Elder Joel Hume (1807-1901) was a first generation leader of the Hardshells and one of their first debaters. He had a number of debates with the Campbellites. Elder Hume was a Conditionalist Hardshell, denying that God had, as the old London Confession stated, decreed all things. But, it is not clear that he denied the use of means in being born of God, at least not in his early years as a Hardshell minister and apologist. He certainly did believe that "faith" was necessary for being saved, and he defined saving faith as involving gospel knowledge.
Hume, in his debate with Campbellite Stinson, said:
"I understand, my friends, that the Apostle is here introducing, for the instruction of his brethren, a system of salvation that embraces the finally and eternally beatified in glory--I had like to have said, the elect of God. It embraces the whole human family that ever did believe the gospel, and those are the only men that will be saved; and we maintain that they will be saved. There is no mistake; God will not be disappointed." (1st speech, emphasis mine)
Today's Hardshells do not teach what Hume taught and cannot therefore claim to be "primitive" or "original" in their views on faith and salvation. Hume is talking about eternal salvation, not a "time salvation." He affirms that only "believers" will be eternally saved and that these "believers" are those who "believe the gospel."
Hume said:
"...then we can speak of the glorious gospel of the Son of God, saying, go ye, teach all nations; tell them that Christ has died and that in him alone is their salvation; let them know that he is exalted to give repentance; let them know he is the king in Zion; it is him that has died and that has ascended on high; tell them this gospel brings the glorious news of deliverance, and promises a home in heaven to all them that believe." (1st speech)
Again, Hume affirms that salvation is promised to believers in the gospel.
Hume said:
"Who are the elect? Why, all the family of believers." (3rd speech)
Again, this is not taught by today's Hardshells. They do not believe that all the elect are gospel believers and that only believers will be saved.
Hume said:
"Understand me, then: I believe that all persons to whom justification unto life is given, believers in any church, whether Calvinists, general Baptists, or in any other church, are involved." (3rd speech)
Again, Hume says that all those who are given that "justification unto life" are "believers," gospel believers, or Christians.
Hume wrote:
"Now, that is the generation of vipers that the Saviour refers to here; but did not embrace that portion who believed on him."
Again, Hume uses "believer" with those who are saved. Unbelievers are "vipers."
Hume said:
"I say God never has required them to exercise faith in him while in that condition. I repeat God never has, and never can, require individuals to exercise faith in him, in Jesus Christ, in that condition: for this reason, God never requires spiritual action from spiritual agents. Consequently, before the sinner can exercise spiritual faith or any of the Christian graces, he must become spiritual. To wind up the matter, in regard to repentance, my brother tells you, men possess the volition of will, and that they can repent. I propose to show that he is greatly mistaken. Turn to Acts v, 31; you will there find this language: when speaking of the exhortation of the Son of God, the apostle says: "Him hath God exalted with his right hand, to be a Prince and a Saviour, for to give repentance to Israel and forgiveness of sins." Now, if that was the mission of Christ, the sinner can not perform till he gives repentance." (2nd reply on 2nd proposition)
I cite these words of Hume to show that I am telling the whole story about the views of Hume relative to faith and salvation. Here he clearly argues for an "ordo salutis" that puts regeneration before faith. But, this does not mean that he denied that a soul was made a believer in being born of God. He would have argued, as do many Reformed Baptists do today, that regeneration precedes faith logically but not chronologically. In the above words, Hume clearly says that the repentance that is given in regeneration is evangelical.
Hume said:
"If I used the language that sinners were damned for unbelief, I would change the phraseology; I would make at read thus, "sinners are condemned because of unbelief;" not to be condemned in the future, but already are; hence the language of the Saviour: "You are condemned already;" not that the time is to come, but the language is, you are condemned already, because you have not believed; a matter already settled." (3rd reply on 2nd proposition)
Nothing could be clearer than the fact that Hume says that all "unbelievers" are condemned, and are not saved and regenerated.
Hume said:
"In the humble conceptions of my mind, all enlightened sinners choose Christ, from the fact that their eyes are opened, because they see."
Today's Hardshells will not generally accept these words of Hume, yet Hume reflected the views of the founding fathers of Hardshellism. Hardshells are not primitive in their views.
Hume said:
"If I know anything about Christian experience, I will say there was a time when I cared no more about my own soul than if I had had none. I had no desire to go to church, nor to read the Bible; I had no desire to hear any talk upon that subject. I was not seeking the Saviour; I was running away from God--sinning against him with a high hand and an outstretched arm; but I shall never forget, while I am allowed a place upon God's footstool, the first serious thought that crossed my mind upon the subject of Christianity. I have heard men talk about agencies and instrumentalities in this grand work, but if there was any agency in my awakening to my condition as a sinner, it was the abominable practice of blaspheming the name of God."
