Hardshell Reform Movement

Elder Michael Gowens, pastor of Lexington (Ky.) Primitive Baptist church, a fluent writer among today's Hardshells, and one whom I have cited in my book on "The Hardshell Baptist Cult," was asked about those ministers who are identifying themselves with the "liberal movement." See here

Gowen's posting can be found here

Here is the question:

"Since the issues are so subtle and technical, it has been difficult for the “rank and file” believer to wrap his arms around the debate. In a nutshell, what are the primary emphases that are causing such unrest among the PB’s?"

Elder Gowens responded by saying:

"One reason it has been difficult for the ordinary church member to recognize the deviations in doctrine is because this new emphasis has been a position “in flux” – an amorphous position—a moving target, if you please. At first, it was very easy to recognize the challenge to orthodoxy because the statements were so blatant. Notice the “uncertain sound” of gospel means in these actual, verbatim quotes from either ordained elders or young men who were exercising for the PB ministry. Again, these are actual, verbatim, unedited quotations from several of our own ministers and “exercising” brethren. Most of these quotations originate from articles written and sermons preached in the early days of this crisis—in 2000 and 2001—and I could supply names and documentation if compelled."

Before I give the "quotations" that Gowens gives, and my response to them, I want to say that what Gowens calls "the uncertain sound of gospel means" is the position that all Particular or Regular Baptists held to prior to the "rise of the Hardshells" (Carroll) in the early 19th century. All the original Hardshell churches subscribed to the Philadelphia and London confessions of faith and the "gospel means" position is the stated belief of those confessions. It was also the position of the first Hardshell founding fathers, the view of men like Gilbert Beebe, Daniel Jewett, John Clark, J.M. Watson, Samuel Trott, James Osbourn, etc. Thus, if the "gospel means" position is that "uncertain sound," then the Baptists who wrote the old confessions preached a false gospel, and the founding fathers preached a gospel that was an "uncertain sound."

First, Gowens says that some Hardshells are saying:

"God uses the gospel minister as His instrument in the eternal salvation of the elect."

But, if they are saying that, is that not what the old confessions say? Is that not what the Baptists universally affirmed prior to the birth of the Hardshell denomination? Is that not what Dr. Gill taught? Further, is that not what the scriptures say? (See for instance Acts 26: 18; I Cor. 4: 15; II Thess. 2: 14)

Gowens says that some Hardshells are saying:

"A certain amount of Christian orthodoxy is necessary to final salvation."

Again, is this not what the old confessions say? What the Baptists prior to the birth of the Hardshells affirmed? Is it not what Dr. Gill taught? Is it not what Elder Watson affirmed in his "Old Baptist Test"? Further, is this not what is stated in scripture? What did Paul tell the jailer? "Believe on the Lord Jesus Christ and you shall be saved." What did Paul tell the Romans? "That if thou shalt confess with thy mouth the Lord Jesus, and shalt believe in thine heart that God hath raised him from the dead, thou shalt be saved." (Rom. 10: 9) Jesus said "if ye believe not that I am he, ye shall die in your sins." (John 8: 24) What did the apostle John say? "Whosoever transgresseth, and abideth not in the doctrine of Christ, hath not God. He that abideth in the doctrine of Christ, he hath both the Father and the Son." (II John 1: 9) It seems clear to me that Gowens and his Hardshell brethren are the ones giving forth a strange "sound."

Gowens then gives this quotation from some in the "liberal movement."

"Salvation is daily therapy…there are ‘means of grace’ which must be employed."

Again, is this not the view of the Baptists prior to the rise of the Hardshells? Can Gowens give us evidence to show that the Old Baptists of the 17th and 18th centuries denied it? Is this not the teaching of scripture? "Take heed unto thyself, and unto the doctrine; continue in them: for in doing this thou shalt both save thyself, and them that hear thee." (I Tim. 4: 16) "And he gave some, apostles; and some, prophets; and some, evangelists; and some, pastors and teachers; For the perfecting of the saints, for the work of the ministry, for the edifying of the body of Christ." (Eph. 4: 11, 12)

Gowens next gives this quotation:

"The Bible is relentless in holding forth both God’s sovereignty and man’s responsibility in relation to salvation."

Why would Gowens deny this? Why would he affirm that it is unscriptural? Does he not show that he is "antinomian" in doing so? Further, is this not the teaching of the old Baptists of the confessions? Of Dr. Gill? Can Gowens give us evidence where the Baptists denied this prior to the rise of the Hardshells?

Gowens next gives this quotation:

"Preaching as a ‘means of grace’ to assist the saints to persevere, and perseverance as necessary for final salvation. Therefore every sermon is a “salvation sermon”; not just because of its aim to convert sinners, but also in its aim to preserve the holy affections of the saints and so enable them to confirm their calling and election, and be saved."

But, again, this is what is affirmed in the confessions, confessions which the old Baptist churches endorsed prior to the rise of the Hardshells. It is what is taught in the scriptures. Hooray for those young preachers who are returning to the faith of their fathers and denying the heresy of Hardshellism.

Gowens then gives this quotation:

"If you don’t believe that your ministry has any eternal consequence, then I seriously doubt that you will have the courage or strength necessary to persevere in the face of opposition and discouragement."

Why is this statement false? Did Paul not believe that his ministry had eternal consequences? Paul said: "Therefore I endure all things for the elect's sakes, that they may also obtain the salvation which is in Christ Jesus with eternal glory." (II Tim. 2: 10)

Gowens then gives this quotation:

"All those who were predestinated unto salvation, Jesus Christ came and died for them, therefore the Holy Spirit will quicken each one of them and they SHALL hear with an effectual ear the gospel and rejoice in Christ as their Savior and be converted."

