REUBEN
A. TORREY
Reuben A. Torrey was an influential Bible
teacher and evangelist who was influenced by
[i]With Torrey and his little book, The Baptism with the Holy Spirit
[ii]
,,
we come to a much more clearly defined statement of the doctrine of the baptism
with the Holy Spirit in terms of power.
Torrey denied that the baptism in the Holy Spirit was connected to
sanctification. Torrey’s views seem to
have influenced some in the early Pentecostal Movement but his teaching is
acknowledged more readily in Charismatic circles. J. Rodman Williams, in his, Renewal
Theology, Volume 2, says,
[i]With Torrey and his little book, The Baptism with the Holy Spirit
[ii]
,
I add here a word about Reuben A
Torrey, Moody’s successor and the first head of Moody Bible Institute (opening
in 1899). Even more strongly than Moody
he stressed the need to be filled, or baptized with the Holy Spirit.......Neither
Moody or Torrey stood in the Holiness tradition with its stress on “entire
sanctification.” They both viewed
baptism with the Holy Spirit as following upon regeneration and as empowerment
for ministry. Torrey especially has had
significant influence on
the charismatic renewal.
[iii]
[iii]
Williams in
the above passage illustrates the importance of Torrey for our study. It is with Torrey that we find the clearest
statements about the purpose of the baptism with the Holy Spirit in terms of
power. The ambiguities that we
discovered in Finney are missing here.
Torrey obviously considered his little book to be vital to his teaching
on the doctrine of the Holy Spirit. He
included the text of this book in his larger work,
The Person and Work of the Holy
Spirit.
[iv]
[iv]
If a man has experienced the
regenerating work of the Holy Spirit he is a saved man, but he is not fitted
for service until in addition to this he has received the baptism of the Holy Spirit.
[v]
[v]
Torrey then
goes on to affirm that the baptism with the Holy Spirit is always connected to
testimony and service. He then denies
any connection with entire sanctification, indeed, he denies that the idea of
entire sanctification is biblical. To
see how Torrey explicates his position we need to look at a rather long
quotation. Torrey says,
The baptism with the Holy Spirit
is not for the purpose of cleansing from sin, but for the purpose of empowering
for service. It is indeed the work of
the Holy Spirit to cleanse from sin.
Further than this there is a work of the Holy Spirit where the believer
is strengthened with might in the inner man, that Christ may dwell in his heart
by faith, that he might be filled unto all the fullness of God (Eph.3:16-19
ASV).
There is a work of the Holy
Spirit of such a character that the believer is “made... free from the law of
sin and death” (Rom.8:2), and through the Spirit does “mortify [put to death]
the deeds of the body” (Rom.8:13). It
is our privilege to so walk daily and hourly in the power of the Spirit, that
the carnal nature is kept in the place of death. But this is not the baptism with the Spirit,
neither is it the eradication of a sinful nature. It is not something done once and for all,
it is something that must be momentarily be maintained. “Walk in the Spirit, and ye shall not fulfil
the lust of the flesh” (Gal5:16). While
insisting that the baptism is primarily for the purpose of empowering for
service, it should be added that the baptism is accompanied by a great moral
uplift. (See Acts 2:44-46; 4:31-35)
This is necessarily so, from the steps one must take to obtain the blessing.
[vi]
[vi]
Torrey’s views as expressed here are closer to Keswick
teaching with its idea of suppression of the old man. He also expresses clearly the line that was
to become familiar, that the baptism with the Spirit is separate from
sanctification. However, one must ask
whether even Torrey maintains the distinction convincingly, after all he does
say that the blessing is accompanied by a great moral uplift. This point will be returned to later as it
needs further development in the light of other passages we have not yet looked
at.