I again cite these words in order to dispell any charges from Hardshells who might say that I did not cite words from Hume that might show him consistent with today's Hardshells. But, notice that Hume speaks of his "awakening," not his rebirth in Christ. Further, it is evident that Hume, at this time (1863) was showing inclinations to deny instrumentalities, even though he affirmed that the faith that saves was a gospel faith. Perhaps he was like his fellow "Regular" Baptists in that he held that initial "regeneration" or "awakening" occurred apart from the gospel and faith, but that the "birth" did occur by faith and by the gospel. Perhaps he was inconsistent and contradictory. Did he deny that he was without gospel knowledge even when in sin, and at the time of his "awakening"?
Hume continued with relating his Christian experience, and said:
"At that time I was working as a hand upon a steamboat. There I heard the most blasphemous oaths that ever disgraced humanity, and the thought occurred to my mind what an awful wicked set of beings you are; and the next thought was, you are as bad as they. These men pour out all that is in them, while you conceal it up as filth. I ask you, friends, was I choosing--was I desiring? Surely not. But from that hour till the day I trusted in God, I was unable to see how God could be just and save sinners. I chose holiness and despised sin, and never shall I forget the last afternoon of the deep agony of my soul; it was in a paw-paw thicket, in the east end of this state. My soul feels deeply interested when I think upon that dark and gloomy evening. I left the spot with this conviction: hell is my portion; I am doomed, and there is no mercy for such a rebel as you. I went to the little cabin in which I was living, and I leaned against the wall and closed my eyes. Oh, Christian friends! if my tongue had been taken out by the roots, every breath would have gone up to God in prayer. Till then I was not seeking Christ, but he sought and found me. Christ revealed himself to me. I would say to every sinner, I care not what your names, if you live as Christians, have not these been some of your exercises?" (3rd reply on 2nd proposition)
Hume speaks of the time of his "awakening" as a time when he fell under "conviction" for his sins, when he came to believe that he was lost and needed to be saved. He speaks of there being a gap in time between the time when he was awakened and convicted and when he came to trust in God. The old Regular Baptist Hardshells believed that Hume was "regenerated" when he fell under conviction but that he was not "born again" till he believed the gospel and trusted in Christ alone for salvation. For those who are interested, read my chapters on "Hardshells and Conviction" regarding their errors on the relationship of conviction to salvation.
Hume continues:
"And here I will make an admission that my friends are welcome to the benefit of, if any can be derived from it; it is this: the 15th verse of the 1st chapter of Mark has caused me more serious study, more close attention, more intense application, and perhaps more prayer to God, than any other one passage found in the Bible; and I confess now that there has been no passage introduced into this discussion about which my mind is as unsettled: "The time is fulfilled, the kingdom of heaven is at hand; repent ye, and believe the gospel." That is the whole text; and I can not, as an honest man, tell you that this address was made to the disciples; (people already saved - SG) consequently, the mystery in my mind is in regard to its application. I can not reconcile that single verse with the general tenor of Revelation upon the subject. The best I can do is this: I learn from the Bible that where the word of a king is, there is power. Jesus Christ was the king, and when he made this commandment, he possessed power to enforce it, and understood to whom it was to be applied. Now, if that is not the meaning, I confess I do not understand it. I would not know how to reconcile that expression with what the apostle says, in Acts v, 31, where it says that God has exalted Christ with his own right hand to be a Prince and a Saviour, to give repentance to Israel, and forgiveness of sins. Now, if repentance is an act of the creature, and if mankind possess that power, I can not see the propriety of Christ being exalted to give it. It is either a gift of Christ, or an act of the creature; it is not both. Here we have an emphatic declaration that God has exalted Christ for that purpose, not only to give repentance to Israel, but forgiveness of sins. This is precisely the view I entertain of the gospel plan." (1st speech 3rd proposition)
What was Hume's answer to his difficulty? The belief that the gospel command to "repent and believe" was the means by which God would give repentance to his elect! He said "where the word of the king is," that is what he sees the gospel command to be, "there is power," power as a means. This he says is "the gospel plan." Hume had difficulty seeing how faith and repentance could be "gifts" of God vouchsaved to all the elect, and yet how faith and repentance could be commanded of all men. He reconciled himself by affirming that the command must be the way God has chosen to produce faith and repentance, the manner in which he gives these gifts. Hume was honest enough to admit that the command to believe and repent was not made to only "disciples," to only those who were already saved and regenerated.
Hume said:
"The question, then, is this, will Jehovah require spiritual action from natural agents, and then damn that agent for not performing that action?" (1st speech 3rd proposition)
This is a question that many Hardshells continue, like Hume, to have trouble reconciling in their minds. They have trouble with Pelagianism, with the proposition that says that a "command implies ability." God commands all men to repent and believe the gospel. Hume knew that such was taught in scripture. Yet, he also knew that men had no power to do so, as a result of their totally depraved nature. The answer to his difficulty was to realize 1) commands do not imply ability, and 2) the commands are used by God as a means to effect what he commands.
