Prevenient Grace (7)

Many people say things about what Calvinists believe that are untrue, and even when some of those things are true, they are only true in regard to some Calvinists, but not to all. This is true when people say -- "Calvinists believe that a person must be regenerated or born again before he can believe or have faith." It is also true when they say "Only Arminians believe in prevenient grace." Many Calvinists, like John Calvin himself, believe that sinners are born again by faith. Many Calvinists also believe in some form of prevenient grace or in pre-regeneration acts of providence that are prerequisites to regeneration, to some common operations of the Spirit. The great "prince of preachers," Charles H. Spurgeon, a Calvinist, in his sermon "Rain and Grace — A Parallel" (April 5th 1883) said:

"If you have nothing with which to entertain the grace, grace will bring its own company with it. It will come into your empty heart, and make you one of the “people prepared for the Lord.” Grace waits not for men, neither tarries for the sins of men. We call it prevenient grace, because it comes before it is sought, and God bestows it on a people who are utterly undeserving of it."

I cited Spurgeon in the first chapter of this series and showed where he advocated for prevenient grace or pre-regeneration operations of the word and Spirit that are intended to lead to regeneration. That is not to say that these Calvinists believed in prevenient grace in the same way as John Wesley. Rather, they believed in prevenient grace in the manner explained in previous chapters, by theologians like Spurgeon, Charles Hodge, John Owen, Stephen Charnock, and even Augustine (who believed in "Calvinism" centuries before Calvin). In this chapter we will add another Calvinist to the list of theologians who believed in prevenient grace and in preparations and some common operations of the Spirit in the hearts and minds of sinners prior to salvation. His name is Jonathan Edwards. In the "Works of Jonathan Edwards," Vol.1 SECT. II., under "The manner of conversion various, yet bearing a great analogy" (See here) Edwards wrote (highligting mine):

"I therefore proceed to give an account of the manner of persons being wrought upon; and here there is a vast variety, perhaps as manifold as the subjects of the operation; but yet in many things there is a great analogy in all.—Persons are first awakened with a sense of their miserable condition by nature, the danger they are in of perishing eternally, and that it is of great importance to them that they speedily escape and get into a better state. Those who before were secure and senseless, are made sensible how much they were in the way to ruin, in their former courses. Some are more suddenly seized with convictions—it may be, by the news of others’ conversion, or something they hear in public, or in private conference—their consciences are smitten, as if their hearts were pierced through with a dart. Others are awakened more gradually, they begin at first to be something more thoughtful and considerate, so as to come to a conclusion in their minds, that it is their best and wisest way to delay no longer, but to improve the present opportunity. They have accordingly set themselves seriously to meditate on those things that have the most awakening tendency, on purpose to obtain convictions; and so their awakenings have increased, till a sense of their misery, by God’s Holy Spirit setting in therewith, has had fast hold of them. Others who before had been somewhat religious, and concerned for their salvation, have been awakened in a new manner; and made sensible that their slack and dull way of seeking, was never like to attain that purpose."

The Great Awakening was a series of intense religious revivals that first swept through the American colonies in the 1730s–1740s and which was led by preachers like George Whitefield and Jonathan Edwards, both Calvinists. We have been speaking about what the Puritans called a sinner's "awakening" and how it was an experience of many lost sinners who have come under some conviction or sin and a realization that they were lost and hell bound. Britannica says the following about the "great awakening."

(You can read here; emphasis mine)

"The Puritan fervour waned toward the end of the 17th century, but the Great Awakening (c. 1720–50), America’s first great revival, under the leadership of Jonathan Edwards, George Whitefield, and others, revitalized religion in the North American colonies."  

"The revival preachers emphasized the “terrors of the law” to sinners, the unmerited grace of God, and the “new birth” in Jesus Christ. They frequently sought to inspire in their listeners a fear of the consequences of their sinful lives and a respect for the omnipotence of God. This sense of the ferocity of God was often tempered by the implied promise that a rejection of worldliness and a return to faith would result in a return to grace and an avoidance of the horrible punishments of an angry God. There was a certain contradictory quality about Great Awakening theology, however. Predestination, one of the principal tenets of the Calvinist theology of most of the ministers of the Great Awakening, was ultimately incompatible with the promise that humans could, by a voluntary act of faith, achieve salvation by their own efforts."

The same article mentions both George Whitefield and Jonathan Edwards as two leading ministers who took the lead in the great awakening. Of the latter Britannica says:

"Jonathan Edwards was the great academician and apologist of the Great Awakening. A Congregational pastor at Northampton, Massachusetts, he preached justification by faith alone with remarkable effectiveness. He also attempted to redefine the psychology of religious experience and to help those involved in the revival to discern what were true works of the Holy Spirit."

In the above opening citation from Edwards we note particularly his statement that "persons are first awakened with a sense of their miserable condition by nature, the danger they are in of perishing eternally" and how he said that those awakenings were by the Holy Spirit. It is obvious that Edwards, like John Owen, did not believe that such awakenings were evidence of regeneration but were often steps towards salvation.

Benjamin Franklin went out to hear Whitefield preach and made these observations (emphasis mine):

"In 1739 arriv’d among us from England the Rev. Mr. Whitefield, who had made himself remarkable there as an itinerant Preacher. He was at first permitted to preach in some of our Churches; but the Clergy taking a Dislike to him, soon refus’d him their Pulpits and he was oblig’d to preach in the Fields. The Multitudes of all Sects and Denominations that attended his Sermons were enormous and it was [a] matter of Speculation to me who was one of the Number, to observe the extraordinary Influence of his Oratory on his Hearers, and how much they admir’d and respected him, notwithstanding his common Abuse of them, by assuring them they were naturally half Beasts and half Devils. It was wonderful to see the Change soon made in the Manners [behavior] of our Inhabitants; from being thoughtless or indifferent about Religion, it seem’d as if all the World were growing Religious; so that one could not walk thro’ the Town in an Evening without Hearing Psalms sung in different Families of every Street." (See here for citation) 

What is meant by "awakening" in the "great awakening" is an increased interest in religion and in the Christian message and an awareness of God and the need of salvation. It was just what we have stated in previous chapters, that being "awakened" was an experience of sinners coming under conviction of sin and discovering that they were lost and on their way to hell. I find it ironic, however, that the Hyper Calvinists during both the first and second great awakenings often viewed the conversions that occurred during those times of revival as not genuine and yet argued that such awakening of sinners was a result of a prior regeneration or quickening. 

Edwards wrote further:

"These awakenings when they have first seized on persons, have had two effects; one was, that they have brought them immediately to quit their sinful practices; and the looser sort have been brought to forsake and dread their former vices and extravagancies. When once the Spirit of God began to be so wonderfully poured out in a general way through the town, people had soon done with their old quarrels, backbitings, and intermeddling with other men’s matters. The tavern was soon left empty, and persons kept very much at home; none went abroad unless on necessary business, or on some religious account, and every day seemed in many respects like a Sabbath-day. The other effect was, that it put them on earnest application to the means of salvation, reading, prayer, meditation, the ordinances of God’s house, and private conference; their cry was, What shall we do to be saved? The place of resort was now altered, it was no longer the tavern, but the minister’s house that was thronged far more than ever the tavern had been wont to be."

Here we see where Edwards sees these awakenings as preliminary experiences that may lead to salvation through the divinely appointed means of salvation.

