Elder James Osbourn

Elder James Osbourn

1780 - 1850

The above is a picture of this leader of the anti-mission movement that produced the "Primitive" or "Old School" Baptist sect. It took me time to finally find it, being taken from his book "The Lawful Captive Delivered..." It also took me awhile to find pictures of Elder John M. Watson and Elder R.W. Fain. Many "Primitive Baptists" esteemed him very highly, while others seem to be jealous of his influence. He caused some to oppose him because he spoke out against the rampant Sabellianism among many "Primitive Baptists." According to Elder Henry Sheets in his book "History of the Liberty Baptist Association: From Its Organization in 1832 to 1906" 

"Elder James Osbourn was perhaps the leading spirit in bringing about the split. Yet this item from the record tells us where he once was: "In 1817 'a committee was appointed for Domestic Missionary Affairs,' and Brethren O. B. Brown, James Osbourn and Spencer H. Cone were appointed as Home Missionaries." James Osbourn appointed a Missionary! He was Then a Primitive Baptist." 

In one post on Osbourn I wrote (See here):

"According to a present day "Primitive Baptist" web page, edited by Elder David Montgomery, "Elder Osbourn was a staunch defender of the old paths. In the 1832 split with the Missionaries, he was instrumental in keeping many faithful to the truth. His opposition to the new and unscriptural ideas being promoted, earned him the ire of the new schoolers. However, we Primitives owe him a debt of gratitude."

Another PB elder said this about Osbourn:

"In my library I have four books written by James Osbourn. James Osbourn was born in England in 1780, sat under the ministry of the celebrated William Huntington, and converted under the ministry of John Harm. Later, Osbourn moved to America and was blessed to preach extensively and to write several books. Historian Sylvster Hassell said of him that he "was an Englishman, who traveled and preached much , and wrote many religious books." He was a part of the presbytery that ordained Sylvester Hassell's father, C. B. Hassell. Osbourn's autobiography is "The Lawful Captive Delivered.""  (See here)

Sylvester Hassell also says that Osbourn was one of their ministers in his and his father's History. Elder John M. Watson thought very highly of Osbourn.

Osbourn, however, was no friend of Wilson Thompson because of his Sabellianism. He was no friend to Beebe and Trott and the "Signs of the Times" periodical also, and I have in posts shown evidence of this. Welsh Tract Publications gives Trott's response to Osbourn's attack against Hardshell Sabellianism (here). Osbourn was also a friend of Elder C.B. Hassell and even died in his house in 1850. Osbourn was one of the presbyters in the ordination of C.B. Hassell. 

In my writings on Osbourn's beliefs I show that he believed in gospel means, which was the common view of "Primitive Baptists" in the 1820s and 1830s. Below is a list of my posts on Osbourn and also a list of some of the leading books and pamphlets of Osbourn, who was a good and fluent writer. He was born in England and lived there for some periods of his life and was a friend of William Huntington. He lived in Baltimore, Maryland when living in America. 

Posts On Osbourn

"Elder James Osbourne on Means" (here)

"Elder James Osbourn On Gospel Means" (here)

"Hardshell Sabellianism" (here)

"Hardshell Sabellianism II" (here)

"Elder James Osbourn's Creed" (here)

"History of Baptist Mission Work II" (here)

Books by Osbourn

"A Fac Simile Or The Religion Of New England Portrayed: To Which Is Added, A Journal Of Facts"

"A Christian Described, And His Right Proved And Vindicated" (Available here)

"Spiritual Gleanings, or the Celestial Fruit from the Tree of Life. Intended for the Use and Benefit of Sin-sick Souls. Also, A Cluster of Evangelical Truths, Brought from the Gospel Field; in a Series of Letters to William Fewell, Esq." (1845)

"The Lawful Captive Delivered or, the Prey Taken from the Mighty" (1835) (Available here)

"North Carolina sonnets, or A selection of choice hymns for the use of Old School Baptists : compiled by the recommendation of the Kehukee Association" (1845) (Available here)

"Divine Communications or Spiritual Letters" (1822) (Available here)

"Spiritual Gleanings, or Celestial Fruit from the Tree of Life. Intended for the Use and Benefit of Sin-Sick Souls" (1847) (Available )

"A Glimpse of the Building of Mercy; Or, An Outline of the Mystical Building of Christ: and A Sketch of the Ancient House of the Hagarenes; or, The Tabernacle of Anti-Christ Pourtrayed" (1848 London)

"A Christian Described, and His Right Proved and Vindicated" (Available here)

"A Selection of Hymns, and Spiritual Songs," often referred to as "Osbourn's Selection"

"A review of the base conduct of William Parkinson, pastor of the First Baptist Church, in the city of New York in a letter to Thomas Cottrell" (Available here)

Citations From Osbourn's Creed

Osbourn gives twelve articles for his creed in the book "The Lawful Captive Delivered..." Here are some of them which show that he believed in means.

7. I believe that to all and every one of those persons, thus beloved by the Father from everlasting, and in time redeemed by the Son; the Holy Spirit is sent for the purpose of quickening, and enlightening, and preparing them for glory above; and that this Holy Spirit never was, nor can be, defeated in his design and work with those persons composing the true catholic church, or the mystical body of Christ.

8. I believe that all the ways, and works, and means, which the God of heaven hath ordained to make use of in effecting the salvation of men, ought, so far as they are binding on us, to be made use of by us, that we thereby may be benefitted, and the Lord God honored and adored.

9. I believe the Old and the New Testament to be the true and only written word of God; and that the Lord hath ordained that this his written word, and the preaching of the gospel shall be the chief means whereby to accomplish the conversion of sinners, and the edification of saints; and that whereever those means are sent, it is the duty of all men to attend upon them in due order, and also to believe the report which those means make, which thing can be done as easily as to believe the report of common things, when such reports are made. Yes, the report of the gospel can be believed, and often is, by natural men, or men in a natural state. But to believe the written word of God, and to receive the gospel, as preached by the Lord’s true sent servants, TO THE SALVATION OF THE SOUL, is effected in no other way than by the energetic influence of divine grace in the heart of the man so believing the written word of God, and so receiving the gospel preached.

10. I believe that the bodies as well as the souls of elect persons, are the purchase of a Redeemer’s blood; consequently their bodies will be raised from their graves, and their souls re-enter them in a day yet to come, and so both bodies and souls ascend with Christ to glory; and that the happiness of the saints, and the misery of the wicked, are alike interminable.

11. I believe in the doctrine of eternal union of Christ and his church; and that in time, this church receiveth divine life, and light, and glory, and beauty, and wisdom, and strength, and comfort, and joy, and peace, and faith, and hope from Christ, her covenant head; and that those things thus received from him, make up what we call, vital union between Christ and his people. And as they are thus brought to believe in the Lord of glory, and from him to receive eternal life, they shall never perish, for “who shall lay any thing to the charge -of God’s elect? It is God that justifieth,” Rom. 8. 33. 7

In my post "Elder James Osbourne on Means" (here) I cited these words that Osbourn wrote for the first widely supported periodical, "The Christian Doctrinal Advocate and Spiritual Monitor," which was edited by Elder Daniel Jewett. Elder C.B. Hassell married Jewett's widow after the death of Daniel and the death of C.B. Hassell's first wife. 

"But if so be that the specific object which the Deity had in-view, and designed to accomplish by means of, or in a way compatible with the gospel which he ordained and promulgated, was the eternal salvation of the bride, the Lamb's wife, Rev. 21; 9; we then of course may safely conclude, that that specific object must and will be accomplished, just in that way and manner as infinite wisdom may have dictated. And lo, this is what we do believe and rejoice in; and in the gospel we also believe, every necessary arrangement and provision is made and permanently settled for the effecting the salvation of that church which was the object of God's everlasting love and delight, and which he gave to his Son before time began.

That God ordained the GOSPEL, and promulgated the same, with a settled purpose to save sinners thereby; and hence in this his gospel he says, "I will give them an heart to know me, that 1 am the Lord; and they shall be my people, and I will be their God : for they shall return unto me with,their whole heart." And again says the Lord, 'Zaccheus make haste and come down, for to day I must abide at thy house.' And again it is said, 'As many as were ordained to eternal life believed.' And we are told that the Lord works in men to will and to do of his own good pleasure; and that Christ came to seek and to save that which was lost; Jer. 24, 7; Luke, 19, 5; Acts, 11, 48; Phil. 2, 13; Luke 19, 10. (14, 15)." (pg. 14) (See here)

Overall, I think that Osbourn was the best educated and well versed in scripture than any "Primitive" or "Old School" Baptist of his day. He was widely looked up to by many in the anti-mission movement. If he were here today he would be disgusted and amazed by what the "Primitive Baptist" denomination has become.

