William Fristoe On Preaching To Emotion

Elder William Fristoe, one of the first leaders of the Ketocton Association of Baptists, in his history of the churches of Virginia and of her oldest Association, wrote:

"It is a matter understood by us, that the great Creator endowed rational creatures with noble passions, and made them capable of sorrow, joy, love, hatred, desire, etc. and proper use of those passions ought to be exercised, when under the ministry of the gospel, or employed in divine contemplation, or otherwise; the understanding is enlightened and spiritual ideas possessed; it is no wonder the passions are raised while the heart glows with love to God and Christ, and everything sacred and divine; at such a time the conversation will be lively, and divine subjects will be conversed on intelligibly and with good sense; songs of praise will be offered up with true devotion, and an aspiring after perfection and the complete enjoyment of God; such a frame fits man to live or die. But for the passions to be overwhelmed by sound, and fabulous reports, by clash and noise, to the confounding of reason where the understanding remains uninformed and the person so exercised quite unable to give any rational account of himself, what discovery he had more than at other times, or why it was that he was wrought upon, is a great abuse of the passions, and although it may be a momentary satisfaction to seducers, to obtain such ascendency over their hearers, the consequence has often been very dreadful, and injurious to the souls of men; it is an invariable rule with many of us, to appeal to the scriptures for precedent or example, both in preaching and worship; for all is darkness, error, and confusion that stands opposed to the law and testimony."

I found, during my years with the "Primitive Baptists" that many of their preachers were able to stir the emotions of their hearers to a level where there were lots of tears, shouting, and laughing, and some of this was holy, as Fristoe points out, and the result of being moved by truth being received by the mind; however, too much preaching is geared to stirring the emotions without any real instruction in the things of God. Some preachers become skilled in how to stir the emotions and they do it because they know that stirring emotions is the sure way to gain popularity and a following with their brotherhood. Let us be sober.

On "Time Salvation"

The following are some excerpts from "Chpt. 7 - Time Salvation - A Novel Idea" of my ongoing book "The Hardshell Baptist Cult" (see here)

"Basically, religious secrets involve "special revelation" that the cult, and it alone, possesses. Christians have "special revelation"..."

"Their primary "secret" revelation concerns the doctrine they call "Time Salvation." You have to be trained in Hardshell "dogma" to know all that the words convey. What the Hardshells believe the terminology, "Time Salvation," represents would never cross the average Bible reader's mind. You have to hear it from a Hardshell to be introduced to and informed in the meaning of its theological “jargon.”"

"Hardshells take many "salvation passages," clearly dealing with eternal salvation and redemption, in a limited way and as dealing strictly with timely or earthly concerns. Why the necessity to do this? Because to interpret those salvation passages as dealing with eternal salvation would destroy their "anti-means," "Spirit Alone"teaching."

What the Hardshells have done, with their emphasis on the presumed many occurrences of timely deliverances in the Bible, is to take the occasional use of a word and make it the general meaning of the word, turning things about, upside down, topsy turvy. They do this in many areas of Bible interpretation. I will give some further examples, but first I will deal a little more with how they take the occasional use of the word "save"and make it predominate.

"It will become obvious to most who read this essay on Hardshellism, that these Hardshells, who have historically opposed any thing "new," i.e. "inventions," have themselves, ironically and hypocritically, introduced many new things under the Baptist and Christian name, at least in doctrine.

If one takes the word saved in mostly a timely sense, then one will, of course, do the same with those words that express the opposite idea of salvation, words like Perish Destruction, Damnation, etc. These words too must denote, not eternal punishment, something after this life, but only some temporal punishment. It is no wonder that the Hardshells have been plagued with the heresies of "No-Hellism" and "Universalism," violating such a simple rule of Bible interpretation. Rare and occasional usages of words cannot be made to be the regular use of them. The Hardshells do the same with the words Angel, Heaven, Hell The word does sometimes, occasionally, refer to human messengers, but the predominant meaning refers to that order of beings that are spirits, without bodies, of whom man is said to be "made a little lower." But, you listen to Hardshell sermons and the way they "spiritualize" and abuse all "hermeneutic rules" of sound Biblical interpretation, and you will see that they make angel to nearly always mean human messengers."

In the creation and invention of this "new" doctrine of "Spirit without the word" regeneration, several classes of scripture passages that teach regeneration through the word, had to be interpreted in a non-traditional way...Thus the Hardshell premise became this:anything that the gospel produces in the elect cannot be necessary for their "eternal" salvation When this is narrowed down, the only thing necessary for their "eternal" salvation or regeneration, was a belief in and love for a supreme being!""

"Hardshells see "evidence" of regeneration in the heathen's desire to worship anything! Therefore, Hardshells were forced into illogical, contradictory and unscriptural positions on the nature and necessity of "faith" for salvation."

"Whatever qualities the "faith" produced by the gospel had, the other kind of faith could not have. That became another premise to defend."

