York: Harper & Bros, 1883), 413.

                             [23] R.A. Torrey, What the Bible Teaches (New York: Fleming H. Revell & Co., 1898),1.