In the above citations we see where Osbourn, though believing in an eternal union between Christ and the church (or elect), did not believe that vital union with Christ occured until Christ was received by faith. So, he would no doubt have been an opponent of Two Seedism.

Osbourn came though this section of North Carolina in the early 19th century and preached in several churches, including, I believe, Meadow Creek Primitive Baptist Church.

Elder James Osbourne on Means

James Osbourn was one of the first leaders in the anti mission movement and had much to do with the separation of the Hardshells from the main body of Baptists. He lived in Baltimore, Maryland, and was a member of the Baltimore Association of Baptists. He was friends with the first leaders in the Hardshell movement, with men such as Gilbert Beebe, Samuel Trott, Ambrose Booten, Joshua Lawrence, John M. Watson, etc.

According to a present day "Primitive Baptist" web page, edited by Elder David Montgomery, "Elder Osbourn was a staunch defender of the old paths. In the 1832 split with the Missionaries, he was instrumental in keeping many faithful to the truth. His opposition to the new and unscriptural ideas being promoted, earned him the ire of the new schoolers. However, we Primitives owe him a debt of gratitude."

Another PB elder said this about Osbourn:

"In my library I have four books written by James Osbourn. James Osbourn was born in England in 1780, sat under the ministry of the celebrated William Huntington, and converted under the ministry of John Harm. Later, Osbourn moved to America and was blessed to preach extensively and to write several books. Historian Sylvster Hassell said of him that he "was an Englishman, who traveled and preached much , and wrote many religious books." He was a part of the presbytery that ordained Sylveter Hassell's father, C. B. Hassell. Osbourn's autobiography is "The Lawful Captive Delivered.""

See here

Not all PB's seem to think so highly of Elder Osbourn, however, nor recognize the leading role he had in the creation of their sect. I have a book published by the "Primitive Baptists" called "Biographical History of Primitive or Old School Baptist Ministers" and I find Elder Osbourn omitted.

First, a little biographical information about Elder James Osbourn (sometimes spelled Osbourne). From his personal letters we learn that he was the youngest of fourteen children, and that he did not learn to read or write till he was in his twenties.

See here

We find Elder Osbourn mentioned in Hassell's history as a frequent visitor to the Kehukee Association in the early days of the anti mission movement. Hassell wrote this interesting tidbit about Elder Osbourn.

"The Association realizing the need of a Hymn Book suitable to the of thc churches, recommended Elder Osbourn, of Baltimore (who in the habit of having works issued from the press), to prepare a suitable book, to the best of his ability, for the use of the churches and on his own responsibility; to which he (being present) gave his consent."

(Minutes for the Kehukee Association, 1843, as given in History of the Church of God: Chapter XXIII, Written by Sylvester Hassell)

Hassell also said of Osbourn:

Sylvester Hassell said, in chapter nineteen of his "History of the Church of God," that "Elder James Osbourn was an Englishman, who traveled and preached much, and wrote many religious books."

See here

Elder Sheets, who wrote against the claims of the Hardshells, being a participant in the early debates with the PBs, wrote this about Elder Osbourn:

See here

"In 1832, Elder James Osborne, of Baltimore, was present. Through his influence a large majority of this Association declared non-fellowship with all the benevolent societies of the day, and have since assumed the name of "The Old School" or "Primitive Baptists." It is, however, a misnomer, for they were formerly the "Primitive Baptists," but by changing their position, and instead of remaining Missionary Baptists as they previously had been, they became the New Baptists."

"The Baltimore Baptist Association, so famous for its antimissionary character since 1836, was, previous to that date, a missionary Association."

"Elder James Osborne, who afterward became a disturber of the churches and a leader in the anti-mission ranks, was present and "cordially received" Brother Rice, and was afterward appointed a Home Missionary!"

"This result was secured, it is said, through the influence of a few men. The spirit of opposition was never spontaneous; it was wrought up by a few shrewd leaders. Elders James Osbourn of the Baltimore Association and John Stadler of the Country Line and Joshua Lawrence in the East, contributed more to the result in North Carolina than any dozen others. And it is quite likely true that Elder Osbourn's influence carried Stadler and Lawrence."

"Again we quote from the Biblical Recorder—an editorial— November, 1871: "The Rev. James Osbourn began to preach in the South and to feed the fires of covetousness by declaiming against 'money hunters.' He denounced all publications except his own, and all collections except for himself, and obtained subscriptions for his books before they were written. Elder Joshua Lawrence and many others were led astray."

Here is what Elder Osbourn wrote about the purpose of the gospel (emphasis mine SG).

"But if so be that the specific object which the Deity had in-view, and designed to accomplish by means of, or in a way compatible with the gospel which he ordained and promulgated, was the eternal salvation of the bride, the Lamb's wife, Rev. 21; 9; we then of course may safely conclude, that that specific object must and will be accomplished, just in that way and manner as infinite wisdom may have dictated. And lo, this is what we do believe and rejoice in; and in the gospel we also believe, every necessary arrangement and provision is made and permanently settled for the effecting the salvation of that church which was the object of God's everlasting love and delight, and which he gave to his Son before time began.

That God ordained the GOSPEL, and promulgated the same, with a settled purpose to save sinners thereby; and hence in this his gospel he says, "I will give them an heart to know me, that 1 am the Lord; and they shall be my people, and I will be their God : for they shall return unto me with,their whole heart." And again says the Lord, 'Zaccheus make haste and come down, for to day I must abide at thy house.' And again it is said, 'As many as were ordained to eternal life believed.' And we are told that the Lord works in men to will and to do of his own good pleasure; and that Christ came to seek and to save that which was lost; Jer. 24, 7; Luke, 19, 5; Acts, 11, 48; Phil. 2, 13; Luke 19, 10. (14, 15)." (pg. 14)

See here

Will today's "Primitives" accept Osbourn? Why have they not preserved his books?

Hardshell Sabellianism

Recently under a posting titled "Wilson Thompson's Heresies" I showed how Thompson was a Sabellian, denying the historic doctrine of the Trinity, that God is a trinity of persons.  This false doctrine apparently was widespread among the first Hardshells in the 1830s as the following citations from the Christian Doctrinal Advocate and Spiritual Monitor demonstrate.  In the first citation there is a letter from George Ambrose from Ohio to Daniel Jewett, editor of the Monitor, followed by letters to Ambrose and Elder John M. Watson of Tennessee from Elder Osbourn.  It is evident that many churches in Ohio, particularly in the Miami Association, held to Sabellianism and the other errors of Wilson Thompson.  In Ohio today there are few Hardshell churches, but in the 1830s there were many.  What happened to them?  What was the cause of their decline?  Was it not their false teachings?

From Br. George Ambrose, Darbyville Ohio

Brother Jcwett,—I have lately received a communication from Elder Osbourn of Baltimore, and herewith enclose it to you; that if you deem it worthy of publicity, you may give it a place in the Advocate and Monitor.

When he was in this State, last summer was a year, I had the pleasure of a personal acquaintance with brother Osbourn, and esteem him an able minister of the New Testament. He delivered the introductory sermon at the opening of the Mad River Association, from 1 Chron. 26; 27. "Out of the spoils won in battles did they dedicate to maintain the house of the Lord," to a very attentive audience. I have several Books written by him and must say that I am pleased with his writings. His works will be more generally admired by the Baptists when he is no more, than they are at this day; so I think it will likely be.

I would brother Osbourn had used some milder terms, when speaking of those Ohio Baptists, whom he terms Sabellian Heresiarchs as you will see in his communication. Those brethren do not oppose the doctrine of the Trinity, as Br. Osbourn thinks they do. They advocate that doctrine, but oppose what they call the Tripersonal scheme; and they are worthy, zealous, exemplary christians, as much so as any within my acquaintance, for with some of them I am acquainted pretty well; so that I am not prepared to part with them as he is, on the ground of real christianity, for I think we may differ thus much and still be christians "But, examine the communication, and dispose of it as your wisdom may direct. I remain yours truly in the love of the truth, and in the patience of the saints. George Ambrose."  (pg. 47-48)

When Ambrose says that the "Ohio Baptists" do not deny the doctrine of the Trinity, he is being an artful dodger, as many Sabellians.  They say they believe in an "economical Trinity," that the one person God manifests himself in three roles, offices, or modes.  Yet, they constantly ridicule the idea of "the Trinity," that is, in the historic teaching of God in three persons. 

From Eld. James Osbourn to Br Geo. Ambrose.

Dearly beloved, grace be with thee. -Your affectionate epistle, dated the fifth inst. came safe to hand; and also the one directed to me in Glasgow Kentucky 1 got safe, when I was there in Nov. last; and for them both I here present to you my sincere thanks.

