I believe many Hardshell "historians," like Sylvestor Hassell, have been dishonest historians, leaving out any information that was detrimental to their perversions of historical facts.
I expect that this book, when completed, and when read by the Hardshells, will cause many to attempt to ignore it. But, this will not be possible. You cannot ignore the truth, even if you try. It has a way of eating at one's conscience like a cancer.
I just had another very heated discussion with dad on points relative to my historical research. We have had many and did I publish write ups of them, some would find them quite interesting.
I have discovered that Elder Wilson Thompson, probably the most recognized "founding father" of all those who can be so denominated, also believed, along with Gilbert Beebe and Samuel Trott, with whom he had close fellowship, that the new birth occurred through the means of the gospel. I have also presented evidence that one of the leading Old School or Hardshell Elders in the state of Kentucky, in the mid 19th century, Elder William Conrad, believed it. I assume he was in fellowship with Elder Wilson Thompson and his son Elder Grigg Thompson.
Wilson Thompson also held to the "three stage model" of the Christian experience of being "born again." He believed, with Beebe and Trott, that "regeneration" or "quickening" occurred first, without the gospel, and that the immediate effect of this was to be under conviction of sin (in the womb, as it were), but was not yet "born," or "brought forth," or "delivered" (from the womb of conviction) until one embraced Christ in the gospel.
Well, my dad's church is called "Thompson Memorial Primitive Baptist Church," which is sufficient testimony to the status of Elder Wilson Thompson (and his son Elder Grigg Thompson too) with dad and his church, and reflects the general high standing that the father particularly has had within the Hardshell brotherhood generally.
I have revealed two facts about both father and son that has not been readily acknowledged by dad, even though incontrovertible evidence has been presented. I have told him that this is evidence of his being in a "cult." He has been brainwashed and has substituted his allegiance to the word for allegiance to a sect of men.
The fact about the son, Grigg Thompson, is that he was a freemason, and Hardshells have historically, and almost universally, had no fellowship nor tolerance for anyone who was a mason. It was always grounds for church exclusion and for a "non-fellowshiping" resolution. This evidence, when first presented to Elder C. H. Cayce, was vehemently refused as truthful. But, when Cayce was finally presented with the facts, and when he could no longer thus deny it, he admitted it in his "Editorial Writings."
So, what does this prove? It proves 1) that my dad would not even fellowship a man that his church is named after! 2) that my dad and many Hardshells simply do not know their true history!
Elder Wilson Thompson is often cited by today's Hardshells wherein he says that men are "regenerated" or "quickened" without the gospel as a means. They think they have someone "early on" then who agreed with their novel ideas. But, Thompson, if you read all he says on the subject, will discover that he believed in the "three stage model" and that a man was not "born again," though "regenerated" and "convicted," until he embraced Christ by faith through the gospel.
Well, dad did not know this! Yet, he is so learned in their history! I suspect he is just like so many of today's Hardshells! They simply do not know their own history but keep parroting their traditional distorted views. Actually, there are more shocking things to be revealed about Thompson and many other of the first "anti-mission" Baptists that many Hardshells will not want to admit is the truth, simply because they are wedded to their own ideas.
I will again throw out a challenge to all Hardshells who are following me while I write this book:
Show me who, prior to 1860, held modern Hardshell views on the new birth. I will offer evidence that it was not till the latter part of the nineteenth century that modern Hardshells (who say that one does not have to have a gospel faith to be saved or born again) came into being as the predominant representative sect of those who today call themselves "Primitive Baptists." They have no leading spokesman for that view prior to the 1860s'.
Please stay tuned as I hope to publish in upcoming chapters some very important information. Again, the silence of Hardshells thus far, only shows that truth does "stop mouths" and that the Hardshells "cannot handle the truth."