Edwards wrote further:

"There is a very great variety, as to the degree of fear and trouble that persons are exercised with, before they attain any comfortable evidences of pardon and acceptance with God. Some are from the beginning carried on with abundantly more encouragement and hope than others. Some have had ten times less trouble of mind than others, in whom yet the issue seems to be the same. Some have had such a sense of the displeasure of God, and the great danger they were in of damnation, that they could not sleep at nights; and many have said that when they have laid down, the thoughts of sleeping in such a condition have been frightful to them; they have scarcely been free from terror while asleep, and they have awakened with fear, heaviness, and distress, still abiding on their spirits. It has been very common, that the deep and fixed concern on persons’ minds, has had a painful influence on their bodies, and given disturbance to animal nature."

Again, we see where Edwards sees a sinner's awakening not as an evidence of salvation but as an instance of prevenient grace and pre-regeneration workings of the word and Spirit of God upon the consciences of lost sinners.

Edwards wrote further:

"Persons are sometimes brought to the borders of despair, and it looks as black as midnight to them a little before the day dawns in their souls. Some few instances there have been, of persons who have had such a sense of God’s wrath for sin, that they have been overborne; and made to cry out under an astonishing sense of their guilt, wondering that God suffers such guilty wretches to live upon earth, and that he doth not immediately send them to hell. Sometimes their guilt doth so stare them in the face, that they are in exceeding terror for fear that God will instantly do it; but more commonly their distresses under legal awakenings have not been to such a degree. In some, these terrors do not seem to be so sharp, when near comfort, as before; their convictions have not seemed to work so much that way, but to be led further down into their own hearts, to a further sense of their own universal depravity and deadness in sin."

Again, Edwards does not view "legal awakenings" as evidence of a saved state, but as what is a necessary preparation for salvation, and these type preparations are instances of God's grace and activities of the Spirit upon sinners as a means to bring them to Christ.

Edwards wrote further:

"But in some other instances, where persons have been much terrified at the sight of such wickedness in their hearts, God has brought good to them out of evil; and made it a means of convincing them of their own desperate sinfulness, and bringing them off from all self-confidence."

Edwards does not believe that everyone who is awakened or experiences prevenient grace actually comes to be saved by those means. Does that mean that he believed that grace will not always be efficacious or irresistible? That not all preparations of the Spirit succeed in saving sinners? About those questions we will have more to say later.

Edwards wrote further:

"The drift of the Spirit of God in his legal strivings with persons, have seemed most evidently to be, to bring to a conviction of their absolute dependence on his sovereign power and grace, and an universal necessity of a mediator. This has been effected by leading them more and more to a sense of their exceeding wickedness and guiltiness in his sight; their pollution, and the insufficiency of their own righteousness; that they can in no wise help themselves, and that God would be wholly just and righteous in rejecting them and all that they do, and in casting them off for ever. There is however, a vast variety, as to the manner and distinctness of such convictions."

This process is what Wilson Thompson spoke about, how sinners go from Mt. Sinai to Mt. Zion, of going from law to gospel, how they go from efforts to try to save themselves by their efforts at reformation to Christ as mere beggars and asking Christ to do what they have been unable to do.

Edwards wrote further:

"Under the sense which the Spirit of God gives them of their sinfulness, they often think that they differ from all others; their hearts are ready to sink with the thought, that they are the worst of all, and that none ever obtained mercy who were so wicked as they."

Notice that Edwards rightly affirms that sinners becoming sensible of their sinfulness is a work of the Holy Spirit and one that precedes salvation in some but not in others. Surely this work of the Spirit is gracious and so is an example of prevenient grace.

Edwards wrote further:

"When awakenings first begin, their consciences are commonly most exercised about their outward vicious course, or other acts of sin; but afterwards, are much more burdened with a sense of heart-sins, the dreadful corruption of their nature, their enmity against God, the pride of their hearts, their unbelief, their rejection of Christ, the stubbornness and obstinacy of their wills; and the like. In many, God makes much use of their own experience, in the course of their awakenings and endeavours after saving good, to convince them of their own vile emptiness and universal depravity."

As I have stated before in this series, I had several awakenings while I was lost in sin and before I received Christ by faith. Notice that Edwards sees awakenings as involving a process and often a period of time. 

Edwards wrote further:

"Very often under first awakenings, when they are brought to reflect on the sin of their past lives, and have something of a terrifying sense of God’s anger, they set themselves to walk more strictly, and confess their sins, and perform many religious duties, with a secret hope of appeasing God’s anger, and making up for the sins they have committed. And oftentimes, at first setting out, their affections are so moved, that they are full of tears, in their confessions and prayers; which they are ready to make very much of, as though they were some atonement, and had power to move correspondent affections in God too. Hence they are for a while big with expectation of what God will do for them; and conceive they grow better apace, and shall soon be thoroughly converted. But these affections are but short-lived; they quickly find that they fail, and then they think themselves to be grown worse again."

Again, notice his reference to "first awakenings." Oftentimes sinners are awakened by the word and Spirit of God but go back to sleep, into a stupor. Then, they are awakened again, and again, until they either become hardened with a seared dead conscience or are saved and risen from spiritual death never to die or go back to sleep again.

Edwards wrote further:

"And then it may be they set themselves upon a new course of fruitless endeavours, in their own strength, to make themselves better; and still meet with new disappointments. They are earnest to inquire, what they shall do? They do not know but there is something else to be done, in order to their obtaining converting grace, that they have never done yet. It may be they hope, that they are something better than they were; but then the pleasing dream all vanishes again. If they are told, that they trust too much to their own strength and righteousness, they cannot unlearn this practice all at once, and find not yet the appearance of any good, but all looks as dark as midnight to them. Thus they wander about from mountain to hill, seeking rest, and finding none. When they are beat out of one refuge, they fly to another; till they are as it were debilitated, broken, and subdued with legal humblings; in which God gives them a conviction of their own utter helplessness and insufficiency, and discovers the true remedy in a clearer knowledge of Christ and his gospel."

Again, this is what we have spoken about in preceding chapters, how many awakened and alarmed sinners will begin to find peace and salvation by "going about to establish their own righteousness" rather than receiving by faith the righteousness of God by imputation. They will often try to save themselves by law keeping and by their own power and self willing and self determinations, and they will always fail. This failure often brings desperation and realization and leads the sinner at last to fall at the feet of Jesus and plead for mercy, forgiveness, and a new life.

Edwards wrote further:

"God has of late abundantly shown, that he does not need to wait to have men convinced by long and often repeated fruitless trials; for in multitudes of instances he has made a shorter work of it. He has so awakened and convinced persons’ consciences, and made them so sensible of their exceeding great vileness, and given them such a sense of his wrath against sin, as has quickly overcome all their vain self-confidence, and borne them down into the dust before a holy and righteous God."

Edwards wrote further:

"There have been some who have not had great terrors, but have had a very quick work. Some of those who have not had so deep a conviction of these things before their conversion, have much more of it afterwards. God has appeared far from limiting himself to any certain method in his proceedings with sinners under legal convictions. In some instances, it seems easy for our reasoning powers to discern the methods of divine wisdom, in his dealings with the soul under awakenings; in others, his footsteps cannot be traced, and his ways are past finding put. Some who are less distinctly wrought upon, in what is preparatory to grace, appear no less eminent in gracious experiences afterwards."