Torrey’s
exposition of the baptism of the Holy
Spirit as enduement with power for service became the model which later
developed into the full blown Pentecostal doctrine. During the Nineteenth
Century there had been this gradual shift from the emphasis on purity to that
of power. There had been various
influences in this development as has been seen in previous chapters. At this point we should also note the
influence of the British Methodist, William Arthur. His book
[vii]
,
,
was published in 1856 and was widely read both in Britain and America. Arthur, in his use of Pentecostal language, shifted the emphasis from purity to power. It is not known whether Torrey read Arthur’s book but the point is that this book had a pervasive influence. We do know, however, that Moody and Finney had both influenced Torrey; both of them had, in setting forth their views of the baptism of the Spirit, emphasised power. Torrey developed his teaching and clarified what he believed the baptism with the Spirit is. Torrey exercised a wide preaching and teaching ministry in which he frequently spoke of the baptism with the Holy Spirit. During these meetings it was Torrey’s desire to lead people into an experience of the baptism of the Holy Spirit. It may be that the spoken word carried more influence than the printed page, certainly some of the testimonies that Torrey cites would lead one to conclude this to be the case.
[vii]
,
,
was published in 1856 and was widely read both in Britain and America. Arthur, in his use of Pentecostal language, shifted the emphasis from purity to power. It is not known whether Torrey read Arthur’s book but the point is that this book had a pervasive influence. We do know, however, that Moody and Finney had both influenced Torrey; both of them had, in setting forth their views of the baptism of the Spirit, emphasised power. Torrey developed his teaching and clarified what he believed the baptism with the Spirit is. Torrey exercised a wide preaching and teaching ministry in which he frequently spoke of the baptism with the Holy Spirit. During these meetings it was Torrey’s desire to lead people into an experience of the baptism of the Holy Spirit. It may be that the spoken word carried more influence than the printed page, certainly some of the testimonies that Torrey cites would lead one to conclude this to be the case.
Although
Torrey emphasised that the baptism with the Spirit was for power for service,
he also listed a number of conditions for receiving the baptism with the
Spirit. These conditions raise some
questions as to the consistency of his thinking as they are directly linked to
purity. Daniel Steele had maintained
that purity must precede power. Reuben
Torrey agrees with this up to a point but denies that purification is part of
the baptism with the Holy Spirit. Torrey
would argue that purity is connected to sanctification and one needs to have
renounced sin to receive the baptism with the Holy Spirit. He strongly believed that Holiness teaching
is mistaken when it identifies the baptism with the Holy Spirit with entire
sanctification. Torrey clearly states
the need to renounce sin when he says,
The second step is also found in
the word repent. While the change of
mind about Jesus is the first and
prominent thought, there must also be a change of mind about sin - a change of
mind from a sin-loving or sin-indulging attitude to a sin-hating and
sin-renouncing attitude. This is the
second step: renounce sin, all sin,
every sin
[viii]
.
.
[viii]
.
.
It is
important to note this connection between the renunciation of sin and the
baptism with the Holy Spirit. Sadly
this emphasis was to be lost in later generations.
Torrey’s
fourth step is also connected to sanctification, it is, obedience. When Torrey explains this fourth step, he
comes very close to the Holiness emphasis, especially in his use of altar
terminology. Torrey says,
What does obedience mean? It does not mean merely doing some of the
things or many of the things or most of the things that God bids us do. It means total surrender to the will of
God. Obedience is an attitude of the
will lying back of specific acts of obedience.
It means that I come to God and say “Heavenly Father, here I am and all
I have. Thou hast bought me with a price and I acknowledge Thine absolute
ownership. Take me and all I have, and
do with me whatever Thou wilt, I surrender myself and all that I possess
absolutely, unconditionally, forever to thy control and use.”
It was when the burnt
offering-whole no part held back- was laid on the altar that “there came forth
fire from before the Lord” and accepted the gift (Lev.9:24), and it is when we
bring ourselves, a whole burnt offering to the Lord and lay ourselves thus upon
the altar that fire comes and God accepts the gift.
[ix]
[ix]
The altar
terminology that Torrey uses is very similar to that of Phoebe Palmer’s and
shows the influence of Holiness teaching even when it is being denied. Torrey would claim that this is just a step
that is not to be identified with the baptism itself. It could be claimed that the real
differences between the two parties are minor because both want to see
Christians leading pure lives and being empowered by the Spirit. However, this would lead to a minimising of
the differences that are real, especially as regards entire sanctification.