"Also, the "life" that a sinner receives in the new birth must be void of those things that the gospel produces.And again, narrowed down, this becomes a bare mystical principle of life, or some strange spiritual deposited "substance" that Hardshells generally call an "inner ability.""

"These are heretical views. In the new Hardshell vocabulary, "faith," "salvation," "regeneration," "new birth," "repentance," etc., all receive new and heretical definitions!"

More Hard Nuts For Hardshells

On Being One Of The Sheep (John 10)

1. If one does not follow the shepherd (and his voice), is he a sheep?

2. What does it mean to follow Christ?

3. Is an unbeliever (non Christian) a follower of Christ?

4. What is meant by the statement "and a stranger will they not follow"?

On Total Depravity/Inability

1. What part of "the law," which is "spiritual" (Rom. 7:14), are lost sinners ("natural" and "dead") unable to understand?

2. What part of "thou shalt not kill, "thou shalt not steal," etc., are dead sinners not able to understand?

On Being One Of The Elect

1. Did God choose sinners to salvation "through belief of the truth" (II Thess. 2:13)?

2. Is election "unto obedience" (I Peter 1:2)?

3. Since election is "unto holiness" (Eph. 1:4), is faith in Christ necessary to holiness?

The Father Is Not The Son

The Apostle John began his gospel with these words:

“In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was (the) God. The same was in the beginning with God. All things were made by him; and without him was not anything made that was made” (John 1:1-3).

It is very clear from this passage that "The Word (Logos)" is a person.  The personal pronoun "him" is used twice in reference to him who is by title "the Word."  The very one who is "the Word" is identified by the Apostle John as being the Son of God.

"And the Word was made flesh, and dwelt among us, (and we beheld his glory, the glory as of the only begotten of the Father,) full of grace and truth. John bare witness of him, and cried, saying, This was he of whom I spake, He that cometh after me is preferred before me: for he was before me.  And of his fulness have all we received, and grace for grace. For the law was given by Moses, but grace and truth came by Jesus Christ. No man hath seen God at any time, the only begotten Son, which is in the bosom of the Father, he hath declared him."  (vs. 14-18)

 It seems strange to me that anyone can read these words and not see that "the Word" is that person who "was made flesh" and "dwelled among us," and who is "the only begotten of the Father" and "the only begotten Son," and who is clearly distinct from "the Father" who begat him. How can one be in the bosom of himself?  The "Word" or the "Son" is "in the bosom of the Father," and is clearly not the Father.  It would be as easy for me to claim to be my own father as for Jesus to claim to be his Father.

There are no scriptures where the Father and Son are ever said to be the same person.  The only possible exception are these words of Jesus:

"If ye had known me, ye should have known my Father also: and from henceforth ye know him, and have seen him.  Philip saith unto him, Lord, show us the Father, and it sufficeth us. Jesus saith unto him, Have I been so long time with you, and yet hast thou not known me, Philip? he that hath seen me hath seen the Father; and how sayest thou then, Show us the Father? Believest thou not that I am in the Father, and the Father in me? the words that I speak unto you I speak not of myself: but the Father that dwelleth in me, he doeth the works."  (John 14: 7-10)

Is Jesus saying "I am my Father"?  Is he saying that he is the same person as the Father?  If he is, then the above words of the text would be truly a unique passage with none other like it in Scripture.  In fact, it would contradict every other statement, in the gospels, where Jesus personally distinguished himself from his Father. 

In fact, Jesus spoke of both he and his Father as being "two."  Even in that famous passage where Jesus says "I and my Father are one" (John 10: 30) there is the use of the plural verb "are."  Jesus did not say "I and my Father is one."  Thus, Jesus is saying, about himself and his Father, "we two are one."  It would be the same in meaning as when Jesus confirms that "two are one" in marriage. 
 
In John 5: 31-37 Jesus responds to charges that his witness of himself cannot be valid unless, by the law of God, there are two witnesses. In addition to his own testimony about himself, there is the added witness of "the Father."  (He also in several places spoke of the witness of the Spirit to his person and work)  Jesus said:
 
"If I bear witness of myself, my witness is not true. There is another that beareth witness of me; and I know that the witness which he witnesseth of me is true."  (vs. 31, 32) 

If Jesus was the Father, then he was indeed bearing witness of himself alone.  Jesus is a person but it requires, in the Torah, that "another" person to bear witness.  Jesus said:  "It is also written in your law, that the testimony of two men (persons) is true."  (John 8: 17)  Jesus is clearly saying that he and the Father are "two" persons and bear witness as persons.

This is all devastating, of course, to Modalism.  If Jesus and the Father are the same person, then Jesus' justification and defence, for meeting Torah witness standards, is not valid.  Modalists do not want to confess that Jesus (the Word and Son of God) is not the same person as the Father, do not want to think of them as being anything more than "one" in every sense possible, and therefore are opposed to admitting that they are "two" as well as "one."  But, as we have seen, the scriptures are clear.