I think it is particularly true with young children who believe in Jesus that they experience "much more" deep conviction of sins after they have believed and been saved. Not only that, but in many cases it is not the preaching of the law that reveals to a sinner his depravity and guilt, but it is seeing the cruelty of Calvary, and understanding the beauty and greatness of Christ and his salvation. When a person sees the beauty of Christ and God's righteousness, he will at the same time see his own moral and spiritual ugliness. Sinners are often first slain by the law before they are brought to life by the gospel. 

Notice also that Edwards speaks of "what is preparatory to grace," meaning what is preparatory to saving grace, for he does not exclude what is preparatory as also being instances of prevenient grace.

Edwards wrote further:

"There is in nothing a greater difference, in different persons, than with respect to the time of their being under trouble; some but a few days, and others for months or years. There were many in this town, who had been, before this effusion of the Spirit upon us, for years, and some for many years, concerned about their salvation. Though probably they were not thoroughly awakened, yet they were concerned to such a degree as to be very uneasy, so as to live an uncomfortable disquieted life. They continued in a way of taking considerable pains about their salvation; but had never obtained any comfortable evidence of a good state."

Notice that Edwards sees the great awakening as a time when there was an "effusion of the Spirit" upon the people which awakened them and made them sensible and attentive to the message of the gospel, and which effusion came before sinners were saved and thus were acts of grace preceding their salvation. He also says that many who are awakened are not "thoroughly awakened" and "never obtained evidence of a good state" of salvation.

Edwards wrote further:

"As to those in whom awakenings seem to have a saving issue, commonly the first thing that appears after their legal troubles, is a conviction of the justice of God in their condemnation, appearing in a sense of their own exceeding sinfulness, and the vileness of all their performances."

Awakenings do not always end with a sinner's salvation, though God intends that they do. They do cause sinners to begin to seek peace and salvation.

Edwards wrote further:

"That calm of spirit that some persons have found after their legal distresses, continues some time before any special and delightful manifestation is made to the soul of the grace of God as revealed in the gospel. But very often some comfortable and sweet view of a merciful God, of a sufficient Redeemer, or of some great and joyful things of the gospel, immediately follows, or in a very little time: and in some, the first sight of their just desert of hell, and God’s sovereignty with respect to their salvation, and a discovery of all-sufficient grace, are so near, that they seem to go as it were together."

In the next chapter we will continue to look at what Edwards said further on this subject.

Prevenient Grace (6)

Several errors of the Hyper Calvinists are behind their general rejection of any kind of prevenient grace or preparations for salvation.

First, their erroneous belief that regeneration is defined as the first act of God for effecting regeneration. Second, that regeneration is defined by the act of God or first cause of it to the exclusion of the effects. In my post titled "Regeneration - Devil in the Definition" (See here) I wrote about this in these words:

Hyper Calvinists who say "regeneration precedes faith" oftentimes, in explaining that proposition, will equate it with an act of God that produces faith and repentance, or evangelical conversion. What others call a pre-regeneration act of God, or "prevenient" grace and action, Hypers call "regeneration." This is their error. They have defined "regeneration" as

1) the first act that God does to bring about regeneration, by the cause alone, and

2) excluding any acts done by the one regenerated (or the effects)

By this definition, there are no preliminary acts of God prior to regeneration.

Another error of those who separate regeneration from conversion, faith, and repentance, is to define "regeneration" simply as respects the "cause," whereas biblical "regeneration" includes both causes and effects, and primarily focuses upon the effect.  On this point the great head of Princeton Seminary, Archibald Alexander, wrote:

"Evangelical repentance, conversion and regeneration, are substantially the same. They all signify a thorough change of views, affections, purposes and conduct; and this change is every where declared to be essential to salvation."

Alexander wrote:

"Curious inquiries respecting the way in which the word is instrumental in the production of this change are not for edification. Sometimes regeneration is considered distinctly from the acts and exercises of the mind which proceed from it, but in the Holy Scriptures the cause and effect are included; and we shall therefore treat the subject in this practical and popular form. The instrumentality of the word can never derogate from the efficient agency of the Spirit in this work. The Spirit operates by and through the word. The word derives all its power and penetrating energy from the Spirit. Without the omnipotence of God the word would be as inefficient as clay and spittle, to restore sight to the blind."

So, Hyper Calvinists shifted regeneration as far back in the experiences of believers as possible, and in doing this they denied that there were any preparations for it, or any prevenient grace. This led them to distinguish regeneration from evangelical conversion, something that many of the older Calvinists did not do, including John Calvin. In denying that conversion was regeneration they denied that regeneration included the effects, as Alexander said. Faith became an effect of regeneration rather than a means. Further, by this new scheme they had to believe that sinners who were experiencing being "awakened" to their lost condition and made "sensible" of their guilt was their regeneration rather than pre-regeneration or preparatory experiences thereto. So, conviction of sin became evidence of regeneration rather than a prelude to it. 

In the 1795 Circular Letter of the Philadelphia Baptist Association, a Calvinist association, on "The Gospel," Samuel Jones, D. D., wrote (See here) the following (emphasis mine):

"The applications of the Gospel under the influence of the divine Spirit, in the work of conviction and conversion, is absolutely necessary, in order to our receiving saving benefit from it. In this precious work of grace in our hearts, the Law and Gospel, considered as means, go hand in hand, and are often found in the same verse. By the one is the knowledge of sin, by the other the discovery of deliverance. The one worketh despair, the other faith and hope." 

In these words we see that Jones does speak of "the influence of the divine Spirit" as occurring "in the work of conviction and conversion" and says that these are "absolutely necessary in order to receiving saving benefit from" the Gospel. He also speaks of both law and gospel as "means" in preparatory works that precede regeneration. 

Jones wrote further:

"To this end means are appointed, chiefly the word and the ministration thereof; wherein the state of the sinner by nature, and the way of recovery through rich grace is unfolded; and it pleases God to enlighten the mind; move on the affections, and subdue the will. The sinner is awakened and convicted; he sees his danger; is filled with concern of mind; enquires what he must do to be saved; has repentance unto life given him; is led to see the fulness, freeness, suitableness, and glory of the way of life through a Redeemer; is enabled to lay hold by faith of this hope; is transformed by the renewing of his mind; has the constraining love of God shed abroad in his heart; is humbled and abased in himself, yet triumphs in the mercy and power of God; and thus being filled with holy zeal, he goes on his way rejoicing. He is sensible the Lord of his mere sovereign unconditional grace and mercy began the good work, is now carrying it on, and will complete it in glory, to whom, therefore, without reserve, he ascribes all the praise, and will to all eternity."

I find it interesting that Hopewell Primitive Baptist Church's web page is where this citation from the circular may be read. I find that odd since in the circular Dr. Jones says that the gospel is a means in saving the elect and "Primitive Baptist" of the Hardshell variety deny this truth. Jones identifies the pre-regeneration activity of God prior to regeneration, which includes enlightening the mind, awakening, convicting, moving on the affections, subduing the will, making "sensible," so as to cause the sinner thus affected to enquire about what he must do to be saved, and who then, after all these preparatory things, embraces Christ by faith and is given repentance unto life, is transformed and renewed, and has the love of God shed abroad in his heart.  Hardshells say that an awakened and sensible sinner has already been regenerated, but this is wrong, as Jones says.

Jones also wrote:

"From what we have said, various useful observations, by way of inference, might be made; but we shall only mention two: First, that according to the Gospel, the atonement of Christ did not extend to every individual of the human race; and, secondly, that the Gospel contains no conditional offers of salvation."