Torrrey’s
views also lead to a syllogism of power, if you have asked for the baptism of
the Spirit, you have received it. Torrey puts it this way,
If Christ has been accepted as
Saviour and Lord and openly confessed as such in God’s way; if sin has been searched out and put
away; if there has been total surrender
of the will and self to God; if there is a true desire, for God’s glory, to be
baptized with the Holy Spirit-- if these conditions have been met, any reader
may ask God to baptize him with the Holy Spirit. He then can say, when the prayer has gone up,
“That prayer was heard; I have what I
have asked: I have the baptism with the Holy Spirit”; and he has a right to get up and go out to
his work assured that in that work he will have the Holy Spirit’s power.
But someone will ask “Must I not
know that I have the baptism with the Holy Spirit before I begin to work?” Certainly, but how shall we know? I know of
no better way of knowing than by God’s Word.
I would believe God’s Word before
my feelings any
day
.
[x]
day
.
[x]
This seems
to negate any concept of the inner witness of the Holy Spirit and at this point
Torrey’s view is different from that of the Pentecostal model. Pentecostalism would promote the idea of
initial evidence as a demonstration that the believer had been baptized in the
Holy Spirit. Torrey did not completely
deny the inner witness of the Spirit but rather he believed that it would come
as the believer stepped out in faith.
Reuben
Torrey’s formulation of the doctrine of the baptism with the Holy Spirit as
empowerment for service was to have a great influence on the Pentecostal and
Charismatic Movements of the Twentieth Century.
EARLY PENTECOSTALISM
The birth of
Pentecostalism shows the impact of diverse views of the baptism of the
Spirit. Developments within the Holiness
Movement and the evangelical circles influenced by men like Moody and Torrey
would all have their influence.
[xi]
[xii]
[xi]
[xii]
TWO WORKS OF GRACE AND THE GIFT OF THE HOLY GHOST
We preach old-time sanctification,
and old-time baptism with the Holy Ghost, which is the gift of power upon the
sanctified life, and God throws in the gift of tongues..
1st. Justification deals with
our actual sins. When we go to Him and
repent, God washes all the guilt and pollution of our hearts, and we stand
justified like a new babe that never committed sin. We have no condemnation. We can walk with Jesus and live a holy life
before the Lord, if we walk in the Spirit.
2nd. Sanctification is the second and last work of
grace. After we are justified, we have
two battles to fight. There is sin
inside and sin outside. There is
warfare within, caused by the old inherited sin. When God brings the word, ”It is the will of
God, even your sanctification,” we should accept the word, and then the blood
comes and takes away all inherited sin.
Everything is heavenly in your soul, you are a son of God. The Spirit of God witnesses in your heart
that you are sanctified.
3rd. The Spirit begins then and there leading us
on to the Baptism with the Holy Ghost.
Now, as a son of God, you should enter into the earnest of your
inheritance. After you have a cleat
witness of the two works of grace in your heart, you can receive this gift of
God, which is a free gift without repentance.
Pray for the power of the Holy Ghost, and the Holy Ghost will give you a
new language. It is the privilege of
everyone to be filled with the Holy
Ghost. It is for every believing child.
[xiii]
[xiii]
This short
article demonstrates quite clearly the doctrinal structure of early
Pentecostalism. Of course, this is not
just a doctrinal statement but it also
an expectation of an experiential reality. The witness of the Spirit is clearly
expected for both justification and sanctification. It is only with this witness of the Spirit
that one can then go on to receive the baptism with the Holy Spirit. Stephen Land in his book, Pentecostal Spirituality
[xiv]
,
,
shows that this teaching was being re-emphasised in 1908 in another article in The Apostolic Faith, the article which is presented in question and answer form, has some overlap with the previous article but it shows also that some issues had been more clearly thought through. The article says,
[xiv]
,
,
shows that this teaching was being re-emphasised in 1908 in another article in The Apostolic Faith, the article which is presented in question and answer form, has some overlap with the previous article but it shows also that some issues had been more clearly thought through. The article says,
Questions Answered
Should
a person seek sanctification before baptism with the Holy Ghost? Yes,
sanctification makes us holy, but the baptism with the Holy Spirit
empowers us for service after we are
sanctified, and seals unto the day of redemption. Sanctification destroys the
body of sin, the old man Adam. Rom6.6,7... When a man has been saved from
actual sins, then he consecrates himself to God to be sanctified, and so his
body of sin is destroyed or crucified...
