Their Relationship to Sound Doctrine


God speaks to His people through the Bible. Many of His thoughts are revealed in direct statements of truth which we call doctrines. The application of these doctrines as guides in the Christian life is often illustrated by word pictures, by the lives of God’s ancient people, and in other ways. This pamphlet points out the Scriptural relationship between doctrines and illustrations, with the view of helping the reader to remain in the ‘path of the just, which is as a shining light, that shineth more and more unto the perfect day.”Pr 4:18

TYPES: Their Relationship to Sound Doctrine


It would seem that some persons can see types in everything, and others fail to see any. Some are disposed to think so lightly of types as to doubt if they can be classed under sound doctrine, while others freely use them to teach doctrines. Is it not important, then, to examine the Scriptures carefully for the purpose of discovering its unquestionable testimony on the subject’ Surely this is one of the matters that should be taken into consideration in our endeavor to be guided by the apostle’s counsel in writing to Timothy, when he said: ‘Take heed unto thyself, and unto the doctrine; continue in these things: for in doing this thou shalt both save thyself, and them that hear thee.”1Ti 4:16


Paul also wrote to Timothy to hold fast to the ‘form’ or ‘pattern’ of sound [Greek, ‘healthful’] words’to hold them in faith and love which is in Christ Jesus. {1Ti 1:13} After being in the race course for some thirty years, events had transpired that caused Paul to further instruct Timothy to charge ‘some’ (certain men) to teach ‘no other doctrine,’ nor to give heed to ‘endless genealogies”for some had ‘missed the mark’ by turning aside unto vain talking, instead of seeking the end of the commandment, which is love out of a pure heart and a good conscience and unfeigned faith.’1Ti 1:3-10.


To Titus Paul wrote that he was to appoint elders in every city, specifying those ‘holding fast the faithful word,’ which is according to the teaching, so that they might exhort in sound doctrine, and convince the gainsayers. Others were to be ‘sharply reproved that they might be sound’ in the faith, so that they would not give heed to the commandments of men. Titus was also admonished to speak sound doctrine to the aged men that they might be sound in the faith; and to all he was to show himself an example of good works, gravity, in unadulterated doctrine, sound speech that could not be condemned, so that even opposers might be ashamed, having no evil things to say against us. Additionally he was to shun certain questionings and genealogies, and various other subjects, as unprofitable and vain.’ Tit 1:5-14; 2:1, 2, 7, 8; 3:9-10.


That the Church of Christ, founded by the mighty power of the holy spirit on the day of Pentecost, should be permitted to fall away, must have seemed strange, yea, almost unbelievable to the first believers. How could a God-given channel of truth so pure, become corrupted’ Paul tells them that this evil influence was even working in his day, {2Th 2:3-7} that the movement was evidently already abroad in which the ‘serpent’ in his craftiness, together with his able associates, {1Ti 4:2} was gradually undermining the Gospel by beguiling, diverting, corrupting its simplicity and purity in Christ. {2Co 11:3,13,14} Truth, knowledge, was to be imparted and the church was expected to grow in it, but it was to be of the soul-satisfying, sanctifying kind, which is able to make ‘Wise unto salvation through faith which is in Christ Jesus”’the word of His grace, which is able to build you up, and to give you an inheritance among all them which are sanctified.”23:15 Joh 6:63 17:17 Ac 20:32 .


In view of these many admonitions to hold fast to sound doctrine, how shall we answer those who question the method or system of making types out of nearly all the stories and historical accounts of the Bible’ Does the Bible give us any instructions to guide us in this matter’ We believe it does. The English word ‘type’ does not actually occur at all in either the Common or Revised Version of the Bible; but Paul, Luke and Peter use an equivalent Greek word, typos, which Young’s Concordance defines as ‘type, model.’ Translators have rendered this word variously as ‘example,’ ‘ensample,’ ‘pattern,’ and ‘figure.’ Following are texts in which the Greek word typos is thus translated. As we read the texts let us note carefully the manner in which the inspired writers use the word:


‘Brethren, be followers together of me, and mark them which walk so as ye have us for an ensample. [typos].”Php 3:17.


‘Ye... received the word in much affliction, with joy of the Holy Spirit: so that ye were ensamples [typos] to all that believe in Macedonia and Achaia.”1Th 1:6, 7.


‘We...wrought...that we might not be chargeable to any of you...but to make ourselves an ensample [typos] unto you to follow us.”2Th 3:8, 9.