I include these words though they are somewhat off topic. I do this because it proves my previous statement that the Philadelphia Association and its confession of faith was Calvinistic. But, it also shows elements of Hyper Calvinism in saying that "the Gospel contains no conditional offers of salvation." How Jones could say this when he believed, and the confession affirms, that sinners must believe and repent to be saved. Many Particular or Predestinarian Baptists in the 18th and 19th century decried "conditional salvation" or "conditional offers of salvation." In J.H. Spencer's history, volume two, he writes the following about the Elkhorn Baptist Association of Kentucky in chapter one, published 1886 (See here):

"In answer to a query from Tates Creek, the churches were advised to use all tenderness to re-claim persons holding the error of conditional salvation, but if they could not be reclaimed, to exclude them."

Does this mean that they believed that a man could be saved without believing in Christ, or without repenting of his sins, or without abiding in Christ or persevering? No, rather, by denouncing "the error of conditional salvation" they meant the making of salvation dependent on the sinner's own doing alone, the making of gospel conditions into a kind of law. Spencer also records this information about the Elkhorn Association:

"1793. October 12. At South Elkhorn. Grassy Lick and Flat Lick Churches had been received, in May, and now Springfield Church was received. A union was formed with the four churches which had recently seceded from South Kentucky Association, on the following terms, proposed by the seceding churches:

"And that we do believe in the doctrines relative to the Trinity, the divinity of Christ, the sacred authority of the Scriptures, the universal depravity of human nature, the total inability of men to help themselves without the aid of divine grace, the necessity of repentance toward God and faith in the Lord Jesus Christ, the justification of our persons entirely by the righteousness of Christ imputed, believer's baptism by immersion only; and self-denial..."

Here we see what they meant by "conditional salvation." It is equated with the idea that sinners obey the commands to believe and repent by "themselves without the aid of divine grace." This does not mean that they deny that faith and repentance are necessary things for a sinner to do to be saved for they say they believe in "the necessity of repentance toward God and faith in the Lord Jesus Christ." 

In the Circular Letter Licking Association of Particular Baptists (KY) for 1823 (See here) we have this question and answer:

"Ques. We have heard you do not preach the gospel to sinners. Is it true? [p. 15]

Ans. It is not true. We preach to them and pray for them too. No doubt by divine authority, we are to preach, publish, and proclaim the word of the Lord, both law and gospel, to every creature. We are to charge home on sinners the guilt of their sin in Adam, their head, and all their sins in heart, or action, the justice of the divine law in their condemnation forever, and to publish to them the only salvation, Christ Jesus. And we are to persuade men. This we believe every minister of the gospel is bound to do, as well as to comfort the feeble minded. And although it is the spirit that quickens, either before the preaching, or afterwards, it is clear that very often the first feelings of spiritual life, were under the preaching of the gospel, when it was made the power of God to salvation. The Bible, and confessions of faith too, will support these opinions. Let us not neglect to obey the divine commands, "Preach the gospel to every creature." "Preach the word." When God commands it is enough. He makes use of his word by the spirit, to feed those who have spiritual life, and in the same manner in first communicating that life. In either case the word will do nothing without the spirit. But in this question something more is intended; that is, that we should put the gospel out of its own shape, by accomodating it to the natural mind of man. It must have terms, offers, and invitations, it knows nothing of. A gospel of terms, would be a new book. That would be a law book, and not the gospel. The preaching of such a book would not be preaching the gospel to sinners at all. The gospel of Jesus Christ is quite different from a book of terms. If a poor sinner thinks of coming to Christ on terms, he cannot come that way. But if, agreeably to the gospel, he is drawn by love to Christ, he comes very willingly without terms. He comes bringing nothing with him but sin to be pardoned. The invitation of Christ Jesus to this sinner, proves as effectual as it will be when he shall be invited to Heaven. All whom the saviour makes welcome to himself here, he will make welcome to and with himself in Heaven." [p. 16]

Our chief reason for citing Jones was to show that he believed that a sinner's being "awakened" and "convicted" of his sin, guilt, and lost condition, were things that preceded salvation and were often a means to it. I think these old Baptists were confusing matters when they said that there were no conditions for salvation and then spoke of things the sinners must do to be saved. In the above citation they mention the sinner "coming" to Jesus for salvation, which is something the sinner does, and is therefore a condition for salvation. Though most of today's "Primitive Baptists" would not agree with Jones, nor with the view that there are things God does in sinner's prior to their salvation, yet many of their founders in the early 19th century agreed with Jones somewhat. Elder Wilson Thompson (1788-1866) in his book "Triumph of Truth" (1825) wrote the following:

"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."

Notice that Thompson, like most of the first generation of "Primitive Baptists," thought that a sinner's awakening to see his lost state followed his being "quickened," or being made spiritually alive, but he did not believe that this was his new birth. That would come later after the awakened sinner had first gone to Mt. Sinai and tried to save himself by self reformation or law keeping, and then after failing in that effort, finally coming to Mt. Zion, and then believing in Christ and his saving work, and then being born again. So, Thompson did not agree with the Puritans or Jones that the sinner's awakening and conviction was a pre-regeneration grace or preparation, but affirmed that his awakening was an effect of his actual regeneration or quickening, but oddly, this was not his rebirth. As we saw in the previous chapter, Thompson and other 19th century "Primitive Baptists" believed that regeneration and rebirth were not the same, and that awakening and conviction took place after regeneration (or quickening) but before rebirth. 

He also wrote:

"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. "

I wrote more about this in this post (here). This view would deny any pre-regeneration work of the Spirit and any prevenient grace. They would see awakening and conviction of sin and guilt as evidence of having been previously regenerated or made alive.

In chapter fifty of my online work titled "The Hardshell Baptist Cult" I write about Thompson's view under the title "Law To Grace?" (See here) In that chapter I cited much from Thompson's autobiography showing how he believed the whole process of being born of God involved going from law to grace. I cited these words from Thompson:

"I BELIEVE my mind was more or less impressed with the importance of religion from my first recollection. I had a dread of death and fears of future misery, that betimes would harrass me very much; but, I am now convinced that these early exercises were the effect of education. My father’s house was a home for the preachers, and was called a “Baptist Tavern”...So I heard much about religious subjects, and, perhaps, this will account for the early impressions of my mind. I am very sure, from a retrospect of those early impressions, that they were just of that character which a carnal heart and a defiled conscience might be expected to have, under such circumstances as I have related."

These words seem to contradict what he said in the previous citation, because in the above citation he says that he was awakened and convicted of sin but did not believe that awakening evidenced a saved state.

He wrote further:

"I began to desire greatly to know what was meant by law and gospel, and what it was, in Christian experience, that was called passing from law to gospel. All these things oppressed me sorely. My mind was in a tumult, like a troubled sea, tossed with contending emotions, doubts, fears, hope, assurance, and despair."

"But still I could not understand their system. This something they called law and gospel was with them the great matter. The beautiful and satisfying evidence of Christian experience consisted, as they said, in a thorough and correct passing from law to gospel. This was all new matter to me. I could not understand what they meant by the phrase, “passing from law to gospel”." (Chapter Two - "Early Religious Impressions")

"When meeting closed, a company started with Father, some on horseback and others on foot. As they walked, I was all attention and felt impatient to hear them speak of the reception of these wicked children. They had not walked far until an old man from north of the Ohio River, by the name of Davies, introduced the subject by saying: “How beautifully them young people passed from law to gospel.” 