What is the real evidence that a
man or woman has received the baptism with the Holy Ghost?
Divine love which is charity.
Charity is the Spirit of Jesus. They
will have the fruits of the Spirit.
Gal5.22. “The fruit of the
Spirit is love, joy, peace, long-suffering, gentleness, goodness, meekness,
faith temperance, against such there is no law. And they that are Christ’s have
crucified the flesh with the affections and lusts”. This is the real Bible evidence in their
daily walk and conversation; and the outward manifestations; speaking in
tongues and signs following; casting out devils, laying hands on the sick and
the sick being healed, and the love of God for souls increasing in their
hearts.
Is it necessary to have hands
laid on in order to receive the Holy Ghost?
No; you can receive Him in your closet. The gift of the Holy Ghost comes by faith in
the word of God. You may receive the
gift of the Holy Ghost right now, that is if you are sanctified... The baptism
of the Spirit is a gift of power on the sanctified life, and sooner or later
they will speak in tongues as the Spirit gives utterance. A person may not speak in tongues for a week
after the baptism, but as soon as he gets to praying or praising God in the
liberty of the Spirit, the tongues will follow. Tongues are not salvation. It is a gift that God throws in with the
Holy Spirit. People do not have to
travail and agonise for the baptism, for when all work ceases then God
comes. We cease from our works, which
is a very type of the millennium.
Does a soul need the baptism
with the Holy Ghost in order to live a pure and holy life?
No, Sanctification makes us
holy, Heb.2.11... The Holy Ghost never died for our sins, it was Jesus who died
for our sins and it is His blood that atones for our sins. 1John1.9, 7...It is the blood that cleanses and makes
holy, and through the blood we receive the baptism of the Holy Spirit. The Holy Ghost never fails to answer to the
Blood.
[xv]
[xv]
At these
early stages of Pentecostalism we can see a very clear link between Wesleyan
theology and a newly developed doctrine of the baptism of the Holy Spirit. The early leaders did not want to depart
from what they had learnt in the Holiness Movement. As leaders were added from other backgrounds
we find a shift in some circles. Later
developments in such groups as the Assemblies of God, would lead to a departure from this
model. W.H. Durham was to contest the
whole idea of entire sanctification and preach instead a more Reformed view of
sanctification which led to the finished work of Christ controversy. At this time, this denomination moved away
from the whole idea of entire sanctification; many other groups would follow
their example, leaving the Holiness Pentecostal denomination to carry the
original message. William Durham made
his position quite clear when he said,
I began to write against the
doctrine that it takes two works of grace to save and cleanse a man. I denied and still deny that God does not
deal with the nature of sin at conversion.
I deny that a man who is converted or born again is outwardly washed and
cleansed but that his heart is left unclean with enmity towards God in it....
This would not be salvation. Salvation
is an inward work. It means a change of
nature. It means that old things pass away and all things become
new.
[xvi]
new.
[xvi]
The above
statement demonstrates that Durham was clearly opposed to the doctrine of
entire sanctification, but one has to question whether he really understood
what he was fighting. He seems to
believe that entire sanctification implies a denial of an inner working of the
Holy Spirit at conversion. The writings
of Wesley, Fletcher, Palmer and Steele all testify to the inner working of the
Spirit at conversion. However,
Durham’s view was to prevail and with it, in some circles, less of an emphasis
on a holy life. In this scheme the
baptism of the Spirit is seen as endument with power from on high, attested by
speaking in tongues. Power has been
emphasised in Pentecostal circles and when this has been combined with an
evangelistic heart, thousands have been won to Christ. The presumption that all that is needed for
sanctification has been given at the new birth has tended to downplay the need
to stress the holy life. There is a
real irony at this point because many Pentecostals complain bitterly about the standard
evangelical view of the baptism of the Spirit, which is seen as taking place at
conversion, deprives believers of power.