William H. Crouse wrote:
"To be born really signifies to be produced or brought into life. The word has come to be applied, however, by common usage, to the bringing forth of that which already has being and life. According to the former, which is the primary and real signification of the term, no distinction can be made between the begetting and the birth. To say that one is begotten of God in this sense, is to say that he is born of God. According to the latter there is a distinction, the soul being quickened by the Spirit and caused to travel in a mourning state until the time of deliverance from trouble. It depends upon what one means to express by the term birth, then, whether or not he is authorized to make a distinction. Where it is said in the scriptures that we are born of God, it is the same as saying that we are begotten of God; that is, that God is our Father."
(www.carthage.lib.il.us/community/churches/primbap/DailyEditorials)
Modern Hardshells have divorced the experience of convicting sinners from the preaching of the gospel. They believe that not only the initial planting of life is the irresistable work of God, wherein the sinner is wholly passive, but also the post regeneration work of conviction. As the Spirit used no means in the former, so too most believe he uses none in the latter. To preach so as to attempt to convict the heart of unregenerate men is to them both unscriptural and illogical.
Elder Crouse may not believe in the "three stage model," being an early 20th century Progressive Hardshell, of the "new birth," but he cannot deny that this was the predominant view of the "Old School" party from 1832 till at least the 1860's. This can be proven by the facts.
The Old Regular Hardshell Baptist on the Three Stage Model
"The Old Regular Baptists are an American Christian denomination based primarily in the Appalachian region of the United States."
History
"Most Regular Baptists merged with the Separate Baptists near the beginning of 19th century. The party names were dropped in favor of United Baptists. The use of the name "Regular" has persisted among some Baptist groups, particularly among primitivistic sects that reject modern methods, including missionary and educational auxiliaries for the churches. Most Old Regular Baptists can be traced back to the New Salem Association of United Baptists (org. in eastern Kentucky in 1825). In 1854 the name was changed to "Regular United", to "Regular Primitive" in 1870, to "Regular Baptist" in 1871 and then in 1892 to "Old Regular." The minutes of New Salem Association in 1892 indicate that they feared the extremism of some predestinarians that tended toward teaching God is the author of sin. Those associations and churches that do not trace their lineage through the New Salem, such as Mountain, Mud River, Twin Creek and others, along with some churches that are in the larger associations, may have originated in the North District Association; or else like the Mud River churches originated from the Particular Baptist. Yet others have left Primitive Baptist and United Baptist Associations and found a home among the Old Regular Baptist. The word "old" was added to Regular Baptist soon after many Regular Baptist had joined and or began to correspond with mission boards, this was done to distinguish the Old (or original) Regular Baptist from the New School Baptist that had emerged throughout the United States. Old Regular Baptist have had several divisions through the years in the 1960's a debate started over when everlasting (eternal) life began, many Old Regular Baptist hold the same views as the Primitive Baptist [some historians consider the Old Regular Baptist a branch of the Primitive Baptist, that held to a stricter order but more liberal in doctrine, allowing for different views on the atonement]. While the doctrine of some Old Regular Baptist would be in harmony with the majority of Primitive Baptist today, others among the Regulars hold to a more modified Calvinism, this difference led to the light is life split that took place in the Union Association. This division soon spread to other associations brought on by requests sent to them from the Union Association, resulting in the isolation of the Mud River Association, and the formation of the Bethel Association, other associations like the New Salem, chose not to divide over this issue, often churches and associations and even Elders are distinguished by which side of this debate they are on, those that hold to the doctrine that an individual is first begotten or quickened into life at the start of their travail, are called the "hard shell side" of Old Regular Baptist or the Old School, [this appears to be the original view of the first Regular Baptist in America] those who hold that life starts at the end of their travail (repentance) are called the "soft shell side". Today the debate is still among the Old Regular Baptist along with when one receives faith, men and women's dress, the receiving of divorced members, the doctrinal differences over hope and knowledge."