Jesus explains what he means when he says "he who has seen me has seen the Father."  He says "I am in the Father, and the Father is in me."  Clearly he distinguishes his own person from the person of his Father.  Jesus even speaks of his Father, who is in him, in the third person.  So, it is a mistinterpretation of this unique passage to say that it proves that Jesus and the Father are the same person.  Rather, it clearly shows that they are not the same person.

So, how is the Father's person seen in the person of his Son?  Is it not because the Son is the "express image (likeness) of his (Father's) person (substance)"?  (Heb. 1: 3)  Christ mirrored the exact image of his Father.  The Son is like the Father and the Father is like the Son.  As we say in common speech - "like father, like son."  Further, Jesus clearly distinguished himself from the Father when he said "he who has seen me has seen the Father."  "Me" is clearly not the same person as "the Father."

Taken from The Baptist Gadfly blog (see here)

Psallontes (ψάλλοντες) - Making Melody

INSTRUMENTAL MUSIC IN WORSHIP? by  Bob L. Ross of Pilgrim Publications (see here)

As brother Ross said, this article is "part of my book entitled “Campbellites, Cowbells, Rosary Beads, and Snake-Handling.”

It would do well for all to read the entire article and to get Bob's book on this topic. There are also debates on the subject by Ross on youtube. Here are some of the questions and answers on the subject that Bob addressed (emphasis mine).

1. “What kinds of music are in the Bible?”

The words “musick,” “musical,” and “musician(s)” are used in the Bible 75 times, and 55 of these are “captions” to the Psalms.

The word “musick” is used 15 times in the Old Testament and refers to instrumental music: 13 times literally, once allegorically (Ecc. 12:4), and once metaphorically (Lam. 3:63).

“Musick” is used ONE time in the New Testament (Luke 15:25) where it translates the Greek word “sumphonia,” which means the same as our word “symphony.”

Thus, in the Bible, “musick” is used of instrumental music only. There are, however, two classes of instruments: (1) wind instruments, (2) hand-played instruments. These have been here since the days of Adam (Gen. 4:21, harp and organ). These classes of instruments are also said to be in God’s own heavenly presence (Ex. 20:18; I Cor. 15:52; Rev. 8:2; 5:8; 14:2; 15:2). It appears that the Lord has his own “musical staff” in the heavenlies, and the instruments are stamped “made in Heaven” (if stamped at all)!

2. “Is not singing a kind of music in the Bible?”

We have nothing against singing; in fact, we love it! We could take all our space and then some in extolling singing. But in the Bible, “musick” is not used of singing. Singing has been so closely associated with instrumental music, we usually use the word “music” to cover singing, as well as other related items such as lyrics, musical notes, performances, etc. However, in scriptural nomenclature, there is only one “kind” of music, and that is with instruments. The words, “vocal music,” are sometimes used by some, but there is no direct statement, account of action, or implication that this is a Bible expression.

3. “Why do some churches reject instrumental music?”

Church groups, such as Churches of Christ and Primitive Baptists, here in Texas, reject instrumental music. One reason for this is a particular theory about the relation of the Old Testament to the New Testament. It is thought by some that we are “not under the Old Testament.” But while there are indeed a number of things which changed with the coming of Jesus Christ, these are carefully delineated in New Testament writings and we must not go “above that which is written” (I Cor. 4:6). The scriptures of both testaments are to be studied and “rightly divided” (2 Tim. 2:15). Jesus, the Apostles, and the early church had the Old Testament; the Gospels and the Epistles came along as the apostolic days transpired. The Old Testament is “for our learning” and is “scripture” (Romans 15:4; John 5:39; 2 Tim. 3:15). Paul admonishes us to use “psalms” in our singing, and these are admittedly the Psalms of the Old Testament (Ept. 5:19; Col. 3:16).

4. “If we take instrumental music from the Old Testament, would we not also have to take animal sacrifices and everything else?”

We are authorized to use “psalms” (Eph. 5:19), not to offer animal sacrifices. Many things taught in the Old Testament are still lawful; many things which are called “patterns, figures, and shadows” were fulfilled. The Law is still “good, if a man use it lawfully” (I Timothy 1:8). But there is perhaps nothing about which there is as much confusion as the Law and its relation to New Testament teachings. This was also the case in apostolic times, and the apostles often had to address the problem. And today, we are not authorized to subtract anything from God’s Law without authority for so doing (Deut. 4:2; Matt. 5:19; Mark 7:5-13). Neither are we to add to His Law.

5. “Also, wouldn’t we likewise be authorized to bring in many other questionable religious practices?”

To hear some critics of instrumental music present the case, instrumental music “opens the floodgates” to a regular “Vanity Fair” in church worship! This is the old ploy of the sophist who seeks accreditation for his point of view by the discreditation of another view, and to do this he uses what is called the “slippery slope” or “domino” fallacy.