Obviously Thompson was experiencing pre-regeneration experiences that were instances of God's working on his heart and mind, or of prevenient grace. The Baptists that Thompson was associated with spoke of "Christian experience" involving "passing from law to gospel" and this shows that they believed that before a sinner is saved he would first come under conviction, then would try to save himself by reformation or by his own works, what Paul called "going about to establish their own righteousness"  (Rom. 10: 3), and that endeavor would invariably fail, and such failure would often finally cause the guilty sinner to come to Christ as a whipped supplicant to be saved by Christ and his righteousness, crying "God be merciful to me a sinner." 

What Thompson and the Baptists of his day meant by going from law to grace, or from Mt. Sinai (the place where the law was given and a label for the law) to Mt. Zion (a label for grace via the gospel), was what the Puritans taught when they spoke of how the law was a means of enlightening sinners about sin, guilt, condemnation, and the need for atonement. Once the law has done its work in conviction the gospel of Christ would then be seen as the remedy. So they cited the words of Paul who said that "the law" is a "schoolmaster" to "bring us to Christ" and be "justified by faith." (Gal. 3: 24) They also saw the law as God's means of preparing the soil of the sinner's heart for the planting of the gospel seed, which seed when received in a "good and honest heart" saves the sinner and makes it possible for him to bring forth good and lasting fruit. Charles Spurgeon in his sermon "The Plowman" said (emphasis mine):

"Jesus says to all of us, "You must be born-again." Unless God the Holy Spirit breaks up the heart with the plow of the Law and sows it with the Seed of the Gospel, not a single ear of holiness will any of us produce, even though we may be children of godly parents and may be regarded as excellent moral people by those with whom we live!" (Read his sermon here)

Luther viewed the law as a "hammer" or "thunderbolt" that breaks the impenitent heart and a "mirror" that shows us our true spiritual condition. Recall what happened on Mt. Sinai when God came down and met with the people on that mountain. The record says: 

"Now all the people witnessed the thunderings, the lightning flashes, the sound of the trumpet, and the mountain smoking; and when the people saw it, they trembled and stood afar off. Then they said to Moses, “You speak with us, and we will hear; but let not God speak with us, lest we die.” (Exo. 20: 18-19 nkjv)

Well said one writer of Luther on the law as a means in conviction unto salvation (See here):

"Luther is very clear that we cannot offer the comfort of the gospel without first leading people to despair of their sin through the law. The law wounds, and the gospel heals. Luther did not want gospel presentations to be so focused on the wrath of God that people would be fleeing his wrath out of fear; rather, he wanted them to flee God’s wrath because they knew they were sinners and they despaired of their sin. This despair of sin only comes through the conviction of the law."

In chapter three of this series I cited from the words of Stephen Charnock who said: "The soul must be beaten down by conviction before it be raised up by regeneration." 

Getting back to Elder Thompson, he wrote further:

"At once I inferred that God had shown me my guilty and condemned condition, and had brought me solemnly on my knees, to confess that His judgment was just in my banishment, and that I had no just cause of complaint...Yet I never once thought of this being conversion, but my trouble now was that my former trouble was gone!"

When God showed Thompson his guilty and condemned condition, surely God was not showing him what was not true. This showing, or revelation of truth, therefore was a preparation for his salvation and an instance of prevenient grace, and not evidence of salvation. Thompson even says that he did not think that in this state of being convicted of sin was his conversion. So, was this work of God in awakening him to his lost condition and bringing conviction a gracious act? If yes, then is it not an instance of prevenient grace?

He wrote further:

"For several days I continued in this way; sometimes all my mind seemed shrouded in impenetrable darkness, but frequently an inward dart of light in the mind would reveal the way in which God could be just as a Saviour, through the mediation of His Son."

Again, these experiences were the workings of the Spirit and grace of God leading to his salvation and not the effects of salvation. There was some revelation and enlightenment prior to his coming to Christ. Those Hyper Calvinists who go overboard on the doctrine of "total depravity" will say that the dead sinner cannot feel guilt for sin, cannot receive any enlightenment, cannot understand anything about the bible. However, as the older Calvinists and Puritans taught, light is first given before life is given, and light of truth is the means for producing life. Wrote J.C. Philpot (emphasis mine):

"Nor shall we, as we wish to avoid controversial topics, enter at any length into the question whether light or life first enters into the heart—”The entrance of your words gives light.” (Psalm 119:130.) There it would seem that light came first. And so the passage—”To open their eyes, and turn them from darkness to light.” (Acts 26:18.) So Saul at Damascus’ gate saw and was struck down by the light before the quickening words came—”Saul, Saul, why are you persecuting me?” (Acts 9:4.) In grace, if not in nature, it would seem evident that we see before we feel; and thus the disciples “beheld his glory, as of the only begotten of the Father,” before they received the Son of God into their hearts and believed on his name. It will be seen from these hints that without entering into the controversy, or pronouncing any dogmatical opinion, our own view inclines to the point held by Mr. Huntington, that light precedes life." (From his sermon "The Authority and Power of the Word upon the Heart" and cited by me in this post here)

So sinners, when they are first awakened to see their lost condition, as Thompson described, it is by the means of some light, some enlightenment, some realization, some epiphany, some moment of realization, that sinners come to Christ confessing their sins, and repenting and seeking forgiveness. 

Thompson wrote further:

"...Elder Riggs resumed his sermon...“We are told,” said he, “that Christ will come to judge the world in flaming fire, and with the voice of the archangel and the trump of God. Now, if He should appear in this cloud, amid the streaming lightning and bellowing thunder, who is ready to meet Him? "At that instant the light that had so often flashed and darted before my inward eyes, now suddenly shone in me, and continued to shine in its splendor, revealing the fullness of the glory of the Person of Christ, and the mediatorial work He had performed for His people, through the redemption that was in Him, and obtained by Him for His people. God was revealed glorious in all His perfections, His law honored, and His truth and justice fully vindicated, while His grace was richly exercised in the free and full justification of poor, ungodly sinners who believed in His Son. This, to me, was the most transporting joy I had ever beheld. I knew it was the same blessed plan that, during several of the preceding days had been flashing across my mind. Christ was now All! He was truly the way, the truth, and the life, the end of the law, the fullness of the gospel." 

Several things are important to notice from the above words of Thompson. First, the preaching of the word of God was an instrument in Thompson's awakening. Second, it was the minister's question - "who is ready to meet him?" - that was a means in his conviction. Third, there was light that enlightened his darkness and this before Christ and the way of salvation was revealed to him. All this was an instance of prevenient grace and works of the Spirit and word of God upon him prior to his conversion.

In "Conviction of Sin Before Conversion" by John Owen under "Several Practical Cases of Conscience Resolved" (Available here), being Discourse One, from which we have previously cited, that Puritan wrote:

"The church owed no obligation to her free will and her own predispositions. There is not a smoke in the heart to heaven without a spark first from heaven; not a step till God enlarges the heart. Velleities are from common grace, under the preaching, of the word, fervent and saving desires are from special grace, by the hand of the Spirit. So that there are no preparations from nature to this, since both our apprehensions of it and desires of it spring not out of that stock."

What Owen describes is what Thompson describes as his experience. It was common or prevenient grace, under preaching, that led to receiving special grace.

Wrote Owen:

"The will willing would then be the cause of God's working, not God's working the cause of the will's willing and choice. God's working would be consequent upon the will, and so the effect of the will's free motion...To conclude; God must either be precedent in his operation to the act of the will, or follow it. If precedent, we have what we would, if subsequent, then God is a mere attendant upon the motions of the creature, and a servant to wait upon man."