"The theology of the group is "election by grace", as stated in the scripture "By Grace are ye saved through faith. While all Old Regulars preach "election by grace" a difference of opinion exists among them concerning election and predestination. Today depending on which group you hear preach, their doctrine ranges from absolute predestination to man being a free moral agent. The majority of Old Regular Baptist hold to a doctrine that is between these extremes, with absolutism the smallest minority. Some churches and associations would be in doctrinal sympathy with the Old Line Primitive Baptist others would be closer to the United Baptist. Churches form local associations by which they fellowship with one another. This fellowship is formally maintained by the associations electing "correspondents" to attend the meetings of the other associations. Preachers are God-called, not trained by man, and unpaid, and preach "improvisational" (often chanted) sermons. Baptism (in running water), the Lord's supper and feet washing are held to be ordinances. Shouting is a frequent occurrence at Old Regular meeting, particularly among the female membership. Conversion experiences may be a lengthy "process," beginning with an awakening to sin, through a period of conviction and travail of the soul, to repentance and belief." (From Wikipedia)
First, the leading Hardshell spokesmen, in this period of time, men such as Samuel Trott, Joshua Lawrence, Gilbert Beebe, Wilson Thompson, all believed it, and if others did not believe it, they show that they constituted a minority within the "Old School" movement, and further that they could fellowship the "Beebe-Trott Model."
One thing is clear from this first Hardshell paradigm on the experience of the "new birth"; it held within it the view that all the elect would not only be "regenerated," but that they would also be "converted," and this conversion experience was evangelic, being the time when the regenerated and quickened soul was delivered (born) out of the womb of conviction, and setting his faith in Christ Jesus and the gospel of his atoning death. In other words, all the elect would hear the gospel.
There was also, during this first Hardshell generational time period (1832-1860's), a very heterogeneous group under the umbrella name of "Old School," or of "Anti-Mission" Baptists. Some were more opposed to one thing than to another. Within this heterogeneous group were opposers of Sunday Schools, Muscial Instruments in worship, theological schools, salaried ministers, mission methods and boards, general benevolent societies, etc. In this respect, the history of the first generation of Hardshells greatly resembles the history of the twin of the Hardshells, the Campbellites (or followers of Alexander Campbell, who also had his "hay day" in the same period of time), but I will address this in greater detail in upcoming chapters, but mention the fact here so that the reader may understand that very little can be said about the "Old School" and the "antis" of this period that is universal of every sub-sect within the general movement.
Not all those who were opposers of mission methods, by the Baptist, through a general denominational cooperation, opposed the view that regeneration and the new birth took place, as the Confessions stated, through the instrumentality of the preached gospel. The fact is, among those who came to be styled "anti-mission" or "anti-means," only few were were "ultraist."
The "antinomians," or "ultraists," as Dr. Watson styled them, were a minority among the heterogeneous group that were "anti" means and missions.
The term "human means" would become a veritable "hot potato" for the Hardshells throughout the nineteeth century. This will become fully evident in upcoming chapters. This term did not all signify the same thing by those who used the term, even among those within the greater umbrella group of "Old School." Not all those who affirmed that they were against "human means" in salvation meant that they were against God using ministers and the gospel they preach to call and regenerate the elect, or against "divine means."
They were against believing that any invention or institution of human creation could be a means in that work, human means such as mission boards and societies, or high pressure invitation tactics, or special music, etc., but that was not the same as affirming that God used Paul to regenerate sinners. They were not against human means in an absolute sense, but only in the sense as mentioned above, where they are against means and methods not authorized in the bible.
Recall these words from the "Signs of the Times."
"We agree with Elder Buckles in the opinion expressed by him, that much of the seeming difference of views recently expressed on the subject of regeneration and the new birth arises from a failure with brethren to perfectly understand each other. Much labor is, in some cases, lost in argument to prove what no one intends to dispute, and to establish points which belong not to the general issue. We presume that all Old School Baptists fully agree, so far as they understand each other, in what constitutes a genuine and reliable Christian experience, at least so far as the sensible demonstration of God's quickening power is felt and witnessed by all the children of God. So that in examining those who desire our fellowship, and apply for admission to the communion of the church, we have no trouble in understanding the relation they give of the dealings of the Lord with them. Even the tongue of the stammerer can pronounce the Shibboleth clear and distinctly.