But still I want Elder Ambrose to give all lawful dilligence to live in the enjoyment of an abode so honorable and so safe.—And will you not take my advice in this thing? Brother Eld. Williams of whom you speak, is a choice man in my estimation; and so likewise is Eld. Peters, whose name you mention. But as to your Sabellian heresiarchs, and those who dance after their pipe, I pity, but have no fellowship with them in the gospel; for in my view of divine teaching and of pure Christianity, those men cannot be men of grace who can and do, (as a writing which I have received since I saw you, amply proves,) laugh to scorn, and speak disdainfully of the holy Trinity, and sarcastically treat the glorious doctrine of three Persons in One God, as did old Sabellius before them. And if indeed, you yourself are in the Sabellian heresy, let me know it if you please, and I will drop all correspondence, and connection, and fellowship with you on the ground of real Christianity. But I hope better things of you although I thus write; but I have said these things that you might distinctly know and understand, that in a religious point of view, I have no wish or desire to know any man after the flesh; and also that I estimate the truth and honor of God, far above the friendship, and high esteem, and good will, of all the religionists in the world. Write soon—write often—write largely—write without reserve—write experimentally—write the truth—write in love—and write about Christ. I am yours affectionately,
Baltimore, Jan. 1839. James Osbourn." (Advocate and Monitor, Volumes 3-4 By Daniel E. Jewett, pages 40-51

In a published letter to Elder John M. Watson of West Tennessee, Elder Osbourn wrote:

Your second suggestion to me is truly un important one ;—The greivousness (sic) of the office-work of the third adorable person in the Trinity, the Holy Spirit, being so very generally neglected in the administration of the word. This awful defect is as true as it is heart-rending. But sir, you speak of the third person in the Trinity, and right enough too by the rule of God's word and in the judgment of those who fear the Lord and love his truth. But you sir, have an abundance of people, in your Great West who laugh to scorn the idea of the Holy Spirit being a Person; and so indeed did old Sabellius of the third century and his followers; and so likewise did old Noetius, a philosopher of Ephesus, and his followers; and also the Mahomedans, and Swedenborgians, and Socinians, and Unitarians, and even the Deists, Laugh to scorn the Personality of the Spirit. And it is no wonder that such men should neglect the office-work of a Person they. have no faith in, and be silent about a work they know nothing of. But for men who profess to be interested in the Personality, and Godhead, and office-work of Jehovah the Spirit, to neglect this all important and highly interesting point in theology, when laboring in the pulpit, is a very painful consideration; and yet I know, and am sure, that this is the case among us to an alarming degree."  (pages 53-59 - January 1939 - see here)

Woburn, Mass., March 1839. James Osbourn

Osbourn was convinced that those Hardshells who were Sabellians were not saved.  One wonders what today's Hardshells want to do with these facts?  Will they continue to call Wilson Thompson one of their great leaders in spite of his heresies?

Hardshell Sabellianism II

In the previous posting evidence was presented that showed that many first generation Hardshells in the 1830s denied the doctrine of the Trinity, that there are three persons in the Godhead, and held to Sabellianism, believing that the terms Father, Son (Word), and Holy Spirit were not personal terms, but terms that designate offices, roles, or modes in which the one person God operates towards his creation.  I have shown that this was the view of Elder Wilson Thompson and many in Ohio, Indiana, and Kentucky, places where Thompson had influence.  It was shown how it was a common view of the Miami Association in Ohio, an old and leading association.  In this posting we will offer further evidence regarding how the debate over the Trinity was a heated issue among the first Hardshells.

Elder Jesse Cox, from Williamson County, Tennessee, a recognized first generation leader among Hardshells, wrote to the Christian Doctrinal Advocate and Spiritual Monitor, after Elder Osbourn and others had previously written on the subject, and said:

"1 am truly glad to hear from Bro. Osbourn through the medium of your paper, and am sorry to see the opposition that seems to be raised against him on account of his doctrine, and especially that coming from the state of Ohio. 1 cannot but believe that some mistake, or misuuderstanding has taken place; for we heard him preach frequently, and conversed with him often; and we heard nothing but what we fully believe, especially upon the Holy Trinity, and the work and office of the Holy Spirit. But Bro. Osbourn has written and published a letter in the Advocate, that would go to represent that all the Baptists in the Great Valley of the Mississippi hold the Sabellian heresy. That a great many in some parts of Kentucky, Indiana and Ohio hold it, there is no doubt; but in this part of Tennessee, we as a denomination do not. And among the ministry I know of none; and I believe that Bro. Osbourn would say we do not. In a word, we believe, that there Are Three That Bear Record in Heaven, The Father, The Word, And The Holy Ghost, And That These Three Are One. Not three in office, but three in person, One in Three, and Three in One—one in will,—one in wisdom, one in power, perfectly united together by the same divine principle. like, for instance, the sun that illuminates our world; there is the body, the heat, and the light completely united in one, and yet three; and deprive it of one of these properties, and it would cease to be what it is. But I leave this important subject for more able heads than mine. May the God t»f all grace comfort and support you. Dec. 1839. Yours, in gospel bonds, Jesse Cox."  (pg. 153 of Vols. 3-4 of the Christian Doctrinal Advocate and Spiritual Monitor - see here)

Thus, there were those among the "Old School" or "Primitive" Baptists who objected to the Sabellian views of Thompson and the Miami Association.  Elder Cox affirms that the Sabellian heresy was "great" in "some parts of" the three states mentioned.  But, as we shall see, it was more widespread than this.  Further, it is to be noted how Elder Osbourn was a verbal leader in the opposition to the Sabellian heresy while Elder Thompson and deacon Saunders (of my hometown of Hamilton, Ohio and who was the clerk of the Miami Association) were leaders of the Sabellian heresy.  We shall also see how Elder John Clark, later editor of Zion's Advocate (began in the early 1850s to oppose the heresies promoted by the "Signs of the Times" periodical, edited by Elder Gilbert Beebe), also became a leader in the opposition to the Hardshells who advocated the Sabellian heresy.  We shall also see how Elder Samuel Trott, a first generation leader of the "Old School" party, and frequent writer for the Signs of the Times, also became a defender of the Sabellian heresy and how the controversy over the doctrine of the Trinity not only involved charges of Sabellianism against Beebe, Trott, and Thompson, but also charges of Arianism. 

In the Monitor and Advocate, we read the following from Elder Samuel Williams, of Franklin, Ohio, the town where my dad pastors a church named "Thompson Memorial Primitive Baptist Church," in memorial to the Thompson preachers, Wilson, Grigg, R.W., and J.H. Thompson.  Elder Williams wrote:

"1 heard no hissing, nor any other improper noise by any person, whilst brother Osbourn was preaching, whilst he was on the stand or at the Miami Association; although, I was on the stand, from the beginning to end of his discourse. I was with Br. O. at the Mad River Association, but heard nothing said about the difference between him and Br. Saunders: for I think he had not then received the letter from Br. S., and if he had, 1 knew nothing of it. Sometime after we returned from the association. (1 cannot recollect how long) Br. O. read to us the letter he had received from Br. S. I then informed him, that 1 knew that his preaching was not received at the Miami Association by every body; for I saw one preaching brother shake his head by way of disapprobation whilst he (O.) was preaching. After some conversation about the letter, I informed him, that W. Thompson had written two books against the doctrine of three persons in the Godhead, and in favor of the preexistence of the human soul of Christ: and that 1 believed, that the majority of the Baptists belonging to the Miami Association agreed with W. Thompson on those subjects. In our further conversation relative to the difference between him and Br. Saunders: Br. O. remarked, that he thought it would work for the good of the Church, for he thought it probable that he should some time in future, write his views on the Trinity, and have them printed—I told him I hoped that be would do so: and asked him to, if he could find opportunity."  (pg. 219)

Elder Samuel Trott responded to the charges made by Elder Osbourn regarding Old Schoolers being Sabellians.  In a Signs of the Times posting titled "AN INQUIRY #1," Trott wrote:

"BROTHER BEEBE: - In the DOCTRINAL ADVOCATE for June 1839, there is a letter from Elder James Osbourn to the Editor, containing some remarks which I wish to bring to the notice of our Western Old School Brethren.

I think there must be some mistake in this matter. But mistake or not, the thing has gone out, through what is recognized as an Old School periodical (Christian Doctrinal Advocate - SG), as an indiscriminate charge against our Western brethren, for the New School party to rejoice in. If the above charge is true, I do not blame Elder Osbourn for pronouncing it blasphemy. Not that I am disposed to consider it blasphemous to deny that the Three, the Father, the Word and the Holy Ghost are in any sense three Gods, or that they are three distinct persons, or that they blaspheme who dissent from the Nicene Creed, or from my creed concerning the divine Three, in which the One God has revealed himself, providing that either of the Three is not degraded."

Trott, speaking for a large segment of "Old School" Baptists, says that he does not believe that "the Father, the Word and the Holy Ghost" are "three distinct persons," and that the statement of the Nicene council was not true.