Elder John M. Watson in his "Old Baptist Test," when speaking of the effectiveness of "means," i.e. the preaching of the word of God, said:

"This doctrine does not stop here, but includes all ordinances, conditions, means, and modes of divine "workmanship." None of these are accidental or fortuitous as we may suppose, Reader, "Is not the Lord gone out before thee" in all these?" (pg. 354)

"Means admit of a similar exposition. The Lord has gone out before us also in them. He not only gave us His Gospel, but ordained means by which it would become savingly efficacious to all His chosen. Isa. 55: 11...So we may say of Gospel means, without the power of God they never prevail over the hearts of sinners; but means in His power, whether great or small, in our estimation, are always efficacious. He derives no strength or advantage from them as adjuncts to His work. He employs them because it is His will to do so. Eph. 1: 11." (page 357)

For more of these citations from Watson see my post (here). By "the Lord going out before" the means we can see common and prevenient grace at work in preparations for genuine conversion. We see this in the case of the conversion of Cornelius the centurian. So we read:

"1 There was a certain man in Caesarea called Cornelius, a centurion of what was called the Italian Regiment, 2 a devout man and one who feared God with all his household, who gave alms generously to the people, and prayed to God always. 3 About the ninth hour of the day he saw clearly in a vision an angel of God coming in and saying to him, “Cornelius!” 4 And when he observed him, he was afraid, and said, “What is it, lord?” So he said to him, “Your prayers and your alms have come up for a memorial before God. 5 Now send men to Joppa, and send for Simon whose surname is Peter. 6 He is lodging with Simon, a tanner, whose house is by the sea. He will tell you what you must do.” (Acrs 10: 1-6 nkjv)

By the words "he will tell you what you must do" the angel means "he will tell you what you must do to be saved." That is clear from these words of Peter in the next chapter when rehearsing the events of Cornelius' conversion, where he said:

"And he told us how he had seen an angel standing in his house, who said to him, ‘Send men to Joppa, and call for Simon whose surname is Peter, who will tell you words by which you and all your household will be saved.’ " (Acts 11: 13-14 nkjv)

The description of Cornelius prior to his salvation by faith in the message Peter delivered and in Christ, evidence that Cornelius had been prepared for salvation by God the Spirit's preparatory work. He had been brought to fear the God of the Jews. However, that in itself is no proof of salvation, for even the demons believe in one God. He was devout in his religious activities, but these too are not in themselves proof of salvation. His salvation did not occur until he believed in Christ and his way of salvation.

Two Seed Baptist Ideology (LVII)

Elder C.H. Cayce
Editorial Writings in the "Primitive Baptist"

The above is a picture of one of the bound volumes of "The Primitive Baptist" periodical and I bought my set many years ago. In the previous chapter we began to look at what Cayce wrote about Two Seedism and its tenets. We will continue to do so in this chapter. We will begin with Cayce's views on the parable of the wheat and tares, a key portion of scripture for Two Seeders, beginning with what he wrote in the following editorial for February 26, 1907. 

"Now, it seems to us that this parable has reference somewhat to the end or closing out of the old or law dispensation and the ushering in of the new, or rather to the end of the Jewish age or Jewish world. Jesus says the harvest is the end of the world, and the reapers are the angels. The word angel, in Scripture, often means minister. “Unto the angel of the church,” as used several times in Revelation, certainly refers to the minister of the church. So the reapers or angels were the ministers of Christ, sent by Him. They were not sent by the church or by a board, but were sent by Him. They are sent the same way now as they were then-that is, Christ sends His ministers or His angels now. 

As the tares are gathered and burned in the fire, so it was in the end of the Jewish age or Jewish world. Those wicked Jews were cast out; there was wailing and gnashing of teeth. The Lord's kingdom, or church, came forth from all the darkness of that age, her subjects shining as the sun. Though they suffered persecution and martyrdom, yet loyal subjects were there, and the kingdom of Christ was 'fair as the moon, clear as the sun, and terrible as an army with banners.”

These are a few of the thoughts we have had in connection with this parable. We do not know that this is the correct view of it, but it is the way we view it, and we offer these thoughts for our readers, and not as a standard at all. We know there is a difference among brethren on many of the parables, and we do not propose that our views are a standard."

From the above words of Cayce we see several remnants of Two Seed thinking. Notice that he says that the "angels" who gather the wheat and the tares at the end of the age are human beings, gospel ministers. Though it is true that occasionally "angel" does refer to human messengers, this is not its predominant usage. It is a rule of bible interpretation to take words in their common ordinary usage except where the context or common sense dictates otherwise. But there is nothing in the parable to lead one to think that the angels were human beings who were gospel preachers. 

Recall that we stated how Two Seeders were gross spiritualizers of the bible, a point that Elder John M. Watson stated in his work against Two Seedism in his book "The Old Baptist Test." In chapter forty seven of this series I showed where he spoke of how they needed to give figurative interpretations of biblical texts in their denial of a physical resurrection. He also spoke of this tendency in the context of Two Seedism and what he called "ultraisms." Elder Sylvester Hassell agreed with Watson and I wrote about this in this post (here), writing:

In "Interpreting the Scriptures-The Spiritual Interpretation of Scripture," written by Elder Sylvester Hassell and published in The Gospel Messenger for April 1893 (See here), Hassell made these interesting comments (emphasis mine):

"Nearly thirty years ago “the beloved physician,” Eld. John M. Watson, professor of obstetrics in the medical department of the University of Nashville, Tenn, wrote in the "Old Baptist Test,' these wise and warning words: "We have become too ultra in most things...Above all things, avoid those prevailing ultraisms which are now eating on the Old Baptist Church as doth a canker--dividing churches and Associations, and disturbing the order and peace of the Baptists generally. Rebuke the ultraist whenever you meet with him--reclaim or reject him--let him be regarded constantly as the worst enemy of the Baptists of the present day!"

"It is especially in what claims to be the spiritual interpretation of the Scriptures that these ultra, wild, chilling, deadening, bewitching, confusing, dividing, and ruinous errors prevail among us. We have been so inattentive and dormant that the Lord righteously permits us to be afflicted, deceived, and desolated by false spirits, "transformed as the ministers of righteousness," (2 Cor. xi. 14, 15). Hyper, or Pseudo-Spiritualism, denying the truth or the importance of the literal meaning of the Scriptures, and thus sapping the very foundation of Christianity, now threatens, above every other danger, to be our ruin." 

The idea that the parable of the wheat and tares was intended to teach the casting away of the Jews and the bringing into the gospel church the Gentiles is certainly not what is self evidently the teaching of the parable. In the Lord's interpretation of the parable he does not give such an interpretation. The preachers in the time of Christ who Cayce says are the angels, and the "end of the age" which he connects with the time of the institution of the church, did not burn the wicked at that time. Nor did they gather the wheat into God's storehouse (kingdom). The plain fact is, there are still wheat and tares, saved and lost, living together in the world, and even in many churches. There has not yet been a total separation between the two nor a complete removal from the world of all wicked souls. 

Cayce is one who Hassell condemns in his words of denunciation about spiritualizing literal biblical truth. Elder Sylvester Hassell, a leader among the Hardshells in the time of Cayce, took the traditional view of the parable. In his "Questions and Answers" (See here) he wrote:

 

"Q. What is meant by the parable of the wheat and tares (Matt. 13:24-30, 36-43)?

