Elder R. V. Sarrels wrote the only existing "Systematic Theology" for the Hardshells and he wrote:
"The view we hold with regard to this fundamental doctrine (no means regeneration - SG) is not new, nor, we hasten to say, has it ever been without a witness. Across the centuries it has been firmly held and consistently defended by men who in the main were unaccredited by the scholarship of the world. Here and there, like monuments in distant lands, these fearless sentinals have stood in defense of the everlasting truth...however, these voices in the wilderness, with their labors little noticed and their names seldom recorded, have left their mark on Christian civilization. We thank God for the privilege of standing where these immortals stood, of defending the unpopular but glorious doctrine which they defended, and of sharing in some small measure the hardships which they endured." (Systematic Theology, page 305, 306)
A present day Hardshell, Elder C. C. Morris, said the same thing.
See here
What is ironic about these claims is the fact that Sarrels and Morris say such things without the least shred of proof! I can produce statements from the Old Baptists of the 17th-19th centuries that show that the traditional and continuous view of the Old Baptists was a belief in regeneration/new birth by means of the gospel, but Hardshells cannot do the same. They can only "claim" to do so, but after years of my challenging them on this "claim," none have come forward with the evidence. Surely Sarrels and Morris could at least give us the evidence to back up their claims. Wonder why they have not done so? Who are those "immortals" that Sarrels refers to?
3 comments:
Thank you for saying this. I believe you. I am connected (though not in fellowship) with the Gospel Standard churches of England (where I live) and I can tell you that amonst the particular baptists of England (and I have been to many churches - perhaps 10) I have found no evidence that they believe at all in so called 'no means' regeneration. All that I have spoken to agree adamently that one must believe the gospel to be saved.
Elder Thomas McDonald of Salem PBC in Wichita Falls, Texas, says: "32. Aren’t the scriptures written as a means to get someone to be born again? The scriptures were not written to cause someone to be born again, but it is true that we are born again by the Word of God which liveth and abideth for ever,” but this “Word” is not the written word, nor is it the preached word, but it is the Living Word, the Lord Jesus Christ (John 1:1-2, 14; 1 Peter 1:23-25). The word and the gospel are two distinctly different things. Jesus and the message are not the same thing. The gospel is the “good news from a far country” of what He has done for His people. (Prov. 25:25; Matt. 11:5)."
Elder Hoyt B. Simms of Atlanta PBC says: "If the preached Word were a means of salvation, none could be saved except those who hear the Gospel and there are multiplied thousands who have lived and died without ever hearing the Gospel preached."
dear rashau:
Can you give us the men who believed this prior to the 19th century among Baptists?
Stephen
Post a Comment