Trott continues:

"But when we consider that Father, is one of the names by which God has been pleased to declare himself, as expressive of a relation which, he, the Father sustains in the economy of salvation, as he is declared to be the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, and Christ says to his disciples, “I ascend unto my Father and your Father, and to my God and your God;” I say when we consider these things, we must conclude that no person having a becoming reverence for God, whatever may be his views of the doctrine of the Trinity, can trifle with or make sport of this name and relation in which God has revealed himself. Neither can we conceive that any such person would either deridingly or considerately speak of him as a tool of whom Christ thus speaks, “And I will pray the Father, and he shall give you another Comforter, that he may abide with you forever; even the Spirit of Truth, &c.” John 14:16,17. And again, “But the Comforter which is the Holy Ghost, whom the Father will send in my name, he shall teach you all things, &c.” I hope therefore that some of our Old School Brethren of the West will set this matter right; if it is a wrong charge which Elder Osbourn has made, that they will clear it up; or if any do hold in contempt the names and relations, Father & Holy Ghost, I say not, as declared in the Athanasian Creed, but as declared in the Scriptures; I desire that they may be made manifest; and be no longer recognized as of us. If this charge had come from our avowed enemies it might well be passed unnoticed; but coming from the quarter it has, I do think it calls for some attention."  (1839 in the Signs of the Times, see here)

This is clearly classic Sabellianism!  To Trott, Father, Son (Word), and Holy Spirit do not denote three persons who are God, but are only "names" of the one person God, just as I have three names, Stephen, Michael, and Garrett.  He also says that the terms Father, Son, and Spirit are simply terms "expressive of a relation which, he, the Father sustains in the economy of salvation," thus he believes, as do the Sabellians, in an economic trinity.  It is classic modalism.  Not only does Trott declare the Nicene creed to be false in relation to God being three persons, but also against the Athanasian creed. 

It is interesting, however, that the Black Rock Address, which created the Old School denomination, had attached to it the articles of faith of the Baptist church at Black Rock and which was signed b y the fourteen names who signed the Black Rock Address.  In these articles of faith, first published on March 28, 1828, we read this from Article 1.

We believe that there is one self-existing God, the Great Jehovah, who consists of a trinity of persons, Father, Son and Holy Ghost.   (see here)

Thus, Elders Trott, Beebe, and Thompson do not believe the articles that were attached to the Black Rock Address and believed by the church at Black Rock.

Further, let us notice the Circular Letter of the Delaware River Baptist Association, addressed to the several Churches of which it is composed, send Greetings: (1836)  (see here)

"On the vain hypothesis that the Three spoken of, in the holy Volume, are to be understood, not of persons but as characteristic distinctions expressive of different official operations of the Deity; what conceptions are we to form of the prayers and various solemn appeals of the Son of God to His divine Father? As Matt. 11:25,26; 27:46; Luke 23:34; John 11:41; 17:1, &c.? Must we be driven to the absurdity that He addressed those solemn appeals to Himself? And that His Father was identically Himself under another name, differing in nothing except official characteristics?"

Further, let us notice the "Declaration of the Faith and Practice of the Church of Christ, in Carter-Lane, Southwark, under the Pastoral Care of Dr. John Gill, Read and assented to, at the Admission of Members."  (see here)

"II. We believe, That there is but one (Deut. 6:4; 1 Cor. 8:6; 1 Tim. 2:5; Jer. 10:10) only living and true God: that there are (1 John 5:7; Matthew 28:19) three persons in the Godhead, the Father, the Son, and the Holy Ghost, who are equal in nature, power, and glory; and that the Son ((John 10:30; Phil. 2:6; Rom. 9:5; 1 John 5:20) and the Holy Ghost (Acts 5:3, 4; 1 Cor. 3:16, 17; 2 Cor. 3:17, 18) are as truly and properly God as the Father. These three divine persons are distinguished from each other, by peculiar relative properties: The distinguishing character and relative property of the first person is begetting; he has begotten a Son of the same nature with him, and who is the express image of his person; (Ps. 2:7; Heb. 1:3) and therefore is with great propriety called the Father: The distinguishing character and relative property of the second person is that he is begotten; and he is called the only begotten of the Father, and his own proper Son; (John 1:14; Rom. 8:3, 32) not a Son by creation, as angels and men are, nor by adoption, as saints are, nor by office, as civil magistrates; but by nature, by the Father's eternal generation (Ps. 2:7) of him in the divine nature; and therefore he is truly called the Son: The distinguishing character and relative property of the third person is to be breathed by the Father and the Son, and to proceed from both, (Job 33:4; Ps. 33:6; John 15:26 and 20:26 and 20:22; Gal. 4:6) and is very Properly called the Spirit, or breath of both. These three distinct divine persons, we profess to reverence, serve, and worship as the one true God. (1 John 5:7; Matthew 4:10)"

Thus, the Sabellian Hardshells are against the Old Baptist faith.  Not only Dr. Gill, but the London and Philadelphia confessions uphold the doctrine of the Trinity of persons.  This the Sabellian Hardshells of the Miami Association were forced to admit, and to decry the old confessions.

Elder James Osbourn's Creed

Previous citations from Osbourn (see here):

"But if so be that the specific object which the Deity had in-view, and designed to accomplish by means of, or in a way compatible with the gospel which he ordained and promulgated, was the eternal salvation of the bride, the Lamb's wife, Rev. 21; 9; we then of course may safely conclude, that that specific object must and will be accomplished, just in that way and manner as infinite wisdom may have dictated. And lo, this is what we do believe and rejoice in; and in the gospel we also believe, every necessary arrangement and provision is made and permanently settled for the effecting the salvation of that church which was the object of God's everlasting love and delight, and which he gave to his Son before time began.

That God ordained the GOSPEL, and promulgated the same, with a settled purpose to save sinners thereby; and hence in this his gospel he says, "I will give them an heart to know me, that 1 am the Lord; and they shall be my people, and I will be their God : for they shall return unto me with,their whole heart." And again says the Lord, 'Zaccheus make haste and come down, for to day I must abide at thy house.' And again it is said, 'As many as were ordained to eternal life believed.' And we are told that the Lord works in men to will and to do of his own good pleasure; and that Christ came to seek and to save that which was lost; Jer. 24, 7; Luke, 19, 5; Acts, 11, 48; Phil. 2, 13; Luke 19, 10. (14, 15)." (pg. 14)

Now let me supplement this with these citations from Osbourn's book "The Lawful Captive Delivered; Or, the Prey Taken from the Mighty," (see here) wherein Osbourn, a ringleader among the first Hardshells, gave us his creed. (page 327)

Osbourn's creed

 

"But now, that all. men who read this work, may fully know and understand what are my views of the great leading points of the gospel of the Son of God, I will present unto them a compend of what I believe.

 

1. I believe in one only true God, the Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, the Maker of heaven and earth, and Upholder of all things, visible and invisible; and that he dwelleth in a Trinity of Persons in the Godhead; the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit, who are One in nature, and equal in all the divine perfections, each Holy Person having the whole of the divine essence, and yet is not the essence divided: and that those three Glorious Persons are equally concerned and interested in the great work of redemption, and in the complete salvation of all and every one of those persons whom the Father gave to his Son before the foundation of the world. “Thine they were and thou gavest them to me,” John, 17. 5.

 
Osbourn was a leading opponent of those first Hardshells, like Wilson Thompson and Samuel Trott, who were Sabellian as regards the Trinity.  Here Osbourn gives the truth of Scripture and of the Old Baptist confessions.

2. I believe in the prescience, or foreknowledge of God; and that all things which to us are past, present, and to come, are to this living and true God, one eternal now; and that all wisdom, power, and authority are with him; and that he can and does, Work all things after the counsel of his own will; and that he is of one mind and none can turn him; and that in all and every thing, both in providence and grace, which he hath ever done, or is now doing, or ever will do, he consulteth his own glorious honor and the best interest of his church.

 

3. I believe that God the Father, God the Son, and God the Spirit, loved a people from everlasting, which people compose that church which is called “the fullness of him that filleth all in all,” Eph. l. 23; and who are also emphatically denominated the “elect according to the foreknowledge of God the, Father,” 1 Peter, 1. 2. All those will eventually be saved in that way, and by just such means as a righteous God hath ordained should be made use of to bring about their complete deliverance from Satan, sin, and hell.

4. I believe that the ancient covenant of grace with all its appendages; together with the gospel and its glories and beauties; and also the oath and promises, and gracious declarations, and all the divine perfections of an immutable God, are for, and in the behalf of, his well beloved and chosen church.