A. Jesus clearly explains that the wheat is the children of the kingdom, who will at last shine forth in the kingdom of their Father; and that the tares are the children of the wicked one; who will, at the end of the world, be cast into a furnace of fire, where shall be wailing and gnashing of teeth."

Cayce does recognize that many of his brethren disagree on the meaning of the parable and so he says that he does not know if his view is correct. I suspect that even in the day he wrote this there were still those of his brethren who took the Two Seed view. Further, as we will shortly see, Cayce admits that he sees all the parables as teaching the same thing as he believes is taught in the parable of the wheat and tares. 

Later, in "The Primitive Baptist" for December 6, 1910 Cayce again writes on the parable and says:

"The parable of the wheat and the tares refers to the closing out of the law dispensation and the ushering in of the gospel dispensation. The wheat was gathered together in the gospel kingdom in gospel worship and service. The tares were not admitted in the gospel worship and service. The law service and worship was then done away. It was destroyed."

That is obviously not what the parable teaches and Hassell would agree. Though many Hardshells boast of the greatness of Claud Cayce as a theologian, he certainly was not. He was a good debating Sophist, however. According to Cayce's view the separating work of the angels has been going on for the past two thousand years! However, it is clear that the "reaping" of "the harvest" does not take two thousand years to effect. 

Later, in The Primitive Baptist, Feb. 21, 1911, he writes again on the parable as follows:

"On another page of this paper appears a letter from Brother John G. Rousseau, of Paint Rock, Ala., in which he takes issue with us concerning the wheat and the tares. We gave a short statement of our views on this in our issue of December 6, 1910. We do not propose to set up our views as standard, but we certainly think Brother Rousseau is wrong in his application of the subject.

It is a fact that most, if not all, the parables the Saviour used had primary reference to the closing out of the law dispensation, or the Jewish age, and the ushering in of the gospel dispensation, or gospel age. The original meaning of the term “end of the world,” as used in the parables in the thirteenth chapter of Matthew, is the “end of the age;” the end of the dispensation. The word “world” in the original has no reference to this material universe. For this very reason Brother Rousseau’s position cannot possibly be correct.

The passages quoted by Brother Rousseau showing that grievous wolves shall enter the church, and so on, does not, at all, disprove our statement that the parable has reference to the closing out of that Jewish age or dispensation.

An angel is a messenger. The Lord’s angels were His apostles and ministers, and by their ministry and preaching they gathered the good out from among the bad. The good were gathered together in bundles into gospel worship and service. 

If Brother Rousseau makes the proper application of the parable, it would be wrong to ever exclude anyone from the church, no matter what crime he might commit, for we understand his application to be that the tares are in the church, and must not be rooted up, or taken out, for fear of rooting up the wheat; and if this be a correct application it would destroy all church discipline. Not only so, but the Saviour does not say the field is the church, but the field is the world."

If Cayce's view is correct, then there should never be any failure in gathering the wheat nor in gathering the tares. Every plant, whether wheat or tares, will be harvested and there will be no successful resisting being harvested, all being effectually and irresistibly harvested. But, Cayce believed that many children of God (wheat) are never gathered into the church, and many of the tares are never gathered out of the church nor out of the world. Consider these words of the apostle Paul:

"I wrote to you in my epistle not to keep company with sexually immoral people. Yet I certainly did not mean with the sexually immoral people of this world, or with the covetous, or extortioners, or idolaters, since then you would need to go out of the world." (I Cor. 5: 9-10 nkjv) 

Paul indicates that though it is possible for Christians to not associate with brethren who have been excluded from their fellowship and shunned it is not the case that they exit this world by being burned as weeds, and Paul also says that outside of the Christian community there are yet wicked people (weeds) and the only way to be separated from them is to "go out of the world." Taught the Lord Jesus: “Every plant which My heavenly Father has not planted will be uprooted. Let them alone." (Matt. 15: 13-14 nkjv) Jesus said that every plant not planted by the Lord, but planted by the Devil, will be rooted up and separated from the plants of the Lord and then burned in the fire. Until then, the admonition of the Lord to his disciples, to his ministers, was to "let them alone." But, if Cayce's view is correct, how can his human angels let the tares alone and yet gather them together to be burned? Cayce's view makes it the duty of ministers not only to gather the wheat but to also gather the tares for burning!

In another editorial titled "WHEAT AND TARES AGAIN" Cayce wrote the following in "The Primitive Baptist" for August 8, 1911.

"To make the separation of the wheat and tares to mean the final wind up of time, at the resurrection, is to make the resurrection of all and separation of the sheep from the goats, a work done through instrumentality. We would as soon believe and teach that God regenerates sinners through the instrumentality of ministers (angels) as to teach that He will resurrect them and separate them from the goats that way at the final wind up of all time.

Now, brethren, no matter how much you quibble, nor how much you quarrel about the matter, our statement remains true, whether you believe it or not, that the word world in the expression, “so shall it be in the end of the world,” is translated from a word which means age, and never was used to denote mankind, neither part nor all the race. Now, this is a fact, and all your grumbling at our position will not change this fact."

It is agreed that the words "end of the world" (kjv) means "end of the age." But admitting that does not lead to the view of Cayce that the "end of the age" means the end of the Jewish or old covenant age. In Matthew chapter twenty four Jesus speaks about the "end of the age" and it is clear that he means the time when the church age ends and the millennial age begins. Cayce, however, was a Preterist, and believed that the "end of the age" Jesus talked about in that chapter occurred in A.D. 70 when the temple was destroyed by the Roman army under Titus. Jesus, however, connected the "end of the age" with his second coming and it seems that Cayce, due to his Preterist view, must say that the second coming occurred in A.D. 70. That chapter begins with this question: "what shall be the sign of your coming and the end of the age?" (vs. 3) Christ then says these words in that wonderful discourse:

"For as the lightning cometh out of the east, and shineth even unto the west; so shall also the coming of the Son of man be...And then shall appear the sign of the Son of man in heaven: and then shall all the tribes of the earth mourn, and they shall see the Son of man coming in the clouds of heaven with power and great glory. And he shall send his angels with a great sound of a trumpet, and they shall gather together his elect from the four winds, from one end of heaven to the other." (vs. 27, 30-31 kjv)

Of course, Cayce, like the Two Seeders, often thought that "angels" denoted preachers of the gospel. Just as he said that the reapers in the end of the age harvest were preachers, he would no doubt say that this gathering of the elect from the four winds by the angels, at the time when there is "a great sound of a trumpet," is what began to occur prior to A.D. 70 or immediately after. Such an interpretation is of course ridiculous. In the Primitive Baptist for June 26, 1906, Cayce writes on Matthew 24 and says:

"We will offer only a few words. In the thirty-fourth verse the Saviour says, “This generation shall not pass, till all these things be fulfilled.” All those famines, pestilences, wars, rumors of wars, desolations, earthquakes, and other distresses mentioned— these were all to be fulfilled before the passing away of that generation. So this prophecy could not be of something that is yet in the future. Those things have all been fulfilled...So, taking it all together, we think this chapter is foretelling the destruction of Jerusalem and the overthrow of the temple. In verse 2 it is said, “There shall not be left here one stone upon another, that shall not be thrown down.” This was said with reference to the temple. Then the Saviour tells of some things that were to come to pass before the destruction of the temple, and says these shall all be fulfilled before that generation passes away. For these reasons we think the chapter is foretelling, mainly, of the overthrow of the temple and the destruction of Jerusalem. We offer these thoughts simply as our own views. We are not infallible, and may be wrong; but if what we have given can be any benefit to anyone, we shall have nothing to regret."  