‘Let no man despise thy youth; but be thou an example [typos] of the believers, in word, in conversation [manner of life], in love, in spirit, in faith, in purity.”1Ti 4:12.


‘See, saith He [God], that thou make all things according to the pattern [typos] showed to thee in the mount.”He 8:5.


‘Neither as being lords over God’s heritage, but being ensamples [typos] to the flock.”1Pe 5:3.


‘Yea, ye took up the tabernacle of Moloch, and the star of your god Remphan, figures [typos] which ye made to worship.”Ac 7:43.


It will be noted in these quotations that the words ‘example,’ ‘ensample,’ ‘figures,’ manifestly express the writer’s intent and Dr. Young’s definition ‘model,’ would neatly fit in all cases. Another instance in which the word typos appears, is:


‘Death reigned...over them that had not sinned after the similitude of Adam’s transgression, who is the figure [typos] of Him that was to come.’ {Ro 5:14} Rotherham, the Syriac and the Diaglott translations use the word ‘type’ in this verse. Now, say some, surely here is a Scriptural basis for considering all the Old Testament characters as being types, and all of their experiences as typical of things to occur on a still larger scale in the antitype. But let us not be too hasty in such a conclusion. If we read more into the apostle’s words concerning Adam being a type of Christ than the inspired writer indicates, we get into serious difficulty. It would mean that the bride of Christ will entice Him, even as Eve enticed Adam; and the sin of both Adam and Eve will be carried out on a still more tragic scale in the experiences of Christ and His Church. This of course, is unreasonable. It is evident that Paul’s reference to Adam as a type of Christ is limited to one point; namely, his headship over the human family. In this office of headship, Adam was a type of a second Head, the Lord from heaven, through whom deliverance is to come.’Rom. 8:21-23 Tit 3:5 Mt 19:28 1co 15:45??? . See also W.T. Reprints, pp. 1388 and 3655.

The Scriptural Usage of the Word Type


Evidently the Scriptural usage of the word ‘type’ is somewhat at variance with the accepted thought by some, which is rather more exactly expressed by Paul’s word ‘allegory,’ occurring but once, {Ga 4:24} and which is defined as ‘a description of one thing under the image of another.’ Some feel very confident that they have found a basis for this typical, allegorical method of Scripture interpretation in 1Co 10:6,11, which we here quote:


‘Now these things happened unto them for ensamples [typos]: and they are written for our admonition, upon whom the ends of the world [ages] are come.’


A consideration of the entire passage in which these texts are found indicates that it is in the nature of a warning to all believers, especially the over-confident (vs. 12), to be whole-heartedly and unswervingly sincere in carrying out their covenant of sacrifice, lest they tempt Christ (vs. 9) by murmuring, or by lusting for sinful things (vss. 7, 8, 10 and thereby, like the Israelites, fall under condemnation (vss. 5, 8, 9, 10.) Rather, we should seek to please God (vs. 5), flee forbidden things (vs. 14), and appeal unto the faithful God Who will abundantly aid (vs. 13), and Who, in great kindness, has had the experiences of unfaithful Israel recorded so that they may serve as an example, or model (typos), to the end that we should not do the same things. ‘For if God spared not the natural branches, take heed lest He also spare not thee.”Ro 11:21.

Hebrews Chapter Eleven


In Hebrews, , chapter 11, Paul again reviews Old Testament history and cites a long list of faithful witnesses, who ‘obtained a good report through faith,’ and who, therefore, are examples, models, types, worthy of imitation. {\He 12:1} Some have insisted that Paul’s words, ‘written for our admonition upon whom the ends of the ages are come,’ must refer exclusively to the end of the Gospel age; but this view does not hold true to all the apostle says on the matter. The same phrase is used by Paul in \He 9:26, where he says,


‘But now once in the end of the age, hath He appeared to put away sin by the sacrifice of Himself.’ No one can question but what this text refers to the end of the Jewish age.