This approach fails to recall that psalms were used with instrumental music in the worship of God for thousands of years before anyone ever thought of the “floodgate” idea! Isn’t it rather “strange” that instrumental music did not have that effect in Israel?

If we are instructed to use psalms, this does not carry with it the “blanket approval” of anything and everything that happens to pop-up.

6. “If we are authorized to use instruments, would not every member have to play an instrument?” 

The church “body” is a unit with individual “members” with differing “gifts” as it “hath pleased Him” (I Cor. 12:18). Paul discusses the “parts” such as the foot, hand, ear, eye, and nose and explains that they have their respective roles in the one “body” (I Cor. 12:11-31). He is discussing the same matter in Ephesians and says “unto every one is given grace according to the measure of the gift of Christ” (4:7). Not every member in the one body is gifted to preach, or teach, or lead public prayer, or lead singing, or do mission work, or some other work in which the body as a church unit is engaged. See the “unit” principle in 1 Corinthians 12:26.

The “account of approved action” which we have in Scripture is that those who were “cunning” with instruments, “willing skillful men,” “all that could skill of instruments,”- these served in the “ministry” playing instruments (I Chron. 25:7; 28:21; 2 Chron. 34:12; 29:25; 7:6; 8:14; 23:18; 1 Chron. 16:4-9). It was not every Israelite who played, neither does every member of the “body” play today. We learn this from these Scriptures as we are authorized to do (see Romans 15:4).

7. “How does one ‘make melody,’ according to Scripture?”

The words “making melody” are used in Ephesians 5:19, but “how” this is done is found in Isaiah 23:16, and it is with a musical instrument: “Take an harp, go about the city, thou harlot that hast been forgotten; make sweet melody, sing many songs, that thou mayest be remembered.” Also, Amos 5:23 speaks of “the melody of thy viols,” which is also reference to a musical instrument. So if “the Bible interprets itself,” these passages show “how” to make melody – with musical instruments.

8. “Does Ephesians 5:19 mean that the heart is the ‘instrument’?”

Some who reject musical instruments in worship contend that Eph. 5:19 is “figurative,” or “metaphorical;” however, this idea goes “begging” for any support in the Scriptures. James D. Bales, an anti-instrument writer, even acknowledges that there is “no passage” which says “the instrument typified the melody of the heart,” yet this is the theory of those who oppose music. “Strings of the heart” is not a Bible phrase. “Singing and making melody in your heart” simply means the same thing as in other passages where something is done “in” or “with” the heart. All obedience and worship are to be “in the heart,” for this is what God’s Law requires (Deut. 6:4; Mark 12:30). We are to worship “in spirit” and “in truth” (John 4:23, 24), but this does not mean that acts of worship are eliminated. There is no example of “making melody” in the heart in the “hidden” sense, if we go by Scripture.

Now, let the Hardshell anti instrumentalist answer Bob's defence!

Supplementary Notes 

on "singing and making melody"(ᾄδοντες καὶ ψάλλοντες)

Albert Barnes in his Notes on the NT wrote:

"It is most frequently used in the sense of touching or playing a lyre, or a harp..."

John Eadie's Commentary on Galatians, Ephesians, Colossians and Philippians wrote:

"...the meaning of the clause seems to be this—“Giving expression among yourselves, or in concert, to your joyous emotions in psalms and hymns and spiritual songs.” λαλοῦντες ἑαυτοῖς, different from λέγοντες πρὸς ἑαυτούς, may, perhaps, signify “in responsive chorus,” or dicere secum invicem, as Pliny's letter describes it. We know that ancient sacred song was of this antiphonal nature; nay, Nicephorus Callistus in his History, 13.8, says, that such a practice was handed down from the apostles- τὴν τῶν ἀντιφώνων συνήθειαν ἄνωθεν ἀποστόλων ἡ ἐκκλησία παρέλαβε. Theodoret traces the same custom to the church at Antioch (Hist. Ecclesiastes 2:24), while Socrates ascribes the origin of it to Ignatius. Hist. 6.8. Augustine, however, carries such responsoria no higher than the episcopate of Ambrose at Milan. But indeed many of the psalms were composed so as to be sung by a chorus and semichorus, as is plainly marked in the 2nd and in the 24th."

"The apostle refers certainly to social intercourse, and in all probability also, and at the same time, to meetings for Divine service."

"The previous λαλοῦντες is defined by ᾄδοντες as being co-ordinate with it. The second participle may denote an additional exercise. Their speech was to be song, or they were to be singing as well as speaking. ψάλλειν, originally “to strike the lyre,” came to signify “to strike up a tune,” and it denotes the prime accompaniment of these songs..."

Hodges Commentary:

"ᾄδοντες καὶ ψάλλοντες, singing and making melody, are two forms of expressing the same thing. The latter term is the more comprehensive; as αἴδειν is to make music with the voice; ψάλλειν, to make music in any way; literally, to play on a stringed instrument; then, to sing in concert with such an instrument; then, to sing or chant. See 1 Corinthians 14:15; James 5:13; Romans 15:9."

