Benjamin Keach was a signer of the Second London Baptist Confession of 1689 and a leader of Particular Baptists in England and America. He was also a prolific writer and defender of the faith. He wrote "Keach's Catechism" which was often attached to the London and Philadelphia Confessions, the confession that all the oldest Hardshell churches endorsed.
The Hardshells who met in Fulton, Kentucky, in 1900, met to restate their continued acceptance and endorsement of the old London/Philadelphia confession. One wonders how they could do this since the confession clearly teaches that God saves his people through faith, through the preaching of the gospel. The Fulton "elders" put "footnotes" to the old confession in those sections teaching the necessity of gospel faith for salvation, and in those footnotes they restate the words of the confession to conform to Hardshell "anti-means" dogma, making the old confession to say what it does not say. It was a dishonest undertaking, as many later Hardshells have admitted. Elder John R. Daily, a leading Hardshell debater, debated W. P. Throgmorton, Missionary Baptist, on the question of means, and Daily argued the same thing about the London Confession, as did the Fulton elders, that the old confession did not teach means. Then they will defend their own twist of the words of the confession, a confession which clearly teaches means in "effectual calling."
Had I been in debate with Daily, I would have cited from the writings of the leading men who signed the London Confession which would clearly show, in greater detail, how they believed in the use of the gospel in producing faith unto salvation, and that this additional proof shows that the interpretation of the Hardshells on those sections supporting means, does not say what the Hardshells try to make them to say. For instance, here is Keach's catechism, and the following questions and answers show that Keach believed in means, in the same way the confession states.
From Keach's Catechism (see here emphasis mine):
Q. 34. How does the Spirit apply to us the redemption purchased by Christ?
A. The Spirit applies to us the redemption purchased by Christ, by working faith in us, and thereby uniting us to Christ in our effectual calling.
(Eph. 2:8; 3:17)
Q. 35. What is effectual calling?
A. Effectual calling is the work of God's Spirit, whereby, convincing us of our sin and misery, enlightening our minds in the knowledge of Christ, and renewing our wills, He does persuade and enable us to embrace Jesus Christ, freely offered to us in the Gospel.
(2 Tim. 1:9; John 16:8-11; Acts 2:37; 26:18; Ezekiel 36:26; John 6:44,45; 1 Cor. 12:3)
Q. 92. What does God require of us, that we may escape His wrath and curse, due to us for sin?
A. To escape the wrath and curse of God due to us for sin, God requires of us faith in Jesus Christ, repentance unto life, with the diligent use of all the outward and ordinary means whereby Christ communicates to us the benefits of redemption.
Q. 93. What is faith in Jesus Christ?
A. Faith in Jesus Christ is a saving grace, whereby we receive and rest upon Him alone for salvation, as He is offered to us in the Gospel.
(Heb. 10:39; John 1:12; Phil. 3-9; Gal. 2:15,16)
Q. 94. What is repentance unto life?
A. Repentance unto life is a saving grace, whereby a sinner, out of a true sense of his sin, and apprehension of the mercy of God in Christ, does, with grief and hatred of his sin, turn from it unto God, with full purpose of, and endeavor after, new obedience.
(Acts 2:37; Joel 2:13; Jer. 31:18,19: 2 Cor. 7:10,11; Rom. 6:18)
Q. 96. How is the Word made effectual to salvation?
A. The Spirit of God makes the reading, but especially the preaching of the Word an effectual means of convincing and converting sinners, and of building them up in holiness and comfort, through faith unto salvation.
(Ps. 119:11,18; 1 Thess. 1:6; 1 Peter 2:1,2; Rom. 1:16; Ps. 19:7)
Q. 97. How is the Word to be read and heard that it may become effectual to salvation?
A. That the Word may become effectual to salvation we must attend thereunto with diligence, preparation and prayer, receive it in faith and love, lay it up in our hearts and practice it in our lives.
(Prov. 8:34; 1 Peter 2:1,2; 1 Tim. 4:13; Heb. 2:1,3; Heb. 4:2; 2 Thess. 2:10; Ps. 119:11; James 1:21,25)
Of course, one could cite from other signers of the old confession, such as William Kiffin, Hanserd Knollys, Hercules Collins, etc., to further prove that the confesssion is saying the same thing as these said in their public writings. Thus, the Fulton "footnotes" are lies, perversions of the words of the Old Baptists, and is unworthy of those who call themselves "Primitive Baptists."
2 comments:
I have the writings in abundance of Knollys, Keach, Bebee, Kiffin, Bakkus, Bunyan who would have affixed his signature had he not died in 1688 et al. There isn't anything in the 1900 Fulton edition of the Philadelphia Confession with which they would not agree. I imagine some conditionalist wrote this piece, though for him to make the venerable signers say duty-faith and duty-repentance is to rend their words out of context with gusto.
You are wrong and I have the same writings. This blog contains citations from them that prove you are wrong.
Stephen
Post a Comment