Friday, December 16, 2011

Chapter 109 - Hardshells & Predestination XII

This chapter will conclude the series on "Hardshells and Predestination." As has been shown, the original position of the Old Baptists was first stated in the London Confession of 1689, a position that today's Hardshells do not believe. It was the position of Dr. John Gill and the position of the founding fathers of the "Primitive Baptist" denomination, of men like Elders Gilbert Beebe and Samuel Trott.  The Old Baptists who descended from the English Particular Baptists were generally "High Calvinists," though not Hyper Calvinists. 

In the last chapter the connection between the doctrine of predestination and salvation was noticed.  It was seen how the denial of the absolute predestination of all things, of God's universal decrees, coincided with the invention of the doctrine known as "time salvation" among the Hardshells.  The reasons for this are apparent to any historian of the "Primitive Baptist" denomination.

The oldest articles of faith from the oldest Hardshell churches all state that all the elect will be both "regenerated and converted."  The Old Baptists believed that God had predestinated both the regeneration and conversion of his chosen people.  They also believed that this conversion was effected by the preaching of the gospel, and that this conversion was the same thing as being "born again."  But, when many in the new denomination began to deny the use of means in salvation, they had to also deny that conversion was predestined by God as was regeneration.  This being so, conversion was not viewed as being as much a part of "effectual calling" and "irresistible grace" as regeneration. 

When one examines the preaching and writing of the founding fathers of the "Primitive Baptist" denomination he discovers how conversion/new birth was viewed as dealing with eternal salvation, not with a "time salvation."  And, just as "regeneration" was viewed as being a work in which the sinner was "passive," so too was "conversion" viewed the same way.  There was no need to talk about "two kinds of salvation" or "two kinds of faith." 

When the Hardshells began to deny the use of means in salvation, this led them to alter their previous paradigm and to deny that conversion was to be equated with being born again.  They began to affirm that regeneration and being born again were the same, and that neither was connected with conversion and accomplished through means.

Elder James Osbourn, however, one of the founding fathers of the Hardshell denomination, wrote:

"But if so be that the specific object which the Deity had in-view, and designed to accomplish by means of, or in a way compatible with the gospel which he ordained and promulgated, was the eternal salvation of the bride, the Lamb's wife, Rev. 21; 9; we then of course may safely conclude, that that specific object must and will be accomplished, just in that way and manner as infinite wisdom may have dictated. And lo, this is what we do believe and rejoice in; and in the gospel we also believe, every necessary arrangement and provision is made and permanently settled for the effecting the salvation of that church which was the object of God's everlasting love and delight, and which he gave to his Son before time began." (pg. 14 of Advocate and monitor, Volumes 3-4 By Daniel E. Jewett, 1839, at books.google.com)

Osbourn did not believe that conversion represented a "time salvation" that only a few of the elect would experience.  Regeneration, conversion, re-birth, sanctification, and perseverance, according to the founding fathers of Hardshellism, did not represent various kinds of salvation, some temporal and some eternal, but were all connected with eternal salvation.  Osbourn spoke of conversion as being as much the result of election and predestination as regeneration. 

The Absoluter faction, though also finally rejecting the use of the gospel in salvation, nevertheless held to the old position that conversion was the result of predestination and was effectual and irresistible.  Their problem was that they had to believe that only a few of the elect would be both regenerated and converted, those who are converted representing an "elect within the elect." 

At least the Absoluter faction saw conversion as the work of God, and was by grace, and that God's use of means in conversion did not take away from the graciousness or effectualness of conversion.  They held on to the idea that sinners were as passive in conversion as in regeneration.  Their error was in denying that all the regenerated would be converted.  The Conditionalist would find it difficult for them to claim that "time salvation" was "of the Lord," and "by grace," as they claimed for the work of regeneration.  The Absoluter would affirm that conversion was according to the Calvinistic scheme while Conditionalist would affirm that conversion was according to the Arminian scheme. 

But, again, we repeat the fact that the oldest articles of faith of the oldest Hardshell churches affirmed that "all the elect" would be both "regenerated and converted."  Both factions deviated from this historic and primitive teaching.

No comments:

Post a Comment