Jason's 4th Rebuttal

Most of what Jason wrote in this rebuttal posting was repetition.

See here

Jason wrote:

"But Brother Garrett believes that regeneration is synonymous with conversion - that it "refers to the same singular experience". Beebe and Trott did not advocate this, as they distinguished between the two. Now, they did believe that all the elect would be converted, but my original point was that they did not believe in means for regeneration."

Certainly I disagree with Beebe and Trott making the new birth different from regeneration, but who is closer to the primitive teaching of the Baptists? Jason's or the first Hardshells? I agree with the first Hardshells that means are involved in eternal salvation, that one must be converted to be saved in heaven. I can sympathize much more with the view of the first Hardshells than with today's Hardshells. Who, at the time of Beebe and Trott, publicly disagreed with them? How can Jason legitimately trace his church lineage through the founding fathers of Hardshellism?

Jason wrote:

"While Primitive Baptists today would reject the view that the effectual call of God extends to conversion, as John Gill even entertains the volitional nature of gospel conversion when he states, "then faith comes by hearing, and ministers are instruments by whom, at least, men are encouraged to believe..." (not that regenerate men who have had the principle of grace infused are determined to believe), they would agree with the basic distinction between sonship and discipleship in Beebe and Trott."

We already know that Jason rejects the views of the first Hardshells and yet claims to be "primitive." We already know which view is closer to the truth of scripture and to the old confessions. Beebe's view is closer to the truth and to the primitive faith of Baptists than are Jason's and his neo-Hardshells.

Jason said - "not that regenerate men who have had the principle of grace infused are determined to believe." Their regenerate nature does not cause them to believe in the one true God and in Jesus! How anti scripture is this teaching! I guess they are not determined to overcome either? Not determined by their nature to persevere? I guess God's giving them a new heart and spirit does not, after all, "cause" the regenerate ones to "walk" in his word? The apostle John believed that the presence of the divine nature and seed would universally cause the regenerate ones to "overcome." (I John 5: 4)

Jesus connected regeneration with discipleship when he said "my sheep hear my voice and they follow me."

Jason wrote:

"The "redefinition" of Beebe I spoke of was linguistic - in making regeneration distinct from being "born again". The use of the term "born again" as distinct from the term "regeneration" is a language distinction that neither Brother Garrett or modern Primitive Baptists make. Modern PBs (Primitive Baptists) make such a distinction in principle, though they disagree with necessitating the latter stage, and they believe, like Beebe and Trott, that this latter stage of discipleship is brought about by means of the preached gospel."

Much of this is repetition, hash and rehash. He retorts to minimizing the teaching of Beebe by saying his views were merely "linguistic." Merely meaningless rhetoric!

Jason wrote:

"Brother Garrett was confusing in his argument of this post because he failed to note that it was Beebe's doctrine of God's absolute predestination of all things that separated Beebe from mainstream PBs, not a doctrine of means per se."

Beebe's view about predestination, and the sovereign efficacious work of God in bringing people to the birth (conversion) experience, was not different from what was the "mainstream" view of the first Hardshells. The Hardshells, in the time of Beebe, believed in the absolute predestination of all things, as I also do. They believed that being made a gospel believer was not "conditional" or dependent upon the creature, as the Arminians teach. The division over this issue, in the late 19th century, had several issues involved, not one. It did not only deal with the decrees of God, free will, second causes, etc., but also with whether the conversion experience was the sovereign work of God as was the regeneration experience. It also dealt with the issue of perseverance. Today's Hardshell views did not gain the ascendency till the end of the 19th century.

Jason wrote:

"The texts he references do not indicate that the Scripture equates conversion with the new birth. In fact he seems to fail to realize that the context of Matt. 18:3 is the disciples who were presumably already born again. Jesus tells the disciples that unless they are converted and become as the little child, they shall not enter the kingdom of God."

This words of Jesus were addressed to people who followed him around and who were listening to his teachings. The word "disciple" does not always denote a committed or believing follower, but only someone who is learning the message. Besides, Jason has already acknowledged that the word "convert" may apply to the regeneration experience. We both agree that the word "convert" may denote that change, like sanctification, that progressively occurs in the life of the believer.

Jason wrote:

"Acts 3:19's use of converted is consistent with gospel conversion, not regeneration, as this is what these Jews were called to acknowledge. Repentance and conversion to the gospel accompanies eternal salvation and the forgiveness or blotting out of sin - which gospel it is the nature of the regenerate to accept, as it draws the root trust in God imparted in regeneration."

I have alread made rebuttal to the assertion of Jason about Acts 3: 19 being a command to only regenerate people respecting being converted and pardoned. Perhaps I will have more to say about this verse in future postings.

Now, I have answered all the rebuttal postings of my Hardshell apologist. After he makes more, I will be happy to reply to them. I also plan to make a post soon where we look at the leading passages discussed in our exchange. I have shown how he is not "primitive," "old," or "orginal" in his views on the work of salvation. Jason has produced no records that prove that Hardshellism was the general belief of Baptists prior the 19th century anti mission movement and the rise of the Hardshells.