 

5. I believe in the total depravity of man, and that all men by nature are dead in trespasses and sins, death having passed upon all men, for that all have sinned, Eph. 2. l; Rom. 5. l2; and an actual deliverance from this wretched and helpless state, is effected by an act of mere clemency on the part of him who loved all and every one of those whom he thus rescueth from eternal ruin by an act of his grace.

 

6. I believe that Christ the Son of God, engaged in eternity to be the Deliverer and Saviour of all those persons whom the Father gave to him in covenant; and that in the fullness of time he actually came into this world and suffered, and died in their stead, and rose again for their justification, and now liveth in glory for them.

7. I believe that to all and every one of those persons, thus beloved by the Father from everlasting, and in time redeemed by the Son; the Holy Spirit is sent for the purpose of quickening, and enlightening, and preparing them for glory above; and that this Holy Spirit never was, nor can be, defeated in his design and work with those persons composing the true catholic church, or the mystical body of Christ.

 

8. I believe that all the ways, and works, and means, which the God of heaven hath ordained to make use of in effecting the salvation of men, ought, so far as they are binding on us, to be made use of by us, that we thereby may be benefitted, and the Lord God honored and adored.

 

9. I believe the Old and the New Testament to be the true and only written word of God; and that the Lord hath ordained that this his written word, and the preaching of the gospel shall be the chief means whereby to accomplish the conversion of sinners, and the edification of saints; and that whereever those means are sent, it is the duty of all men to attend upon them in due order, and also to believe the report which those means make, which thing can be done as easily as to believe the report of common things, when such reports are made. Yes, the report of the gospel can be believed, and often is, by natural men, or men in a natural state. But to believe the written word of God, and to receive the gospel, as preached by the Lord’s true sent servants, TO THE SALVATION OF THE SOUL, is effected in no other way than by the energetic influence of divine grace in the heart of the man so believing the written word of God, and so receiving the gospel preached.

10. I believe that the bodies as well as the souls of elect persons, are the purchase of a Redeemer’s blood; consequently their bodies will be raised from their graves, and their souls re-enter them in a day yet to come, and so both bodies and souls ascend with Christ to glory; and that the happiness of the saints, and the misery of the wicked, are alike interminable.

 

11. I believe in the doctrine of eternal union of Christ and his church; and that in time, this church receiveth divine life, and light, and glory, and beauty, and wisdom, and strength, and comfort, and joy, and peace, and faith, and hope from Christ, her covenant head; and that those things thus received from him, make up what we call, vital union between Christ and his people. And as they are thus brought to believe in the Lord of glory, and from him to receive eternal life, they shall never perish, for “who shall lay any thing to the charge -of God’s elect? It is God that justifieth,” Rom. 8. 33. 7

 

12. I believe that Christ as a substitute, stood in the room and place of his church and people and for them magnified the law, and satisfied divine justice, and brought in everlasting righteousness, and bore in his own body upon the tree their iniquities, shame and guilt, and thereby discharged their whole debt of sin; and by reason thereof, those his beloved ones, will never suffer the vengeance of eternal fire.

 

The above points of the gospel, I do most cordially and soberly believe in, and receive, and defend from the pulpit and press."

Now, it is clear that Osbourn, like all the first great leaders of the Hardshell denomination, believed in Gospel means.  As a note it is interesting that Osbourn was one of the elders who ordained C. B. Hassell and who later died at the home of Hassell in 1850.

Notice how he upholds duty faith, a truth denied by today's Hardshells.  He spoke of the "duty of all men to attend upon them in due order, and also to believe the report."

Again, today's Hardshells are not primitive.

Elder Jesse Cox on Hardshell Sabellianism

 

Elder Jesse Cox

1793 - 1879

In an old post of mine on Hardshell Sabellianism (here) I cited from The Christian Doctrinal Advocate and Spiritual Monitor where Elder Jesse Cox wrote in reply to Elder James Osbourn saying that many "Primitive" or "Old School" Baptists of the Mississippi valley held to Sabellianism. Elder Cox (1793–1879) was a prominent 19th century Primitive Baptist minister, historian, and pioneer resident of Williamson County, Tennessee. He served as the second pastor of the Big Harpeth Primitive Baptist Church, succeeding Elder Garner McConnico. I visited with Elder Milton Lillard who pastored these churches when I was a young "Primitive Baptist" and he spoke to me of his predecessors in the Nashville area, such as Elder McConnico, Elder John M. Watson, Elder R.W. Fain, etc. He also spoke of Elder Cox. Cox wrote a commentary on the Book of Revelation which I read parts of years ago, and was quite disappointed in his handling of that text, giving interpretations of its parts that were uniquely his own. 

Here is what Cox wrote (1839):

"I am truly glad to hear from Bro. Osbourn through the medium of your paper, and am sorry to see the opposition that seems to be raised against him on account of his doctrine, and especially that coming from the state of Ohio. I cannot but believe that some mistake, or misuuderstanding has taken place; for we heard him preach frequently, and conversed with him often; and we heard nothing but what we fully believe, especially upon the Holy Trinity, and the work and office of the Holy Spirit. But Bro. Osbourn has written and published a letter in the Advocate, that would go to represent that all the Baptists in the Great Valley of the Mississippi hold the Sabellian heresy. That a great many in some parts of Kentucky, Indiana and Ohio hold it, there is no doubt; but in this part of Tennessee, we as a denomination do not. And among the ministry I know of none; and I believe that Bro. Osbourn would say we do not. In a word, we believe, that there Are Three That Bear Record in Heaven, The Father, The Word, And The Holy Ghost, And That These Three Are One. Not three in office, but three in person, One in Three, and Three in One—one in will,—one in wisdom, one in power, perfectly united together by the same divine principle. like, for instance, the sun that illuminates our world; there is the body, the heat, and the light completely united in one, and yet three; and deprive it of one of these properties, and it would cease to be what it is. But I leave this important subject for more able heads than mine. May the God of all grace comfort and support you. Dec. 1839. Yours, in gospel bonds, Jesse Cox." (pg. 153 of Vols. 3-4 of the Christian Doctrinal Advocate and Spiritual Monitor - see here)

So, here is more proof of the widespread Sabellianism among many of the first generation of "Primitive" or "Old School" Baptists. Further, my historical research shows that most first generation Hardshells tolerated such heresies respecting the Trinity. Elder James Osbourn, however, vehemently denounced this rampant heresy, but he seems to be the only one who did so. 

Hassell Names Founding Fathers

In Hassell's history, we find these words from the close of the chapter on the nineteenth century.

"Some of our ministers who have passed away during this century are the following: John Leland, John Boggs, Thomas' Fleeson, Gideon Farrell, Daniel E. Jewett, Samuel Trott, Joshua Lawrence, Blount Cooper. William Hyman, Thomas Barton, Ichabod Moore, James Osbourn, Burwell Temple, Gabriel Conkling, D. L. Harding, John Staddler, John W. Stamper, Thomas Briggs, William Whitaker, John H. Daniel, Robert C. Leachman, Philander Hartwell, Joseph L. Purington, Robert D. Hart, G. W. Staton, Wilson Thompson, John M. Watson, Isam Cranfill, J. F. Johnson, Clayton Moore, C. B. Hassell, Gilbert Beebe, Jacob Castlebury. Samuel Danks, R. H. Harass and Russell Tucker. My sketch of my father's life, and Elder Gilbert Beebe's autobiographical sketch, will be found in the Appendix to this volume."

What is highly interesting about this is the fact that Hassell (Sylvester alone, or in conjunction with his father, Cushings?) mentions men who were heretics (a fact that he either slights or refuses to mention throughout his history). Let me mention a few things about some of these men.

First, Daniel Jewett. He was the editor of "The Christian Doctrinal Advocate and Spiritual Monitor" in the early to mid 1830s. Many founding fathers of the Hardshells wrote to this periodical, such as C.B. Hassell, John Clark, etc. In this periodical we find them affirming a belief in the predestination of all things, regeneration or new birth by means of gospel preaching, the necessity of conversion and perseverance for final salvation. When Jewett died, C.B. Hassell married his widow, thus making Jewett's widow the step mother of Sylvester.  How can Hassell claim Jewett as one of his brother PBs when he believed these things?

Next, Samuel Trott. No PB will fellowship this man if he were alive today. He believed in the absolute predestination of all things, in means in rebirth, in eternal vital union, and denied the Trinity. He had other "screwball ideas" too. Knowing all this, how can Hassell claim him as a founding father?

Next, Joshua Lawrence. I have no doubt that Hassell knew that Lawrence believed in means in rebirth, absolute predestination, perseverance, etc. Yet, he claims him as one of his brothers and a founding father.

Next, James Osbourn. Hassell added this information about Osbourn in the same section:

"Elder James Osbourn was an Englishman, who traveled and preached much, and wrote many religious books. Elder Clayton Moore, of Martin Co., N. C, was a profound thinker and instructive speaker; and he, more than any other person, urged my father to undertake and myself to complete this History. Having the published lives and writings of Elders John Leland and Wilson Thompson, I will add some interesting particulars in regard to them."