The argument could be turned around to say that the view that says that
all that is needed for sanctification is given at conversion deprives the
believer of the resources for a holy life.
The Charismatic Movement has followed in the steps of the majority of
the Pentecostal Movement. However, one
must not forget that there are still several denominations of Holiness
Pentecostals who still maintain the threefold blessing of justification, entire
sanctification and the baptism of the Holy Spirit.
All of the
Pentecostal teachers, whether stressing
a threefold blessing or the finished work view, agreed that the baptism with
the Holy Spirit is given for empowering the believer. The major difference between the two parties
was whether entire sanctification is available to believers in this life or
whether sanctification would only be completed at death. The Holiness Pentecostals all believed that
entire sanctification must precede the baptism of the Spirit; in contrast ‘finished work’ Pentecostals only
believed in progressive sanctification.
These differences must not detract from their basic unity in believing
that the baptism with the Spirit is an experience of the reception of divine
power.
It has been
presumed until recently that Durham’s finished work concept was accepted mainly
by those coming from Reformed and Baptist backgrounds but D.William Faupel
shows this is not the case, he says,
At first glance it does appear
that those from Reformed and Baptist backgrounds tended to accept the Finished
Work doctrine, while those that came from a Wesleyan background did not. Upon closer examination, however, this
breaks down. Charles Parham, for example, in his spiritual pilgrimage, rejected
most of his Wesleyan heritage, and was strongly influenced by Alexander Dowie,
A.B. Simpson, D.L. Moody, R.A. Torrey and Frank Sandford who all fell into the
Reformed camp. Elmer Fisher of the
Upper room was Baptist before entering the Pentecostal movement.
A.J. Tomlinson was a Quaker when he came upon the Church of God that had
primarily Baptist roots. Charles Mason
and most of his early converts in the Church of God came from a Baptist
background. N.J. Holmes, who became a
major leader in the Pentecostal Holiness Church, led a group of Presbyterians
into that denomination in 1915.
Likewise the Free Will Baptists who accepted the Pentecostal message
remained in the Second Work camp.
[xvii]
[xvii]
Faupel
demonstrates the complexity of the issues outlined above but it is quite clear
that one cannot categorise the adherents of either view by their previous
backgrounds. There does seem to have
been a disposition among some early Pentecostal leaders to be looking for new
revelation, many of these accepted Durham’s position. On the other hand, many believed that any
new revelation would not contradict doctrines already accepted and therefore
repudiated the new teaching.
[xviii]
[xviii]
Although the
above discussion is important, both the Second Work camp and the Finished Work
camp interpret the baptism with the Holy Spirit as an experience of
empowering. It is power that is
expected not purity; sanctification has,
[i]
For a discussion of the relationship between these three men see, Donald Dayton, Theological Roots of Pentecostalism, (Peabody, Hendrickson 1987) 100-104 and John L Gresham, Charles Finney’s Doctrine of the Baptism of the Holy Spirit (Peabody, Hendrickson, 1987 ) 75-77.
[iii]
J. Rodman Williams, Renewal Theology volume 2 (Grand Rapids; Zondervan, 1990), footnote 63, 250.
[v]
Reuben A Torrey, The Baptism with the Holy Spirit (Minneapolis, Bethany House Publishers. 1972). 17.
[vii]
William Arthur. The Tongue of Fire: or, The True Power of Christianity ( London, Wesleyan Methodist Book Room,. 1856)
[xi]
See the helpful discussion in John L Gresham, Charles Finneys Doctrine of the Baptism of The Holy Spirit (Peabody, Hendrickson, 1987) 64-85.
[xii]
The Apostolic Faith. was the magazine set up to spread the news about the revival at Azusa Street and to propagate its teaching
[xvii]
D. William Faupel, The Everlasting Gospel (Sheffield, Sheffield Academic Press. 1996). 259-260.
[xviii]
For a full account of the Finished Work controversy see, Faupel. The Everlasting Gospel Chapter 7
No comments:
Post a Comment