We also, with brother Buckles, hold that regeneration, in the order of things, and according to the word, must precede the new birth. How can that be born of God that is not first begotten of him?" (Elder Gilbert Beebe, Middletown, N.Y.June 1, 1868. Editorials, Volume 7 – Pages 198-202)
(http://www.geocities.com/docsofgrace/)
For an historian of the history of the "Primitive" or "Old School" Baptist, as myself, this is an important citation to consider. The time it was made (1868) is also of crucial significance. This writing testifies of a "seeming difference of views recently expressed on the subject of regeneration and the new birth."
I have been trying to identify all the leading periodicals published by the Hardshells since their founding. I have especially been interested in periodicals of the 19th century, and even more particularly in the 1827-1860 period of time. So far in my research I have been able to identify only three Hardshell periodicals in the beginning of their existence as a separate denomination. (More on this in upcoming chapters, especially that series to be called "Evolution in Doctrine")
Thompson wrote:
"The gospel is sent to men as sinners, lying in the ruins of the first Adam, lost and condemned under the sentence of death; and proclaims and reveals the righteousness of Christ, as the justification of the ungodly..." (Triumph of Truth, chapter 8)
I don't know any neo-Hardshell who could, in good faith, endorse this statement. If it were made by a Hardshell minister today, that minister would be in lots of "hot water." Today's Hardshells do not believe that the "gospel is sent to men AS SINNERS," to men who are "lost" and to men who are "condemned under the sentence of death," but rather deny it, as I showed in my former series on "Addresses to the Lost." I could just have well put this citation of Elder Wilson Thompson there, along with those from his son Grigg, for it seems both father and son had no problem calling upon dead alien sinners to hear and believe the gospel. Who is more "Primitive" Baptist, using the two great Thompson Elders as our criteria, on this point? Those who call upon all men to believe the gospel, or those who do not?
And again:
"It is God that justifieth, who is he that condemneth? It is Christ that died, and so we see that justification is of the grace of God through the blood and righteousness of Christ, and faith is the Spirit's evidence of it to and for the comfort of the soul; and this is according to the experience of every truly regenerated man or woman, and I shall now show something of the way in which the experience of the people of God agrees with the doctrine of this discourse." (Ibid)
"Now men do not feel their condemnation properly until they are quickened by the Spirit; but as soon as they are made alive they begin to feel and see, and so faith is one of the first fruits of the Spirit; it views the excellency of the divine character, and the beauty of holiness, and begins to pant for the living God. Although the awakened sinner now has faith; its eye is not directed to Christ, but he now sees the glory and justice of God, and the purity of the law, and by the law he has a knowledge of sin; and so he begins to abhor himself and repent; he looks at himself in his fallen state, in relation to the first Adam, and sees that he is a condemned criminal; he reads the law, it sentences him to death and condemnation, and as he is wedded to a covenant of works , and sees not his relation to Christ, he begins to try to reform and keep the law, and work for life; and however long he may work under this legal persuasion, he finds but a poor reward, and at length he finds that all his plans are thwarted, and he is like the woman in the gospel that had spent all she had with physicians, and had got nothing better, but rather grew worse. Now the quickened sinner sees what he is in himself, and in relation to the first Adam, and that in this relation he is condemned to death, and can never be justified by any work or sacrifice in his power; all his hopes of obtaining salvation by the deeds of the law, gives up the ghost, for sin now appears exceedingly sinful, and it takes an occasion by the commandment to slay the sinner , who is ready to say, the commandment is holy, just and good, but I am carnal, sold under sin. Sin works by that which is good, and the sinner dies to all hope of ever being justified by any works of his own, and as if cut off from every other refuge, he cries, "God be merciful to me a sinner. " His expectation being cut off from everything else, he looks to God only, and falls as a pensioner on his mercy and grace, filled with the deepest sense of his condemnation, and the impossibility of being justified by the works