Have we not shown in postings and citations from Osbourn that he believed exactly as the men just mentioned?

Next, Wilson Thompson. Hassell knew of Wilson's heresy regarding the Trinity, but he makes excuses for him! He also fails to mention the other heresies and "screwball ideas" of Thompson. Like others (such as the first leaders of the Bear Creek Ass.), Thompson held that Christ's human body preexisted before his incarnation and birth in the womb of the virgin. In spite of all this, Hassell wants to claim him as a founding father! He can fellowship such men but not Arminians?

I had rather fellowship them than some of these "screwball" teachers.

Next, John Watson. Really? So, Hassell claims the means PBs as his brothers? Would our modern PBs do the same?

Next, Gilbert Beebe? Really? What PB today claims him? Absoluters yes. But Hassell? What about the other serious errors of Beebe? (Who believed just as Trott)

Come on, my Hardshell brothers, tell us whether Hassell was correct or not in affirming that these men were of the PB family?

History of Baptist Mission Work II

Chapter 171

According to a "Primitive Baptist" web page (see here), this is what is intended to be conveyed by the use of the adjective "primitive" with "Baptist" by the Hardshells:

"Primitive means 'original' and in doctrine and practice, the Primitive Baptists are identical to the original English and Welsh Baptists who immigrated to colonial America. More importantly, the Primitive Baptists are identical to the primitive or first century church in doctrine and practice."

The Hardshells on the above web page make an unfounded and ignorant claim about being one with, or a legitimate descendent of, the Old English and Welsh Baptists, and with the first Baptists in America. This is a claim that has no historical evidence to support it and a mountain of evidence to show that they are themselves not "primitive." Beebe, as we have seen, did not claim identity with the old English and Welsh Baptists because he knew that they had supported mission organizations and theological education for ministers. Further, as we have seen, they are certainly not like the first Christians in doctrine or practice.

In our day, two Hardshell elders, who claim to have studied the history of their denomination and of the Particular Baptists, and written books on the subject, are Harold Hunt and Michael Ivey. I have already referred to the claims of Hunt in our series "Hardshells and the London Confession."

Hunt, though knowing that his Hardshell brethren had historically claimed succession from the churches who first published the London Confession, believed that his brethren were wrong, for he correctly believed that the old London churches believed in Gospel means, missionary societies, and theological schools. To Hunt this showed that the Calvinistic Missionary Baptists were most like them, and not the Hardshells.

Ivey, he also saw how the Hardshells of former days, who argued that the Hardshells were the rightful heirs of the Baptist churches who first wrote and endorsed the 1689 Confession, were wrong in that claim. This revelation forced Ivey, as it did Hunt, to admit that the Hardshells cannot find succession through the old London churches. Ivey tried to find another ancestral line for his Hardshell group. So did Hunt. But, as we have seen, they are "wish histories," a term R.E. Pound, expert on the history of the Old Baptists, said of Ivey's history. But, more on Hardshell histories later.

Elder Sheets in his book "History of the Liberty Baptist Association," wrote:

"Our Baptist people from the days of Christ to the present time have always been missionary in spirit and practice; though at times held back by a spirit of lethargy. The Antimission Baptists claim that the system of modern missions is too modern, and ought therefore to be rejected. But the missionary spirit is no new thing; it is old as the church. We learn that the early Christians "went everywhere preaching the word."" (chapter 25, page 181)

Sheets repeats the theme of the first apologists against the Hardshells, which is that the church of Jesus Christ has always been a missionary baptist church. Saying this, however, is with the acknowledgment that there have been times when the church of Christ was not active in mission work. This inactivity has these causes: first, persecution, second, lethargy, and third, hyper Calvinism and antinomianism. So, what is affirmed is that the church of Jesus Christ has been in favor of mission work, and has promoted it when she could. Further, when we say that persecution has hindered open evangelism and mission work, this does not exclude the fact that God has often used persecution to scatter believers and thus scatter the seed of the kingdom.

Sheets continued:

"Paul and Barnabas were sent out as missionaries. This work may not have been done in the same way or under the same name that we do it. As time wore on, great changes took place, yet it was really the work of spreading the Gospel. It was carried on according to the plan best adapted to their surroundings."

First, Elder Sheets affirms what we have shown in this book, particularly in the series "Hardshells and Mission Opposition," relative to the church at Antioch sending out missionaries, and how the Scriptures show that the early Christians were intensely involved in evangelistic and missionary work. He also states that the missionary work of later Christians does not have to be precisely spelled out in Scripture to be right and proper.

Sheets continued:

"After the Romish hierarchy was fully established, our people were driven back, tortured in almost every conceivable way; and vast numbers of them were put to death. Thus during the hundreds of years which found them in the wilderness, it was impossible for them to do anything in the way of sending out the gospel as we do it now."

It is important to keep these things in mind in order to explain why the church, at times, has not been engaged in missionary work. To argue that the absence of missionary work during those times is evidence that those churches were opposed to mission work, is not a valid logical deduction.

Sheets continued:

"Neither can they claim the old records as sustaining them. From the organization of this work in England, in 1792, up to about 1826, there was no division of sentiment on the subject of missions (except the Kehukee Association, which divided in 1827), till 1832."

In these words, Sheets focuses in on the period of time between 1792 and 1826. It has already been shown, from facts of history, that the English Baptists who adhered to the 1689 London Confession, were supporters of mission organizations and theological schools. But, the date of 1792 is important because it is the date in which a foreign missionary society was formed in England by Fuller, Carey, and other Baptists. Many Hardshells say this is the date for the birth of the "new school" or "missionary" Baptists. The time period from 1792-1826 is important for analyzing the attitude of the Baptists in general to mission work and to ministerial education. And, what have we learned? We learned that all the Associations, in that period, supported those things. Thirty four years when the Baptists supported mission and education societies without any Hardshell opposition by any Association. We agree with the Hardshells in saying that the churches, between 1810 and 1820, were all one, but not all one in opposition to these things, but one in support of them.

Sheets continued:

"But even the Kehukee Association, anti-mission that she now is, was at one time in favor of missions.

She contributed as follows to the General Meeting of Correspondence: $3, in 1812; $5, in 1813; and $5, in 1814. Here is another record of hers: "Bro. Bennett Barrow was appointed the standing secretary of this Association, to correspond with the Board of Foreign Missions." This, with others, shows that at one time she was thoroughly in accord with us in mission work. But since 1827 she has persistently opposed this work."

How do the Hardshells deal with these facts? Griffin, as we have seen, admits that the first Baptists of the Mississippi territory were supporters of mission and education organizations for 30-40 years before the Hardshells first began to organize a protest. Spencer, the historian who has already been cited, said that there was not an anti-mission Baptist in Kentucky prior to 1816, and that the Baptists of Kentucky and Tennessee were for many years supporters of mission and education entities. The Kehukee also supported such things for many years before the Hardshell faction arose on the scene to organize opposition.

Sheets continued:

"We find as early as 1772 that the Philadelphia Association paid money to traveling preachers (missionaries). The Association voted a vote of thanks with the interest on Association funds, together with £6 more to Morgan Edwards "for his services in traveling and visiting the churches to the southward."

Here is the old Philadelphia Association, the oldest in America, involved itself in paying money to missionaries. Other aged associations, in correspondence with the Philadelphia, voiced no protest against the missionary doings of the Philadelphia Association.

Sheets continued:

"Elder James Osbourn was perhaps the leading spirit in bringing about the split. Yet this item from the record tells us where he once was: "In 1817 'a committee was appointed for Domestic Missionary Affairs,' and Brethren O. B. Brown, James Osbourn and Spencer H. Cone were appointed as Home Missionaries." James Osbourn appointed a Missionary! He was Then a Primitive Baptist."

The story of Osbourn is really the story of the whole denomination that Osbourn helped to produce. Osbourn supported missionary organizations, was himself a missionary, before he denounced all of it as being of the Devil. So too the whole Baptist denomination was a supporter of missionary work for decades before the Hardshells arose to attempt an overthrow and reformation.

Sheets continued:

"The trouble in the Mt. Pleasant Association mainly grew out of the fact that some of the members of some of its churches had united with the Central Society for missionary purposes. A portion of the Association was so bitterly opposed to said society and the object of its organization, that they determined to withdraw fellowship from all who had countenanced the society, on the ground that it was a human invention and unauthorized in the Scriptures. These brethren were no doubt honest in their opposition to the Central Society, but it does seem strange that they could not see that Baptist Associations are as really human inventions as are mission societies."