My Favorite Songs

From

The Inspirations (my favorite group)

Oh What A Day

I'll Have A New Life

I've Got Overwhelming Joy

Waiting On The Other Side

I'm Singing Today

We'll Understand It Better By And By

I Stand Upon The Rock Of Ages

Heavenly Honey

Jeff and Sheri Easter

John Saw

The Hoppers

It's Shouting Time In Heaven

Stepping On The Clouds

Kingdom Heirs

We'll Soon Be Done With Troubles and Trials

James And Martha Carson 

Living In The Promised Land

Jacob's Ladder

Salvation Has Been Brought Down

Doyle Lawson and Quicksilver
(some of these are accapella)

Lay Your Burdens At His Feet

Help Me Lord To Stand

On The Sea Of Life

Babylon's Falling

Climbing Up The Mountain

Heaven's Joy Awaits

O'ershadowed By His Love

Won't It Be A Happy Meeting

Chuckwagon Gang

Heaven's Jubilee

Daddy Sang Bass

He Will Set Your Fields On Fire

The Joy Of Heaven

There's Going Being Shouting And Singing

The Son Hath Made Me Free

I'm Headed For The Promised Land

TENNESSEE ERNIE FORD & The Jordanaires: 
GREAT GOSPEL SONGS (SEE HERE)

Especially

I'll Have A New Life
Daniel Prayed
We'll Soon Be Done With Troubles and Trials

Early Sons Of The Pioneers

There Is Power In The Blood

Leaning On The Everlasting Arms

Chestnut Grove Quartet
(accapella)

I'm So Glad

Lord Give Me Just A Little More Time

I'm Going To Be Happy There

Tis The Old Ship Of Zion

Shouting In The Air

Legacy Five

Send The Light

Somebody Sing

Coming To Christ

The following is from chapter 19 of my book "The Hardshell Baptist Cult" (see here)

"And ye will not come to me, that ye might have life." (John 5:40)

"And Jesus said unto them, I am the bread of life: he that cometh to me shall never hunger; and he that believeth on me shall never thirst. But I said unto you, That ye also have seen me, and believe not. All that the Father giveth me shall come to me; and him that cometh to me I will in no wise cast out. For I came down from heaven, not to do mine own will, but the will of him that sent me. And this is the Father's will which hath sent me, that of all which he hath given me I should lose nothing, but should raise it up again at the last day. And this is the will of him that sent me, that every one which seeth the Son, and believeth on him, may have everlasting life: and I will raise him up at the last day." (6:35-40)

"No man can come to me, except the Father which hath sent me draw him: and I will raise him up at the last day. It is written in the prophets, And they shall be all taught of God. Every man therefore that hath heard, and hath learned of the Father, cometh unto me. Not that any man hath seen the Father, save he which is of God, he hath seen the Father. Verily, verily, I say unto you, He that believeth on me hath everlasting life. I am that bread of life." (vs. 44-48)

"But there are some of you that believe not. For Jesus knew from the beginning who they were that believed not, and who should betray him. And he said, Therefore said I unto you, that no man can come unto me, except it were given unto him of my Father. From that time many of his disciples went back, and walked no more with him." (vs. 64-66)

What does it mean to "come to Christ"? Certainly, as the Hardshells admit, it is a coming to "life," as Christ said, "you will not come to me that you might have life." I have already pointed out the inconsistency of this phraseology of Christ, if the Hardshells are right, who should have said, "and you will not have life that you might come unto me." I have also pointed out how this verse destroys their carnal reasoning in saying that "life must always precede action," for obviously the coming (verb, action) precedes reaching Christ and life. As I have said before, the way the Hardshells argue on their idea that "ability" must first be given, i.e. life, before one can come to Christ, they make it impossible even for God to speak to, or command the dead to do something.

Furthermore, they are forced, by their aberrant soteriology, to make this "coming to Christ" something on the "sub-conscious level." How a man can read the passages above, paying close attention to the context, and come up with such a notion is truly bewildering, if not bewitching. The "coming to Christ" is absolutely equivocated to mean "believe in Christ." It is all the same as "learning" the truth about Christ from the Father. Everyone who reads these passages on coming to Christ sees that it is all the same as believing in Christ, everyone except the Hardshells, of course who make this coming to Christ to be totally unconnected with believing and trusting in Jesus for salvation. They say this and then have the gall to say that they are careful to interpret by the context.

I am so tired of hearing Hardshell apologists talk about how they are the ones who "go by the context" of passages in their hermeneutics. Only they, they constantly affirm, "rightly divide the word of truth." Yet, as I have shown, and will continue to do, they absolutely ignore "context" and place their theorems into the Bible by twisting and distorting the sacred words of truth. Brother, show me anywhere in this "context" where the "coming to Christ for life" is any other thing than what the "context" shows and as Spurgeon said and I also have been affirming.