of the law. This is his state as he stands in himself, and in relation to the first Adam, and this he clearly sees; but here the gospel reveals to faith the righteousness of God, and by faith the soul views his justification complete in the blood and righteousness of Christ; not that his faith hath justified him, but by faith he sees that which was a truth before he saw it; and his soul seems to melt like wax into the depth of humility , and yet he rejoices, he is amazed at the matchless grace of God, is almost ready to wonder he never saw this before; the fulness of Christ engages his confidence, and the sentiments of the soul is, "In the Lord have I righteousness and strength, he has become my salvation. " Now all this comfort flows from the evidence which faith bears to the soul, of its interest in and relation to Christ the second Adam; and from this view of his relation to Christ, in his death and resurrection, he builds his only hope for salvation in Christ, and this building is what is called the faith of reliance; and so it is written, "The just shall live by faith. " To live by faith is to live relying on Christ, looking to Christ, and trusting in his righteousness, faithfulness, and truth. Faith as an act, has nothing in it to comfort the soul, but it brings all its comforts from its object, and so faith, though one of the first fruits which the Spirit produces in the soul, can afford no comfort to the soul until its eye is directed to Christ, and his blood and righteousness, which the gospel reveals to it, nor even then will it afford comfort to the soul, unless it views the relation in which the soul stands to that righteousness; for we may have strong faith in Christ, as one able to save, and yet have no comfortable assurance that he will save me; as the man in the gospel had a strong faith in the ability of Christ, and said, "If thou wilt thou canst make me clean, " but when faith views him, " The Lord our righteousness," the soul can rejoice, and say, "In the Lord have I righteousness. "
Notice again that Thompson says that "conviction" is a "legal work" as contrasted with a work of grace. He also says that one does not have a faith with Christ as an object until the gospel is heard and believed, and does not have any comfort or hope of salvation till then.
He says further:"Christian reader, is it not according to thy own experience? The awakened sinner has faith in God, and in Christ as being righteous, but sees not his own relation to that righteousness, and therefore he is not comforted, but hungers and thirsts after righteousness, and although the promise is positive, " He shall be comforted, " yet the soul cannot see how this can be; but when by faith the soul receives an evidence that it is related to Christ as its righteousness, it is then that it is filled and can rejoice in hope of the glory of God, and puts no confidence in the flesh; and so says Paul, "The life which I now live in the flesh, I live by the faith of the Son of God, who loved me, and gave himself for me. "" (Ibid)
Again, this is additional evidence that Thompson was not opposed to praying for the regeneration of lost sinners. It proves he was not opposed to using "words and arguments" to incite sinners to consideration of the gospel. It also shows he was not opposed to calling upon all men to believe and repent. As I have shown also, his son, Elder Grigg Thompson, certainly had no qualms about doing so as he closed many of his sermons with stirring exhortations to the spiritually dead sinner! I do not see where he was diverting from the practice of his father Wilson, nor of the Baptists of prior days.
(http://primitivebaptist.info/mambo//content/view/559/36/)In a letter to the "Signs" -- Jan 25, 1836, from Elder Thompson to Elder Beebe, Thompson addresses his letter, saying - "Brother Beebe..."
These men fellowshipped one another, preached together. Certainly Elder Thompson knew the view of Beebe and Trott on the new birth. If he did not himself believe in the three stage model of the new birth, he certainly had no difficulty having church fellowship with those who did. I will also show, in upcoming chapters, that Thompson also was willing to fellowship those Baptists who believed in gospel means, but who opposed boards, modern misssions, theological and Sunday Schools, etc., and remained Calvinistic.
I think the evidence I have presented thus far from the writings of Thompson that he also believed in the three stage model. If this is so, it does little good for modern Hardshells to cite him or Beebe wherein they say that "regeneration" is not by means of the gospel, for this does not exclude their believing that the experience of being "born again" was likewise apart from the means of the gospel.