The bitter opposition that Sheets refers to in the Mt. Pleasant Association was similar to what appeared and occurred in many other Associations of the time. The acts of excommunication that were executed by associations against individuals are truly acts wholly lacking that charity which is characteristic of the church of Christ. It is a new unheard of thing, and which, as has been shown, was the real cause of the division. The Hardshells showed no forbearance, patience, or forgiveness for their brethren but cast them off and denounced them as being followers of Antichrist.

Sheets, of course, demolishes the argument of the Hardshells, involving "patternism," which has been addressed already. He shows that the Hardshells are hypocrites in regard to their chief proposition. They argue that mission societies are to be condemned because they are not specifically mentioned or defined in Scripture. But, by the same reasoning, associations ought to be condemned. So, why do they not condemn associations? In supporting associations, do they not give up their right to argue from silence? Their right to condemn mission and educational entities because they are not mentioned in Scripture is taken away.

Sheets continued:

"The following extract is from the doings of the Old Welsh Association, the first of modern times:

"In the association held at Swansea, in 1654, the church at Llantrisaint proposed to assist the church at Abergavenny, now Llanwenarth, to support their minister, which also they did. From the messenger of Llantrisaint, also, the proposal to revive the ancient order of things came the preceding year; that is, to encourage and support the missionary cause." (History Welsh Baptists, by Davis, p. 85.)

These facts about the 17th century Welsh Baptists did not get mentioned by Michael Ivey in his work "A Welch Succession of Primitive Baptists." His thesis affirmed that the Welsh Baptist of the 17th century believed like the Hardshells, and were at odds with the "missionary" and "new school" Baptists who produced the 1689 London Confession.

Sheets continued:

"The anti-missionary Baptists claim that the missionary enterprise is a "modern invention." They, no doubt, think that it is; but the very opposite is true. Missions are as old as Christianity—no new thing, not even among the Baptists. By the foregoing extract we learn that over 200 years ago the Welsh Baptists promoted missions, and considered the "missionary cause" a part of the "ancient order of things." We hope the reader will not pass on without carefully reading the quotation again." (pg. 229)

Such facts as these demolish the claims of the Hardshells.

Sheets continued:

"The oldest Baptists this side of the bloody age—the times of persecution, when God's true witnesses lived in seclusion to escape the cruelties of the Romish Church—were Missionary Baptists. Tell it to all around you, and wherever you go. The real Old School, or Primitive Baptists, in every age of ecclesiastical history, have been the most zealous supporters of missions, home and foreign. This is written advisedly; we know whereof we affirm."

The Hardshell historians, what do they do with such facts? Do they tell them to their people when they write their version of Baptist history? Griffin was honest enough to report how the first Baptists in Mississippi were missionary, and that for about 40 years before the opposers were spawned. Do many not rather "hide in oblivion" such facts and put out a false revisionist history that will keep the cult members deceived?

I also repeat, how it is the Landmarker views of the Hardshells that create these difficulties for the Hardshells relative to their historical claims. Had they followed the example of Alexander Campbell, who's movement parallels that of the Hardshells, they would have admitted that they were a new sect, and claimed that the church of Christ needed to be restored. Had the Hardshells begun as a restoration movement, then they would not have to claim that they had existed unbroken back to the days of the apostles.

Sheets continued:

"The first and oldest Baptist churches and associations of America were Missionary Baptists, the Old Philadelphia, the Warren, the Charleston and the Kehukee Associations, all had missionary plans for promoting the spread of the gospel."

Again, these are facts which demolish Hardshell apologies for rightful succession.

Sheets, citing another, wrote:

"After quoting history showing that the old associations were really missionary in spirit and practice, the author concludes as follows:

"Fidelity to the truth compels us to say that the anti-missionary party were the aggressors in this controversy. There can be, we think, no doubt on this subject, and in confirmation of the truth of what we say, we refer the reader to the propositions of Uriel Sebree at the meeting in 1835, submitted in behalf of the friends of missions, as follows:

"First. We are willing to be at peace upon the principles of the United Baptists of the United States.

"Second. We are willing to be at peace, if the association will adhere to the advice given at its last session, yielding to all the liberty of conscience upon the subject of missions."

"Both these propositions were rejected by the opposers of missions; hence we say they were the aggressors, for both these propositions were reasonable and in perfect harmony with the original principles of the Association and of the Baptist denomination generally." (pg. 230)

Anyone who has read much of the language uttered by the first anti missionaries will see that the spirit that motivated them was not of God. A hateful, strife and conflict loving spirit was manifested. It is a spirit that condemns and says "come not near to me, stand by yourself, for I am holier than you." It is a spirit that seeks to lord it over the minds and consciences of others, to take away the right of personal conscience. It is a spirit that esteems self better, and smarter, than others. It is a stubborn spirit, one that refuses forbearance.

In the next chapter, we will continue to cite and discuss what Elder Sheets wrote in his writings on the history of the Hardshells.

Elder Lawrence Greatrake

It is a little known fact that Lawrence Greatrake (1793-c.1840) was one of the first vocal leaders of the "anti-mission movement," and a founding father of the "Primitive Baptist Church," aka "Hardshells." In my studies of Hardshell history I have noticed how there are some founding fathers of Hardshellism who get little recognition, or wholly ignored, such men as Daniel Parker, James Osbourn, John Watson, and Lawrence Greatrake. Why is this?

Who was Lawrence Greatrake?

Greatrake was a staunch "Regular Baptist" and opposer of Alexander Campbell, writing numerous pamphlets against him. Campbell mentions him in his "Christian Baptist." He was involved in the division in the Pittsburgh (Penn.) split over Campbellism, the church that produced Signey Rigdon of Mormom fame. You can read some of Greatrake's writings against Campbellism at www.signeyrigdon.com.

But, not only was Greatrake an opposer of Campbell but also an opposer of the mission movement of the early 19th century. If one reads the old issues (1830s) of "The Baptist" periodical, published in Nashville by R. B. C. Howell, he will learn that Greatrake was alligned with Joshua Lawrence, James Osbourn, John Watson, and Washington Lowe, all leaders in the "anti-mission movement." When the church in Nashville and at Mill Creek experienced trouble with some members who were Hardshells, Greatrake joined with Watson, Lowe, and Osbourn to constitute the minority into Hardshell churches.

Greatrake published, in 1838, a work called "Anti-Missionary Dissertation on the Commission," which I have not yet been able to read, but the sidneyrigdon web page is in the process of making it available. It was published in Murfreesboro, Tennessee.

But, although Greatrake, like others in the anti-mission movement, opposed "methods" used in spreading the gospel, nevertheless did not deny that God used the means of the gospel in the eternal salvation of the elect. Greatrake wrote much in poetry form. Notice these words of his.

Sanctify them, O Father, through thy truth,
From the womb of th' morning, and the dews of youth!
Thy word is truth -- no other instrument
Hast thou ordained to make man penitent:
My word is truth -- no other source can prove
The means of blessing to the souls I love.
The world, O Father! hates thy sacred word,
And all the vision that it can afford.
The truth is what must bless the chosen race,
The doctrine I have preached, of sov'reign grace.
Father! give them pastors after thine own heart,
Who shall know the truth, and that truth impart;
That my sheep still may through them hear my voice,
Avoid false doctrine, and in truth rejoice.

For their dear sakes, myself I sanctify,
Am set apart to suffer and to die.
The object is, that they one and all may be,
In time appointed, set apart to thee,
As chosen vessels -- monuments of grace --
A holy nation -- a peculiar race!
The Truth of My Gospel thou hast ordain'd to be,
The blessed means, from all eternity.

No! -- miracles were ne'er design'd to give,
That faith by which the elect of God all live!
That is the product of the Spirit's power!
Who have it own the God-head of the doer!
As preaching, so miracles may or may not be,
The means of faith -- as may be God's decree.

The truth is this -- my gospel loud proclams,
To give repentance and faith the Saviour reigns
These fools know not -- 'tis my sovereign instrument,
To make my people truly penitent;
And to their souls the "election's" faith convey,
Which faith shall end in heaven's immortal day.

For them the pages of my sacred word,
Exhortations, precepts,and commands afford --
'Tis by the foolishness of preaching them,
God shews his sov'reign power in saving men!
Man is condemned already -- e'er the gospel came!
And thus of him the words of God proclaim:
If he believe not -- condemn he'll still remain!
If he believe not, then full proof is given
He ne'er was chosen to be heir of heaven!

Then, from Greatrake's non-poetic writings, same page, he says:

"Again we repeat that not exercising evangelical faith in Christ, does not make men guilty -- is not the cause of their final condemnation: But the want of that faith leaves them guilty, leaves them condemned -- leaves them in a state of nature, leaves them where they fell to in Adam's transgression, and where God designed they should remain! For those who pretend to preach salvation by grace, for them to hold such a sentiments is a most gross inconsistency: And yet, alas! how many professed Calvinist ministers do it! But the cause of this inconsistency is most obvious -- to wit: by making it the moral duty of all men to believe, they make it the moral duty of all men to support a ministry as the means by which they are to believe; and they also make it the moral duty of man, woman and child to fill up their meeting houses and make them out respectable congregations: But the truth and the divine commission is, "go, preach my gospel," not as the moral duty of all men to believe, but as the simple (and to the world foolish) means of giving unto the elect repentance and faith! It is the instrument of salvation to the church, not a moral obligation to the world!!"