Here is what Spurgeon said it means to "come to Christ."

"To whom coming."—1 Peter 2:4

"To whom coming." Coming to Christ does not mean coming with any natural motion of the body, for he is in heaven, and we cannot climb up to the place where he is; but it is a mental coming, a spiritual coming; it is, in one word, a trusting in and upon him. He who believes Jesus Christ to be God, and to be the appointed atonement for sin, and relies upon him as such, has come to him, and it is this coming which saves the soul. Whoever the wide world over has relied upon Jesus Christ, and is still relying upon him for the pardon of his iniquities, and for his complete salvation, is saved."

"So I shall take the text, then, this evening thus:—These three words describe our first salvation, describe the life of the Christian, and then describe his departure, for what even is that but to be still coming to Christ, to be in his embrace for ever?"

(C. H. SPURGEON, "Coming to Christ" At the Metropolitan Tabernacle, Newington. On Lord's-day Evening, June 17th, 1868.)

A writer wrote the following informative remarks about "faith" and its relation to the gospel of John.

"While there is one condition for salvation, John may represent that condition with figures of speech designed to illustrate the response of faith.

Look. In 3:14-15 the anticipated response is to look upon Christ and His work for eternal salvation, as the Israelites looked upon the serpent on a pole in the desert for their physical salvation (Numbers 21). The point of the illustration is the simple look of faith.

Hear. Similarly, John uses hearing to represent believing. More than the physical sense is involved. To hear is to listen, but also to accept as true, as we understand with the colloquial expression, "I hear you." Belonging to Jesus as His sheep is conditioned upon hearing His voice of truth (10:16, 27), as also is obtaining eternal life (5:24). The unbelief of the lost is due to their not hearing God’s word (8:43, 47).

Enter. Speaking metaphorically of Himself as the door to the sheepfold, Jesus also pictures the response of faith as entering the door (10:9). To enter correlates with faith in that both express one’s trust for protection from the threat of the enemy.

Feed. The notion of feeding on Christ (6:57), including eating His flesh and drinking His blood (6:54), is another analogy of the faith that obtains eternal life, as is clear in 6:35 and 6:47. This is similar to the drink of living water (eternal life) offered to the Samaritan woman (4:10, 14). To eat and drink is to appropriate or receive something upon which life depends. There is no work or merit associated with these activities. Rather, the benefit is from what is appropriated, which corresponds to the object of faith, which is Christ.

Come. Another metaphor for faith is expressed by the word come. In 5:40 coming to Christ obtains eternal life. In 6:35 come is equated with both eating and believing. Coming, drinking, and believing are used synonymously in 7:37-38 as the condition for salvation. To come is to trustingly approach Christ for help. It entails no human merit or effort.

Receive. Another word that may represent faith is receive. The promise that any who receive Christ will become children of God is closely linked to believing in 1:12. Believe appears to be in apposition to receive here in order to explain it. In 1:12 to receive is to welcome or accept as true the person or words of Jesus Christ (3:11, 32-33; 5:43). This is in contrast to those who "did not know" and "did not receive" Jesus as the Christ in 1:10-11."

(www.faithalone.org/journal/1996i/Bing.html)


John Bunyan

Here is what the Baptist John Bunyan said about what it means to "come to Christ."

Come and Welcome To Jesus Christ Or, A Plain and Profitable Discourse on John 6:37. Showing the cause, truth, and manner of the coming of a sinner to Jesus Christ; with his happy reception and blessed entertainment. LONDON, 1681. Published seven years before John Bunyan's death.

WHAT IT IS TO COME TO CHRIST

"FIRST, I would show you WHAT IT IS TO COME TO CHRIST. This word come must be understood spiritually, not carnally."

"The coming, then, intended in the text is to be understood of the coming of the mind to him, even the moving of the heart towards him. I say the moving of the heart towards him, from a sound sense of the absolute want that a man hath of him for his justification and salvation."

"To speak to the first, that it is a moving of the mind towards him. This is evident; because coming hither or thither, if it be voluntary, is by an act of the mind or will; so coming to Christ is through the inclining of the will. "Thy people shall be willing" (Psa 110:3)."

"This, then, is the coming to Christ, even a moving towards him with the mind."

"So that to move in thy mind and will after Christ, is to be coming to him."

"Coming to Christ is attended with an honest and sincere forsaking of all for him. "If any man come to me, and hate not his father and mother, and wife, and children, and brethren, and sisters, yea, and his own life also, he cannot be my disciple. And whosoever doth not bear his cross, and come after me, cannot be my disciple" (Luke 14:26,27)."