I have read most of Elder Cayce's writings and I have not been able to find where he wrote much about angels, the angels of heaven. As we saw in previous chapters many Two Seeders denied the existence of angels and always interpreted angels in the bible as human messengers. Elder Potter in his writings against Two Seedism did not talk about angels, as did Watson. Cayce in the parable of the wheat and tares said the angels who harvest the wheat and tares at the end of the age are preachers. I am sure that in the above discourse of Christ (called the "Olivet Discourse") about the second coming of Christ, that Cayce would say that the gathering of the elect from the four winds was the gathering that God's ministers do in preaching the gospel.

Further, the complete separation of the saved from the unsaved does not occur until Christ comes, and this is taught by Christ in Matthew chapter twenty five about the separation of the sheep from the goats.

“When the Son of Man comes in His glory, and all the holy angels with Him, then He will sit on the throne of His glory. All the nations will be gathered before Him, and He will separate them one from another, as a shepherd divides his sheep from the goats. And He will set the sheep on His right hand, but the goats on the left." (Matt. 25: 31-33 nkjv)

Just as the parable of the harvest of the wheat and tares effected a separation of the two, so the above prophecy speaks of that same separation which shall occur "when the Son of Man comes in his glory." In an article on "The Sheep and the Goats" for August 15th, 1935 in his paper he agrees that this separation occurs when Christ returns. However, he does not say who the angels are.

Now let me address Cayce's reasoning that led him to take the views he did on the parable of the wheat and tares. He said: "To make the separation of the wheat and tares to mean the final wind up of time, at the resurrection, is to make the resurrection of all and separation of the sheep from the goats, a work done through instrumentality."

I find this reasoning quite stunning. He says that his interpretation is the result of his belief that God does not use his word or gospel by the preachers of it as an instrument in salvation. He thinks that to believe that the harvest of the wheat and tares is what takes place at the end of time would overthrow his anti-means view. Quite frankly, I just don't see how that is so. How does God's use of angels in the end time harvesting overthrow his no means view? If this is his reasoning, then he surely will not believe that the words of Jesus in Matthew twenty four about the angels gathering together the elect from the four winds is what occurs at Christ's second coming, but will want to twist it to make the angels to once again be preachers and the gathering to be what is going on now in the church age and not what will occur at the second coming.

It seems to me that Cayce's view was an invention that was produced because he 1) made "angels" in the parable to be preachers, and 2) denied that God used preachers of his word in the saving of sinners, and 3) because he had no compunction in giving wing to fanciful interpretation, taking many literal truths and giving them a figurative non-literal meaning. Many "Primitive Baptists" believe that the parable teaches what nearly all bible teachers say, as Hassell, that it is talking about the separation of the righteous from the wicked at the return of Christ and yet they do not think that such a view goes against their no-means view of salvation.

Cayce said -- "The Lord’s angels were His apostles and ministers, and by their ministry and preaching they gathered the good out from among the bad. The good were gathered together in bundles into gospel worship and service." Why does he find fault with the holy angels of heaven being instruments in the end time harvesting of the wheat and in the separating of the wheat (saved people) from the tares? He mentions that the traditional interpretation of the parable leads to believing that the angels are employed in the resurrection. However, none of the texts say that the angels are instruments in the resurrection (though they may be) but that they are means for gathering, and he thinks that this gathering implies resurrecting. Perhaps he thinks that if one admits that angels can be instruments in the final resurrection of all, good and bad, then the Hardshell view that human beings cannot be instruments in spiritual resurrection is overthrown. If that is so, then why does he not have a problem with the fact that holy men of the bible raised the dead? Elijah and Elisha raised the dead in the old testament. Peter and Paul did so in the new testament. Why does he not see the same problem for his Hardshell Two Seed no means view in God's using the prophesying of Ezekiel to bring to life a large number of dry dead bones? (Ezekiel 37) 

Elder C.H. Cayce on the KJV

When I was a young "Primitive Baptist" minister there began a campaign by some to change their church's articles of faith to say that only the King James Version of the Bible was scripture. One of the foremost leaders in this campaign was Elder Sonny Pyles who was a friend of my father and me. Father did not believe that the King James Bible was the only Bible and believed as I do that other English translations may be used and that some of them are better than the KJV. We believed that the KJV had some texts that were badly translated. 

Recently while reading through the editorial writings of Elder C.H. Cayce in his paper "The Primitive Baptist" I noticed what this highly esteemed Hardshell apologist wrote about the KJV. In the February 22, 1916 issue of his paper Cayce wrote (emphasis mine):

"Brother J. J. Beck, of Sandy River, Va., writes as follows: How and in what manner were the translators (of the King James Version) chosen?

It was published in 1611; and a number of years elapsed before its intrinsic superiority and merits drove all other English translations out of the field Taken as a whole, it is the best and most truly English version. Couched in noble language, it abounds in felicities. It is musical, dramatic, and even tragical. It is, in turn, pathetic and sublime, and has, withal, a directness and force which commend it to all classes and conditions of men. But it is far from perfect; and wherein, in the opinion of many of its most ardent admirers, it should be made to conform more thoroughly and consistently with the original Scriptures remains to be briefly indicated under the following heads, etc." 

I agree with Cayce. The KJV is "far from perfect." I wonder whether Cayce, if he were alive today and could see other new English translations, would feel differently. I suspect that he would bow to the pressure and go along with what is called "KJV Onlyism." 

In my post (here) "Elder Sylvester Hassell on Translations" I cite where Hassell wrote: 

"Nowhere in the Bible does God promise to inspire or make infallible translators or transcribers or printers; but the men of God who first wrote the Sciptures were, as they claim, and as is abundantly demonstrated, inspired of God; and He has not allowed these variations of others to affect a single doctrine or practice of His Written Word." (The Gospel Messenger, 1914, page 45)

In another post (here) I cite from Hassell's History as follows:

In Hassell's Church History, we note these words: 

 

"It is unfortunate that King James's, or the Authorized Version of the Bible, always translates by the same term "beast" the two different Greek words zoon and therion in the book of Revelation." (page 253)

I am sure that he and Cayce would likewise say that it is unfortunate that the KJV always translates "world" by two different Greek words aion and cosmos. We could give other examples.

On page 508 of Hassell's "History of the Church of God" we read: 

“The seventeenth century was the century of the publication of the King James or Authorized Version of the English Bible (in 1611), the best and noblest of all the translations of the Bible ever made in any language.”

So, both Cayce and Hassell, though both said that they believed that the KJV was best (in their day) yet they did not believe it was perfect.

In this post (here) I cited from a "Primitive Baptist" elder from Welsh Neck Primitive Baptist church, Elder Robert Lackey, who said this about the translators of the KJV:

"If these baby-sprinkling, Baptist-persecuting, state-church loving Episcopalians were inspired as were the prophets, poets, historians, evangelists and apostles then we are bound to account the King of England and Pope of the Church of England as also inspired by the Holy Ghost when he set forth his rules for the translators. Now whether or not King James was a cross-dresser or a boy child lover we will not speculate upon. There is evidence from his enemies he was; there is evidence from his friends he was not. That part matters not to us, what we can say is while in Scotland he was a Presbyterian, but his religious convictions were so strong that he gladly embraced Episcopacy when crowned King of England, and became head (pope) of the Church of England."