In 1Co 10, where the apostle speaks of the ‘ends’ of the ages, he uses the words ‘us’ and ‘our’ and thus clearly includes himself with the Corinthian brethren. Hence his admonitions must have had an application in his time’the end of the law dispensation, and the beginning of the Gospel dispensation. Furthermore, the exhortations which he bases upon the models and types of the Old Testament worthies, have been the property of the saints throughout the age, and therefore could not be limited to the end of the Gospel age. There are certain specific ‘visions,’ of the truth that were kept ‘sealed’ unto the ‘time of the end,’ when ‘meat in due season’ was to be served to the household of faith by the returned Lord. The increase of light, obviously, enhances our appreciation of all truth; but to the extent that the Lord’s people have familiarized themselves with the faithful examples of the Old Testament, and with the unfaithful ones as well, those models have served either as inspirations to faithfulness or as warnings against unfaithfulness, to Christians at all times during the age.


Paul’s allegory in Ga 4:21-31, drawn from the Lord’s specific instructions and miraculous manifestations to Abraham concerning Isaac, has led some to conclude that, therefore, all the Old Testament incidents, down to the smallest details, were so designed, overruled and recorded as to conceal an antitypical, allegorical significance, which under God’s guidance could later be interpreted. These mystic truths thus concealed are claimed to be of vastly greater importance than the events by which they were foreshadowed.

Several Expositors Thoughts On Types


Many, many volumes have been written on this basis. But is this a safe, sound, healthful and logical practice’ Are deductions thus arrived at, really the teaching of God’ It has been practiced by one after another throughout the age, but what has been the result’ Did it help to bring about a healthy Christian growth in the hearts of God’s people’ Was it manifestly profitable in a truly spiritual sense’ Would it not be enlightening to hear brief testimonies of some historians and consecrated Christians on this subject’ All historians agree that this system of interpretation was set in motion about the year 230, by Origen, the foremost writer of the third century. Concerning him, H.L. Hastings says:


‘Modern higher criticism bears a strange resemblance to some theories and expositions in ages past. Let us go back to Origen and listen to a learned critic, an author of perhaps fifty volumes, the founder of a theological school, a man in whose extant writings more than two-thirds of the New Testament can be found. In his second sermon on Exodus, Origen gives us this striking exposition: ‘Pharaoh is the devil; the male and female children of the Hebrews are the rational and animal faculties of the soul; the midwives are the Old and New Testaments. Pharaoh’s daughter is the church; Moses is the Law, etc.”


Seiss, the author says:


‘The first and greatest cause for the decline and the fall of faith in the Millennium, was the allegorical method of interpreting the Scriptures, which Origen set on foot, and which did more mischief than all its enemies. This system was injurious beyond everything else, casting darkness over the whole field of inspired truth, throwing uncertainty over all Christian hope, and, in the hands of its own author, makes the bride of Christ the daughter of the devil.’


Mosheim says: ‘This unhappy method opened a secure retreat for all sorts of errors that a wild and irregular imagination could bring forth. One first forms conclusions as to how things ought to be, and then interprets the Scriptures to these conclusions. Origen was followed by a vast number of such interpreters in that age and succeeding ages, that overflowed the church and paralyzed the true teachings.’


‘These writers all believed the language of the Scriptures to have two meanings, the one literal and the other concealed, like a nut in a shell. Neglecting the former as being of little value, they bestowed their chief attention on the latter; that is, they were more intent on throwing obscurity over the sacred writings by the fictions of their own imaginations than on expounding the true meaning.’


Clarke says:


‘Every friend of Christianity must lament that a man of so much learning and piety as Origin, was led to recommend such a plan of interpreting the Bible, which in many respects is the most futile, absurd and dangerous that can be possibly thought of an by which the sacred Scriptures could be made to say anything, everything, or nothing, according to the fancy, peculiar creed or whim of the interpreter.’


Milner says:


‘A thick mist for ages pervaded the Christian world, supported by Origen’s manner of teaching. The learned alone were considered guides, implicitly to be followed. And the common people, when the literal sense was hissed off the stage, had nothing to do but to follow their authority, wherever it might lead them.’


Geikie says:


‘Augustine [fifth century] has a sermon on Anna, which is a good specimen of allegorizing, which was in too great vogue in the early church. ‘The seven years of her married life are a symbol of the Law, the 84 years of her widowhood of the Gospel. The Law is only seven, while the apostles (12) who represent the Gospel, are 12x7 equals 84’that is, are of twelve times more value.”


Luther says:


‘I insist on the so-called literal sense of the Scriptures, which alone is the substance of faith and of Christian theology’which alone will sustain him in the hour of trouble and temptation’and which will triumph over sin and death, to the praise and glory of God. The allegorical sense is usually uncertain for it depends on human opinion only, on which, if a man lean, he will find it no better than an Egyptian reed. Therefore, Origen, Jerome and similar of the fathers are to be avoided, with the whole of the Alexandrian school.’