"By these and the like expressions elsewhere, Christ describeth the true comer, or the man that indeed is coming to him; he is one that casteth all behind his back; he leaveth all, he forsaketh all, he hateth all things that would stand in his way to hinder his coming to Jesus Christ. There are a great many pretended comers to Jesus Christ in the world; and they are much like to the man you read of in Matthew 21:30, that said to his father's bidding, "I go, Sir, and went not." I say, there are a great many such comers to Jesus Christ; they say, when Christ calls by his gospel, I come, Sir; but still they abide by their pleasures and carnal delights. They come not at all, only they give him a courtly compliment; but he takes notice of it, and will not let it pass for any more than a lie. He said, "I go, Sir, and went not;" he dissembled and lied. Take heed of this, you that flatter yourselves with your own deceivings. Words will not do with Jesus Christ. Coming is coming, and nothing else will go for coming with him."

He says further:

"And believing and coming are all one."

And again:

"And let me add over and above, that for a man to come to Christ for life, though he comes to him for nothing else but life, it is to give much honour to him.

1. He honoureth the word of Christ, and consenteth to the truth of it; and that in these two general heads. (1.) He consenteth to the truth of all those sayings that testify that sin is most abominable in itself, dishonourable to God, and damnable to the soul of man; for thus saith the man that cometh to Jesus Christ (Jer 44:4; Rom 2:23; 6:23; 2 Thess 2:12). (2.) In that he believeth, as the word hath said, that there is in the world's best things, righteousness and all, nothing but death and damnation; for so also says the man that comes to Jesus Christ for life (Rom 7:24,25; 8:2,3; 2 Cor 3:6-8).

2. He honoureth Christ's person, in that he believeth that there is life in him, and that he is able to save him from death, hell, the devil, and damnation; for unless a man believes this, he will not come to Christ for life (Heb 7:24,25).

3. He honoureth him, in that he believeth that he is authorized of the Father to give life to those that come to him for it (John 5:11,12; 17:1-3).

4. He honoureth the priesthood of Jesus Christ. (1.) In that he believeth that Christ hath more power to save from sin by the sacrifice that he hath offered for it, than hath all law, devils, death, or sin to condemn. He that believes not this, will not come to Jesus Christ for life (Acts 13:38; Heb 2:14,15; Rev 1:17,18). (2.) In that he believeth that Christ, according to his office, will be most faithful and merciful in the discharge of his office. This must be included in the faith of him that comes for life to Jesus Christ (1 John 2:1-3; Heb 2:17,18).

5. Further, He that cometh to Jesus Christ for life, taketh part with him against sin, and against the ragged and imperfect righteousness of the world; yea, and against false Christs, and damnable errors, that set themselves against the worthiness of his merits and sufficiency. This is evident, for that such a soul singleth Christ out from them all, as the only one that can save.

6. Therefore as Noah, at God's command, thou preparest this ark, for the saving of thyself, by which also thou condemnest the world, and art become heir of the righteousness which is by faith (Heb 11:7). Wherefore, coming sinner, be content; he that cometh to Jesus Christ, believeth too that he is willing to show mercy to, and have compassion upon him, though unworthy, that comes to him for life. And therefore thy soul lieth not only under a special invitation to come, but under a promise too of being accepted and forgiven (Matt 11:28).

All these particular parts and qualities of faith are in that soul that comes to Jesus Christ for life, as is evident to any indifferent judgment. (YES, BUT THE HARDSHELLS ARE NOT INDIFFERENT AND UNBIASED INTERPRETERS!) For, will he that believeth not the testimony of Christ concerning the baseness of sin, and the insufficiency of the righteousness of the world, come to Christ for life? (AGAIN, THE HARDSHELLS WOULD HAVE TO SAY ALL THIS IS WRONG! THEY SAY MILLIONS "COME TO CHRIST" WHO DO NOT BELIEVE IN JESUS!) No. He that believeth not this testimony of the word, comes not. He that believeth that there is life anywhere else, comes not. He that questions whether the Father hath given Christ power to forgive, comes not. He that thinketh that there is more in sin, in the law, in death, and the devil, to destroy, than there is in Christ to save, comes not. He also that questions his faithful management of his priesthood for the salvation of sinners, comes not."

(acacia.pair.com/Acacia.John.Bunyan/.../Come.and.Welcome/First.5.html)

Of course, all this is just not what the Hardshells believe about what it means to "come to Christ." I know they will come up with different kinds of "coming to Christ," one in a "timely sense," and another in an eternal sense; they will do this to "get around" any difficulties in a "context" with their views. But, there is simply no way one can honestly read the context of John 5 & 6 and not see that "coming to Christ" means all the same as "believing" in Christ.

Hardshells will affirm that John 6:37 is talking about "regeneration." All the elect will be made to "come to Christ" for life and salvation. But, they err in disconnecting this "coming to Christ" with belief and trust in him and his word.

Here is what A.W. Pink wrote about the matter of what it means to "come to Christ."