And, again he wrote:

"Declare the whole counsel of God!! the doctrine of Jehovah's sovereignty is as likely to be blessed by the Holy Ghost to salvation, as that of repentance!

God ordains ONE ONLY, and grand instrument, to save sinners and bless his Church, and that is, his Gospel in all its doctrine, precept and promise!"

See here for these citations from Greatrake.

This is simply more evidence that the first leaders of the Hardshells, ones yet recognized as the great leaders of hardshellism after the "split" with the "Missionaries," believed that the preaching of the gospel was a means used by God in begetting the elect, though they were opposers of the new methods being used to spread the gospel.

Hardshells need to come along and say, either

1) We are not primitive or original, or
2) We can show proof that the first leaders of our denomination rejected means altogether in the work of saving the elect (in which case they need to present the evidence!).

Chapter 109 - Hardshells & Predestination XII

This chapter will conclude the series on "Hardshells and Predestination." As has been shown, the original position of the Old Baptists was first stated in the London Confession of 1689, a position that today's Hardshells do not believe. It was the position of Dr. John Gill and the position of the founding fathers of the "Primitive Baptist" denomination, of men like Elders Gilbert Beebe and Samuel Trott.  The Old Baptists who descended from the English Particular Baptists were generally "High Calvinists," though not Hyper Calvinists. 

In the last chapter the connection between the doctrine of predestination and salvation was noticed.  It was seen how the denial of the absolute predestination of all things, of God's universal decrees, coincided with the invention of the doctrine known as "time salvation" among the Hardshells.  The reasons for this are apparent to any historian of the "Primitive Baptist" denomination.

The oldest articles of faith from the oldest Hardshell churches all state that all the elect will be both "regenerated and converted."  The Old Baptists believed that God had predestinated both the regeneration and conversion of his chosen people.  They also believed that this conversion was effected by the preaching of the gospel, and that this conversion was the same thing as being "born again."  But, when many in the new denomination began to deny the use of means in salvation, they had to also deny that conversion was predestined by God as was regeneration.  This being so, conversion was not viewed as being as much a part of "effectual calling" and "irresistible grace" as regeneration. 

When one examines the preaching and writing of the founding fathers of the "Primitive Baptist" denomination he discovers how conversion/new birth was viewed as dealing with eternal salvation, not with a "time salvation."  And, just as "regeneration" was viewed as being a work in which the sinner was "passive," so too was "conversion" viewed the same way.  There was no need to talk about "two kinds of salvation" or "two kinds of faith." 

When the Hardshells began to deny the use of means in salvation, this led them to alter their previous paradigm and to deny that conversion was to be equated with being born again.  They began to affirm that regeneration and being born again were the same, and that neither was connected with conversion and accomplished through means.

Elder James Osbourn, however, one of the founding fathers of the Hardshell denomination, wrote:

"But if so be that the specific object which the Deity had in-view, and designed to accomplish by means of, or in a way compatible with the gospel which he ordained and promulgated, was the eternal salvation of the bride, the Lamb's wife, Rev. 21; 9; we then of course may safely conclude, that that specific object must and will be accomplished, just in that way and manner as infinite wisdom may have dictated. And lo, this is what we do believe and rejoice in; and in the gospel we also believe, every necessary arrangement and provision is made and permanently settled for the effecting the salvation of that church which was the object of God's everlasting love and delight, and which he gave to his Son before time began." (pg. 14 of Advocate and monitor, Volumes 3-4 By Daniel E. Jewett, 1839, at books.google.com)

Osbourn did not believe that conversion represented a "time salvation" that only a few of the elect would experience.  Regeneration, conversion, re-birth, sanctification, and perseverance, according to the founding fathers of Hardshellism, did not represent various kinds of salvation, some temporal and some eternal, but were all connected with eternal salvation.  Osbourn spoke of conversion as being as much the result of election and predestination as regeneration. 

The Absoluter faction, though also finally rejecting the use of the gospel in salvation, nevertheless held to the old position that conversion was the result of predestination and was effectual and irresistible.  Their problem was that they had to believe that only a few of the elect would be both regenerated and converted, those who are converted representing an "elect within the elect." 

At least the Absoluter faction saw conversion as the work of God, and was by grace, and that God's use of means in conversion did not take away from the graciousness or effectualness of conversion.  They held on to the idea that sinners were as passive in conversion as in regeneration.  Their error was in denying that all the regenerated would be converted.  The Conditionalist would find it difficult for them to claim that "time salvation" was "of the Lord," and "by grace," as they claimed for the work of regeneration.  The Absoluter would affirm that conversion was according to the Calvinistic scheme while Conditionalist would affirm that conversion was according to the Arminian scheme. 

But, again, we repeat the fact that the oldest articles of faith of the oldest Hardshell churches affirmed that "all the elect" would be both "regenerated and converted."  Both factions deviated from this historic and primitive teaching.

Elder James Osbourn On Gospel Means

In the "Christian Doctrinal Advocate and Spiritual Monitor," edited by Daniel E. Jewett (See here), we have this communication from Elder James Osbourn (highlighting mine):

"Now the law is a ministration of condemnation and death, and is heavily charged with the wrath of a highly provoked God; and all who live and die under it, must suffer the vengeance of eternal fire; for here the Lord can by no means clear the guilty, nor pass by iniquities, nor justify the ungodly. And this law is out against, and in search, after, every impenitent sinner on earth; nor can he elude it, but by flying to the proper and legal Remedy ordained by the holy Three in the ancient settlement of eternity: and this remedy is the gospel with all its blessed appurtenances and divine glories. And this gospel is a ministration of life and peace, and is fraught with all the sure mercies of David; and all who go out of this world under its power and influence, will arise and dwell with him in whose presence there is fulness of joy, and at whose right hand are pleasures for evermore." (pg. 13)

"And in reference to what, the Lord designed to affect by the means of the gospel, I presume we may venture to conclude, that in the ordination and promulgation of it, the Lord had someone specific object in view; and that this very identical object will be accomplished by the means of, or in a way compatible with it. And also, if the eternal salvation of all men indiscriminately, was that sole object, we likewise may venture to conclude, that that particular object will necessarily be the result of that glorious gospel which the great Jehovah from everlasting, and in time promulgated. But if indeed we have sufficient authority to believe that some men die and perish in their sins and errors; of course we then cannot venture to conclude, that the Lord's specific object in ordaining and promulgating the gospel, was the eternal salvation of all men indiscriminately. For, to suppose and to believe, an almighty and infinitely wise Being, should by means of the gospel, make an effort to accomplish a special object, and yet fail in the attainment, would be a derision on that gospel—a reproach on divine power, and an outrage on the wisdom of God. So I write, and so you believe."

"But if so be that the specific object which the Deity had in view, and designed to accomplish by means of, or in a way compatible with the gospel which he ordained and promulgated, was the eternal salvation of the bride, the Lamb's wife, Rev. 21; 9; we then of course may safely conclude, that that specific object must and will be accomplished, just in that way and manner as infinite wisdom may have dictated. And lo, this is what we do believe and rejoice in; and in the gospel we also believe, every necessary arrangement and provision is made and permanently settled for the effecting the salvation of that church which was the object of God's everlasting love and delight, and which he gave to his Son before time began."

"Thus having premised a few things in reference to what was, and to what was not, the specific object God had in view, and designed to accomplish by means of, or in a way compatible with that blessed gospel which he ordained from everlasting, and promulgated in time;—together with what the gospel system is, in and of itself considered, and as it stands connected with the salvation of the church and the glory of God;—we undertake to allege,

That God ordained the GOSPEL, and promulgated the same, with a settled purpose to save sinners thereby; and hence in this his gospel he says, "I will give them an heart to know me, that 1 am the Lord; and they shall be my people, and I will be their God : for they shall return unto me with, their whole heart." And again says the Lord, 'Zaccheus make haste and come down, for to day I must abide at thy house.' And again it is said, 'As many as were ordained to eternal life believed.' And we are told that the Lord works in men to will and to do of his own good pleasure; and that Christ came to seek and to save that which was lost; Jer. 24, 7; Luke, 19, 5; Acts, 11, 48; Phil. 2, 13; Luke 19, 10." (pages 12-18)

That was the "primitive" or "old school" Baptist position and those today who deny what Osbourn affirms are not primitive, but a new sect. What say ye?