Farrar says:


‘All these views have their root in one and the same error’which consists of men bringing to the Bible their own self-made dogmas, instead of learning from its own simple and noble trustfulness, what the Bible is. Incredible is the misery and ruin which has been caused by the misinterpretation of Scripture that every passing word has been so miraculously inspired as to contain enigmatic and mystic senses. Infidelity is the natural outcome of false and exaggerated dogmas.’

The Lives of the Faithful in Scripture


Little even in the recorded life of Abraham can well be carried beyond the words of Paul; that is, with the thought of using his experiences to teach doctrinal truths. What would Abraham’s father, his two brothers, or Lot picture’ Or, what would be taught by his leaving Canaan for Egypt to escape a ‘grievous famine”Or his spineless compromise of Sarah and Pharaoh and Abimelech; their rebuke of Abraham after God’s intervention’ Or his or Sarah’s or Isaac’s death’


What difficulty we would be in by trying to make a type out of every detail of Moses’ life. Moses did picture the ‘greater than Moses,’ Christ; yet he did things that we cannot conceive would represent things in the life and ministry of Christ. For example, he lost his poise and struck the rock twice in an attempt to get water. {1Co 10:14} And what about his unavailing prayers to enter the promised land”De 3:23-28.


And what about Aaron the typical high priest’ After he ‘saw’ God, {\Ex 24:9} he made a golden calf and joined Miriam in reprimanding Moses, and his sin at Kadesh debarred him from the privilege of entering Canaan. Then there is David, who wrote, in the first person, so many prophecies concerning Christ. Surely we would find difficulty in trying to fit all of his experiences into a pattern that would type Christ in every detail. Not only did David displease God in connection with his domestic affairs, but he disobeyed the Lord also in his taking of a census, and thus caused the death of 70,000 ‘1Ch 21:1-30???.


Solomon has been spoken of as a type of Christ and his peaceful, prosperous reign of forty years as a type or picture of the Millennium. But what would the latter part of his reign picture when God ‘was angry’ with him because he ‘did evil,’ ‘broke his covenant’ and allowed his heart to be ‘turned away after other gods,’ even after ‘the Lord had twice warned him”And what of the kingdom being rent from Solomon and given to his servant”1Ki 11:1-13.


So we might go on citing illustrations to prove the follow of attempting to attach doctrinal and prophetic meaning to every detail in the lives of Old Testament characters. It is mere human assumption that insists that Old Testament history was written by God for this purpose. The use of the Old Testament in this manner depends, at the best, on mere guesswork’except, of course, where the inspired writers of the New Testament have made definite applications’ and guesswork is a poor substitute for the Word of God, and time has proven that as the ‘heavens are higher than the earth,’ so is a ‘thus it is written,’ above theological speculation.

Extreme Views Along Other Lines


Similarly some have taken extreme views along other lines. As an example, the church as virgins are called to be the bride, though in some respects they are likened unto sheep, soldiers, guests, servants, etc. In considering these illustrations we must always remember that they are distinct and separate and entirely independent one of the other and designed to impart a particular lesson. If we insist that they mean different classes or we endeavor to blend the illustrations and wonder how a stone in the temple can be a branch in the vine, how sheep can be soldiers, or how guests at a wedding can be servants or fishers of men, we create confusion. Since the fleece of sheep is sold, also their hides and meat and we attempt to find correspondencies for these; and treat the figures of soldiers, fishermen, stones, servants, guests to like extremes, we enmesh ourselves in a labyrinth of confusion.



Closely allied to types, allegories, is the supposition that the names of Old Testament persons and places must always have a prophetic significance. Some, indeed, do, because God arbitrarily changed the names of persons to make them fit with specific lessons He desired to teach. For example, the ‘valley of Jehosaphat,’ meaning ‘Jehovah hath judged,’ is interpreted by the Lord to mean the ‘valley of decision.’ {Joe 3:2,14} But such isolated instances of divine overruling is no justification for attempting to attach vital significance to all the personal and geographic names of the Old Testament.