Hume said:
"So with every child of God, when the evidence comes before them that Jesus Christ is their Saviour, faith is irresistible. You know this is so, when you believed in the Lord Jesus; you could not help it. I do not remember how many kinds of faith there are in the Bible; there is such a theory spoken of as the faith of men and the faith of devils, as false faith, as little faith, as great faith; but the faith I have in view here, is the faith of God's elect. I inquire, who has this faith? The answer is, God's spiritual Israel possess that faith, and nobody else." (Hume's closing reply on the 3rd proposition)
Did Hume believe that all the elect would believe the gospel when they heard it? That faith in Jesus Christ, by the gospel, was "irresistible"? Clearly he did. Do most Hardshells today believe as did Hume? Clearly not. How then can they claim to be "primitive"? Did Hume affirm that "the faith of God's elect," the faith which all the elect receive, was a faith that did not have Christ as the object?
Hume said:
"Acts xiii, 48: "And when the gentiles heard this, they were glad, and glorified the word of the Lord: and as many as were ordained to eternal life believed." I suppose the reason why the rest did not believe, was because they were not ordained to eternal life; for the text says as many as were ordained believed." (1st speech of first affirmative proposition)
Again, Hume affirms that all the elect will believe the gospel.
Hume said:
"In his other speech he told us that the gospel is the power of God to every one that believeth. No man believes that stronger than I; but mark, it doesn't say to unbelievers. Hence, before the gospel can be the power of God to a man, he must be a believer." (2nd spped of first aff. prop)
Here is another example that shows that I am being fair in my citations from Hume. In this statement he does seem to take the modern Hardshell view by affirming that one is made a "believer" before he hears the gospel. But, in this he contradicts what he has earlier affirmed. But, it is possible that Hume is simply affirming that the gospel will not save a man until he believes it.
Hume said:
"Respecting Brother Stinson's passage, "he that believeth shall be saved," the question is, how does faith come? Upon what principles do men realize faith? I read in the first chapter of Ephesians, that they believed according to the working of the mighty power of God, which he wrought in Christ when he raised him from the dead. What is the conclusion? It requires the same power to enable the sinner to believe in Jesus Christ that it requires to raise Christ from the dead." (last speech)
In these words Hume equates becoming a "believer" with being raised from the dead, and again affirms that being made a believer is the result of an irresistible act of God. Further, he defines that "believing" of Ephesians 1: 19 as being the same kind of "believing" of Mark 16: 16, which he has affirmed is gospel believing.
Hume said:
"Now, if it requires this, such exercise of faith is the gift of God, and not the act of the creature. Faith is irresistible. I ask you, when you were first enabled to believe, could you help it; when you were first enabled to embrace Christ, to rejoice in God? I know the Christian says, no; and I know you could not neither. You were glad to know that the thing was so, and you received it as the gift of God. This is the way we understand faith." (last speech)
Again, this is a denial of modern Hardshellism. He makes that faith which is given in regeneration to be a gospel faith, a believing in and embracing of Christ. He also says "this is the way we understand faith." Hume did not understand faith to be non-cognitive, or such a faith in which Christ and his salvation are not the objects, or such a faith that did not come via the preaching of the gospel.
Hume said:
"He wants to know, forsooth, if I believed in regard to the text, Go compel them to come in, that it meant binding them hand and foot, manacling them, and forcing them in physically? I believe no such thing. We remark, in the first place, that the language of God to the servant presented the idea that "Thy people shall be willing in the day of thy power." We do not believe that God saves any man against his will. We believe that when the man is renewed, he realizes that holy will. With that will, God brings the sinner. Every sinner who desires to come may come; hence, the language is addressed to that kind of character, and none other. We do not believe in physical force, but in the power of divine truth, to overwhelm the judgment of the sinner, and obtain the consent of his will. In that way he is brought into the kingdom of the blessed." (last speech)
This is a clear affirmation of gospel means! It is by "the power of divine truth" that the sinner is saved or born again! It is by "the power of divine truth" that the sinner's will is conquered and won to the Lord and is the "way he is brought into the kingdom of the blessed."
Hume said:
"I will make a remark here about faith. I have a quotation, which my brother gave us: "He that believeth on the Son, hath everlasting life." I will shake hands with him over that text; but does it read, if you will believe, you shall have everlasting life?"
[STINSON--I will find one that does.]
If you will show me a text of that kind, I will surrender. The point I make is, he that believeth hath everlasting life, being in possession of faith; hence the man that does believe in Christ Jesus, is already in possession of it, for he that believeth hath everlasting life. In the present tense, he has it already, and that is the reason he believes in it." (last speech)
Here Hume argues much like today's Hardshells in saying that one is saved before he believes. But, this does not mean that he believed that faith in Christ was not produced in being born again. He has already affirmed that all unbelievers will be lost and that all the elect will believe and embrace Christ. Further, there are many verses that say that "if you will believe, you will have (future tense) eternal life."
For these citations, see the "Stinson-Hume Debate" at
http://www.gospeltruth.net/Hume_Stinson_atonement/hume_stinson_entiretext.htm
No comments:
Post a Comment