Is this not the teaching of scripture and of the old Baptist confessions? Of the great Dr. Gill? All the predestined will be "called" (Rom. 8: 30) and this calling is "by the gospel." (II Thess. 2: 14) All those drawn and taught by the Father come to Jesus. (John 6: 37, 44, 45)

Gowens then gives this quotation:

"[Preachers], although worthy of no glory or praise, are [an] inherent part of God’s work in the salvation of His elect and will be until the Second Coming of Jesus Christ."

Is this not what the scriptures teach? (See Acts 26: 18; II Tim. 2: 10)

Gowens then gives this quotation:

"[In the NT], we find that God has made [men] essential elements of his plan. This is especially true when we consider justification…What we learn is that justification comes by faith (Gal. 2:16) and faith comes by hearing (Rom. 10:17). God connects us to His righteousness by faith in Christ, thereby imparting His saving benefits to us. It is faith in Christ that God has ordained to unite us with His Son."

How can Gowens deny this when it is so plainly taught in scripture? How can he claim to be a "primitive" or "old" Baptist and deny it?

Gowens then gives this quotation:

"Believing in Christ and eternal life are married and what God has joined together, let not man put asunder."

It is amazing that any minister of the gospel, especially a Baptist, could deny this as being taught in the scriptures! What does the bible say of those who reject Christ and the gospel? Does it not say that they will be "damned" and be "punished with everlasting destruction"? (II Thess. 1: 9; 2: 12)

Gowens then gives this quotation:

"If belief is a condition to salvation, then where does this belief come from? From the God who elected you to salvation. It’s all part of the plan. I submit that is the historic and Biblical position that has been held by Primitive Baptists in ages past."

If Gowens denies this then he should be able to give scripture that refutes it and also give historical proof that the Baptists believed differently prior to the rise of the Hardshells.

Gowens then gives this quotation:

"Many PB churches today are eliminating the word ‘perseverance’ from their articles of faith and it absolutely blows my mind. Now, the word means that the child of grace will ‘hang in there’ in a state of grace until death. He will continue, at least to some degree, in the way of righteousness. If he sins, he repents—‘The just man falleth down seven times and rises again’ (Pro. 24:16). That’s the doctrine of perseverance."

Again, how can Gowens deny that this is the plain teaching of scripture and of the old Baptist confessions?

Gowens then gives this quotation:

"Jesus prayed that every one of His children would be sanctified by the word and did Jesus’ prayers always get answered? Amen! Sanctification is a guaranteed part of the salvation package."

Gowens denies this? How can he? Does he deny that Jesus prayed that all the elect be sanctified by the word?

Gowens then gives this quotation:

"Conditional time salvation eliminates the Biblical notion that sanctification—daily growth in grace—is a definite and guaranteed part of the salvation package."

This is a true statement and Gowens offers no rebuttal to it.

Gowens then gives this quotation:

"Now I would not suggest that it’s impossible that an individual in a foreign land without the benefit and aid of the gospel, the Bible, or the church, could be called by God, because we believe in a sovereign Holy Spirit. But the question is, ‘Does a person who has been reached by the Holy Spirit then stay in this element of ignorance and darkness, or is he drawn to Christ?’."

Gowens shows how opposed to the scriptures he is in denying such a statement. Did Jesus not say all his elect would come to him in faith? That they all would hear his voice and follow him?

Gowens then writes the words as commentary upon these statements.

"These are the actual statements from various PB ministers that started this great crisis."

Good for those PB ministers! They are returning to the faith of their fathers and to the truth of scripture. How is a "great crisis" to bring people out of error?

Gowens said:

"But as some of our ministers recognized these statements as a hybrid form of “bullet-in-the-hole Calvinism” and these brethren were challenged on the claim that the gospel is instrumental to eternal salvation, they retreated to other ground. They then began to espouse that “everything happens in the new birth”, that is, when a person is born again, he automatically believes in Christ, repents of his sins, grows in grace, and perseveres in holiness."

Our series on the Gospel as the "Means of Grace" show that conversion happens in the new birth. Gowen's position is that very little happens in the new birth, making it a "hollow log" experience.

Gowens wrote:

"If repentance, believing in Christ, and personal obedience are not “optional”, then obviously, they are “guaranteed” and “certain”. And clearly, that is the argument they were making. They were saying that if a person has truly been born again, he will repent, he will believe, he will persevere; those who do not give evidence by their disobedience that they have never truly been born again."

Again, is this not what the scriptures teach? What the old Baptists taught? The view of Gowens and his Hardshell "ultraists" brethren say a man can be born again and yet be an unbeliever and an impenitent!

Gowens said:

"It all stems from an effort to dismiss the practice of distinguishing between eternal and temporal salvation, the one feature in Biblical interpretation that makes PB theology more consistent than any other theological grid."

But, where do the bible writers distinguish between two kinds of salvation? Such a distinction is a hybrid and novel view created by the Hardshells in order to hold on to their "hollow log" view or "regeneration." This dividing up texts on salvation into temporal and eternal is truly a man-made "theological grid."

Gowens wrote:

"One of these men recently said regarding his labors in a foreign country, “We held up Christ to them in the gospel; they turned to Him and He saved them.” (again, a direct quote). In all candor, that sounds more like Missionary Baptist doctrine to me than Primitive Baptist doctrine. So, to make a long story short, it appears that their position is again morphing back into its original form."

Holding up Christ to sinners in the gospel? That sounds like scripture to me! "They turned to Him and He saved them"? Again, that sounds like scripture to me!