Men and women in ancient times were no more able, without a miracle to aid them, to give names of prophetic import to their children than we are today. When the Lord desired that the name of a person should bear an important significance, He either chose the name Himself, gave instructions to the parents, or else changed names to suit His purpose. For example, Abram’s name was changed to Abraham; Sarai’s to Sarah; Jacob’s to Israel; Simon’s to Peter; ; and Isaac, John, and Jesus were named by the Lord before their birth.


It is interesting, of course, to consult a Bible Dictionary of proper names, and to note the meanings given, but an insistently fertile imagination can discern applications of these meanings no matter what the name may be; and usually these ‘interpretations’ are based almost wholly on the interpreter’s own idea of what it ought to be.


Twice the word of God says that ‘the things written aforetime’ were written for our admonition, instruction {1Co 10:11 Ro 15:4} Now just what is an admonition’ It is defined thus: ‘An expression of authoritative advice or warning; a caution, forewarning, notification, gently or kindly yet seriously given; a counsel, a reminding, an advising against wrong practices or faults; an instruction in duties.’ In what great mercy and love the Heavenly Father has had recorded for us a series of examples, types, models, or persons and experiences which brought pleasure to Him; and another series of examples, types, models, which brought displeasure. It is in our endeavor to follow the faithful examples and be warned by the unfaithful examples of these models, that the real value of these portions of the Word of God might be apparent to us.

Modern Types or Pictures


Let us briefly examine, analyize some modern types or pictures. We read, :The flood pictures Armageddon,’ ‘Noah represents Christ Jesus,’ ‘the ark pictured God’s organization,’ and ‘the sons of Noah and their wives pictured the Jonadabs.’ 1Pe 3:20,21 R.V. margin, reads as follows, ‘The long suffering of God waited in the days of Noah, while the ark was preparing, wherein eight souls were saved, which in the antitype [Greek anti-typon] doth now save you’even baptism’through the resurrection of Jesus Christ.’ Now does not Peter by inspiration, make the ark a type of Christ and that all, who in the last 1800 years have come into Christ, are saved’ And Peter ends the type there.


Again we read that Ahab pictures Satan, Jezebel pictures Satan’s organization, Jehu pictures Jesus Christ, and Jehu meeting Jonadab pictures the present association of the Jonadabs with the members of the body of Christ. We ask, Does the Bible give these explanations’ We are told, no, but physical facts prove these interpretations to be true. In the Word of God we read:


(1) Ahab was slain in the battle fifteen years before Jehu met Jonadab.’1 22:37,51 2Ki 3:1 10:24???: see also 1Ki 21:27.


(2) Jezebel, Ahab’s seventy sons, Ahab’s great men and kinsfolk and his priests were slain before Jehu before Jehu met Jonadab.’2 Kings 9 and 10.


(3) When Jehu became king, ‘he departed not from the sins of Jeroboam, which made Israel to sin.”2Ki 10:31.


(4) History, observation and our Lord’s testimony of \Mt 13:20,21 agree that an earthly-minded class, not spirit-begotten, has mingled with the spirit-begotten class throughout the whole Gospel age.


(5) This same interpreter, elsewhere writes that Satan will see every member of his rule destroyed, religious, commercial, political, and then Satan himself shall be destroyed last of all.


We read further,’ The inhabitants of Canaan pictured Christendom of today. The Gibeonites, however, had heard of Jericho and were ‘sore afraid’ of the Israelites. Working craftily, the Gibeonites, who picture the Jonadabs of today, beguiled Joshua with a tall story about a long journey from a far country, offering seeming proof, which Joshua, a picture of the Lord Jesus, believed. Failing to ‘ask counsel at the mouth of the Lord’ (vs. 14), a league was made with them and sworn to. Three days later they were discovered to be neighbors of the Israelites, who were now bent on destroying them but were persuaded to respect the oath before God. Joshua said to the Gibeonites, ‘Wherefore have ye lied unto us. Now therefore ye are cursed and none of you shall be freed from bing bondmen and ye shall be hewers of wood and drawers of water for the congregation of Israel.’ {Jos 9:1-27} And yet pages are devoted to prove the Gibeonites picture the Jonadabs!


If Origen interpreted that Pharaoh pictures Satan and Pharaoh’s daughter the church, thus making the bride of Christ the daughter of the devil, can it be said that modern types are of a superior order’


These are but samples of hundreds of weird and contradictory ‘interpretations,’ now being set forth. How evident that this picture method of interpreting the Bible enables one to read practically what he wishes into the Word of God. In a sense it is quite an easy method to use. It is mostly a matter of getting started on the right track; and that right track is to arbitrarily assume divine appointment, hence divine approval and favor for one’s self. The next logical surmise,’ which soon becomes a dogma’ is that those who agree with the interpreter are also heaven’s favorites; and that those who do not, are children of the devil, or if not children of the devil, renegades, outcasts from divine favor, no matter how much of the love of God may be in their hearts.