What modern Hardshells must do is produce a leading writer, prior to the 1860's, who taught that both regeneration and the new birth were apart from the means of the application of gospel truth to the mind.
I wish now to bring up the experience of Elder Wilson Thompson's wife. It was from her conversion that he was ultimately himself converted. His own conversion, as I have shown, is not against the use of means, and he makes no effort to exclude them in telling his experience. So too his wife, for she clearly makes them the means in her own rebirth.
The Religious Experience of the Wife of Elder Wilson Thompson
"Myself, with several neighbor children, attended an evening service in the Old Baptist meeting house near my father's home I then, as for some time past, imagined myself a much more consistent Christian than most professing people. I often found myself commenting on the faults and imagined the shortcomings of even my own dear parents. Filled with self-righteousness, I joined the singing in lull harmony, so far a voice was concerned, fully satisfied with myself in every way, until the minister repeated his text, which was these words, ‘For the great day of his wrath is come; and who shall be able to stand?’ Rev. vi. 17. I realized a feeling similar to a shock. The words, ‘Who shall be able to stand,’ seemed to be addressed to me personally. A trembling fear seized me, and all my props of self-righteousness and good works fell from under the, and left me overwhelmed with a feeling of helplessness and utter despair. Under this load of condemnation, I returned to my father's house. This distress of mind continued with very little change for some time, so much so that it became observable to all my friends.
One day my mother, who had noticed a change in my general manners, also the usual sadness of my countenance, said, ‘Polly, [as such I was called commonly] what is the matter with you, you eat so little and seem so sad? Are you well?’ ‘O mother!’ I cried, ‘I feel that I must die. I don't know what to do. I feel so sinful!’ She asked some questions as to the cause of my trouble. After I answered as best I could, she counseled me to go to Christ as the only hope of deliverance, bid me seek his mercy in prayer, for his sufferings on the cross were to redeem just such sinners as I felt myself to be. This advice comforted me. I resolved at once to try to pray. I had tried so often before arid failed to find relief. My sins arose before me. They seemed like mountains pressing me down. In my inmost heart, I was calling on God to have mercy on my poor soul. Yet, it seemed that I could not pray. This unhappy state of mind continued for some time. When some friends of my parents were spending the day with us, I was told to take charge of a small child while the parents ate dinner, I did so, and seating myself near a stand or table on which lay a hymn book, so great was my distress of mind, I grasped the book, hoping, yet despairing, to find comfort to my poor heart. On opening the book my eyes fell on these lines, no others seemed visible:
'While Jesus shows his heart is mine, And whispers I am his. 'Inexpressible joy filled my soul and involuntarily I praised God for his goodness to me, a poor sinner." (http://primitivebaptist.info/mambo//content/view/267/36/)
The means of the gospel was all a part of this woman's experience of conversion! She does not consider herself to have been born again till she came to faith in Christ, from her state of conviction (which itself was the result of gospel preaching), when she was "filled with joy." In fact, I have cited numerous statements from several Hardshell leaders wherein they state that the experience of the new birth makes a sinner happy. It is only later generations of Hardshells who taught that the new birth experience made the sinner sad.
"Elder John A. Thompson (grandson of Wilson Thompson) in his memorable debate with Benjamin Franklin (Campbellites) at Reynoldsburg, Ohio, in the year 1874, affirmed the following proposition:
“The quickening of the sinner by the Spirit of God into new life, or eternal life, is independent of the written word or scriptures.”
"Twenty-one years before this debate was held Elder Joel Hume held a public discussion with this same Mr. Franklin. That was in 1853. It was held at Mt. Vernon, Ind. In that debate Elder Hume taught and defended the same truth."
Yes, all that may be true, but did they also believe in the three stage model? Were they using the words "regeneration" and "quickening" as equivalent with being "born"? Since we have shown that the three stage model of the new birth was the predominant view, in the 1820-1860 period, the burden of proof rests on others to prove that the above named men, rejected that view.
No comments:
Post a Comment