Interpretations Follow a Logical Sequence


From here on, interpretations merely follow a logical sequence. Every character in the Bible whom God specially favored usually represents the interpreter and his followers; while those characters who were unfaithful to God and whom He punished, represent the devil and those who disagree with the interpreter. Starting upon this wrongly surmised premise, it is obvious that anyone can make up wonderful pictures, and have them apparently fit the circumstances.


And these pictures may seem logical until a closer examination is made of all the facts relating to them; and when this closer examination is made, the interpretations are found to be absurd and contradictory. This method, for example, enables one to say in 1931 that the Edomites represent a certain class, and then in 1936 to say that they represent an entirely different class. It outlines a ‘mighty work’ of gathering ‘Jonadabs’ at the end of the age, while the only divine commission to the church for a gathering this side of the veil is that of making disciples, gathering them into the one faith, by the one baptism, inspiring them with the one glorious hope of the heavenly calling.


To these the New Testament is addressed; and its direct teachings, and its applications of Old Testament lessons, set forth the conditions upon which the church may aspire for joint-heirship with Jesus in His glorious Kingdom soon to be established. But, throughout the age, and even now, the advocates of ‘picture’ teaching have actually typed aside, or annulled, the preaching of the one true gospel,  and have substituted other gospels that are of purely human origin and guesswork, and to which the Lord and the apostles gave no testimony.


This discussion is not intended to convey the thought that there is nothing typical in the Old Testament; for that would be swinging to the other extreme. The tabernacle and its services were typical, and the Lord makes it very plain that this is so. Nearly the entire book of Hebrews substantiates this thought, having much to say concerning those ‘shadows of good things to come.’ As already noted, Adam, Abel, Noah, Abraham, Isaac, Moses, David, Namaan, etc. also Cain, Korah and Balaam are mentioned in the New Testament as being typical. The point is, let us not go beyond what the Scriptures clearly show to be typical in the lives of these characters. Let us, on the other hand, give even closer attention to the example of faithfulness given us by so many of the ancient worthies, and seek to profit by that example in being more faithful to our vows of consecration to the Lord. Let us also give closer heed to the warnings furnished by the historical accounts of those who, for one reason or another, and in one way or another, were faithful to the Lord.


Pastor Russell said (1910). ‘Bearing fruit does not consist in imagination and making of all sorts of types. I am sorry to see such a tendency of some to make types out of everything and to take their own minds as well as the minds of others from the more important things. I am afraid the adversary is behind some of this type-making. Stick to the types explained in the Scriptures.’


The inspired Scriptures are given for instruction in righteousness, for doctrine, for reproof, etc., and they are profitable for this. To follow the inspired Word implicitly is to remain sound in the faith; to give heed to fantastic interpretations which claim to be based upon the Word often leads one away from the ‘faith which was once delivered unto the saints,’ and into strenuous efforts in a ‘mighty work,’ whereunto God has not called, {Ro 10:2} and into a zeal but not according to knowledge.’Mt 7:22.


There is no better evidence of this than in the fact that many who rejoice din the glorious hope of the blessing of all the families of the earth through the ‘restitution of all things spoken by the mouth of all the holy prophets since the world began,’ are now basing their hope for filling the earth upon the fertility of the Jonadab class, having through their interpretations of Old Testament pictures, convinced themselves that very few of the millions of Adam’s children are to have a resurrection.


A few years ago, the author of ‘Harp’ (1921) said: ‘Unless mankind has a full and fair opportunity to be restored to the perfect condition enjoyed by father Adam in Eden, then the promises of God are meaningless.’ ‘The fact of Jesus’ resurrection is a guarantee that all shall have an opportunity for life’ (200 verses of Scriptures are then cited as promises. Page 331 of the ‘Harp’).


Even though this author once wrote, ‘Here again we must not let the type teach us something not plainly stated elsewhere,’ yet today the book is discarded, its truths repudiated, the world of mankind and the 200 verses of Scripture are actually ‘typed’ aside to make room for those who believe and publish a type ‘Fill The Earth.’