"Now the motions of Divine grace work through the apprehensions of faith in the understanding, these warming and firing the affections, and they in turn influencing and moving the will. Every faculty of the soul is put forth in a saving "coming to Christ": "If thou believest with all thine heart, thou mayest"—be baptized (Acts 8:37). "Coming to Christ" is more immediately an act of the will, as John 5:40 shows; yet the will is not active toward Him until the understanding has been enlightened and the affections quickened. The Spirit;

First causes the sinner to perceive his deep need of Christ, and this, by showing him his fearful rebellion against God, and that none but Christ can atone for the same.

Secondly, the Spirit creates in the heart a desire after Christ, and this, by making him sick of sin and in love with holiness.

Third, as the awakened and enlightened soul has been given to see the glory and excellency of Christ, and His perfect suitability to the lost and perishing sinner, then the Spirit draws out the will to set the highest value on that excellency, to esteem it far above all else, and to close with Him.

"...the sinner is not saved when his understanding is enlightened, and his affections fired: there must also be the act of the will, surrendering to God and laying hold of Christ.

The order of the Spirit’s operations corresponds to the three great offices of Christ, the Mediator, namely, His prophetic, priestly, and kingly. As Prophet, He is first apprehended by the understanding, the Truth of God being received from His lips. As Priest, He is trusted and loved by the heart or affections, His glorious person being first endeared unto the soul by the gracious work which He performed for it. As Potentate, our will must be subdued unto Him, so that we submit to His government, yield to His scepter, and heed His commandments. Nothing short of the throne of our hearts will satisfy the Lord Jesus. In order to do this, the Holy Spirit casts down our carnal imaginations, and every high thing that exalteth itself against the knowledge of God, and brings into captivity every thought to the obedience of Christ (2 Corinthians 10:5), so that we freely and gladly take His yoke upon us; which yoke is, as one of the Puritans said, "lined with love."

"No man can come to me, except the Father which hath sent me draw him" (John 6:44).

This "drawing" is accomplished by the Spirit: first, in effectually enlightening the understanding; secondly, by quickening the affections; third, by freeing the will from the bondage of sin and inclining it toward God. By the invincible workings of grace, the Spirit turns the bent of that will, which before moved only toward sin and vanity, unto Christ. "Thy people," said God unto the Mediator, "shall be willing in the day of thy power" (Psalm 110:3)."

"The relation between our understanding being enlightened and the affections quickened by God and the resultant consent of the will, is seen in Psalm 119:34,

"Give me understanding, and I shall keep thy law; yea, I shall observe it with my whole heart."

"The sure result of regeneration, or the bestowal of understanding, is the devout reverence for the law and a reverent keeping of it in the heart. The Spirit of God makes us to know the Lord and to understand somewhat of His love, wisdom, holiness, and majesty; and the result is that we honor the law and yield our hearts to the obedience of the faith. The understanding operates upon the affections; it convinces the heart of the beauty of the law, so that the soul loves it with all its powers; and then it reveals the majesty of the law-Giver, and the whole nature bows before His supreme will. He alone obeys God who can say ‘My Lord, I would serve Thee, and do it with all my heart’; and none can truly say this till they have received as a free grant the inward illumination of the Holy Spirit" (C.H. Spurgeon)."

(A.W. Pink, "Studies on Saving Faith," PART 3, CHAPTER 9 "COMING TO CHRIST WITH OUR THE WILL")

From Dr. Gill:

"2b2b. Faith is a motion of the soul unto Christ; having looked and gazed at him with wonder and pleasure, it moves towards him; this is expressed by coming unto him; "He that cometh to me", says Christ, "shall never hunger; and he that believeth on me", which explains what is meant by coming, "shall never thirst", #Joh 6:35 which coming to Christ is upon an invitation given, encouraging to it; not only by others, by the Spirit and the bride, who say "come", #Re 22:17 and by the ministers of the word; "Ho, every one that thirsteth, come ye to the waters; and he that hath no money, come!" and who, through the gospel trumpet being blown with power, and the sound of it attended with efficacious grace, they that are "ready to perish" come, #Isa 55:1 27:13 but also by Christ himself, who says, "Come unto me, all ye that labour and are heavy laden, and I will give you rest!" #Mt 11:28 such souls come, being influenced and powerfully wrought upon by the grace of God; "All that the Father giveth me", says Christ, "shall come to me"; efficacious grace will cause them to come, will bring them to him, through all discouragements, difficulties, and objections, and which are all removed by what follows; "and him that cometh to me I will in no wise cast out", #Joh 6:37.

This coming to Christ as a Saviour, or believing in him, is owing to the Father's teachings, instructions, and drawing; "No man can come to me", says Christ, that is, believe in him, "except the Father, which hath sent me, draw him", draw him with his lovingkindness, and through the power of his grace, and of his divine teachings; "every man therefore that hath heard and learned of the Father cometh unto me"; yea, this is a pure gift of his grace, "therefore said I unto you, that no man can come unto me except it were given unto him of my Father", #Joh 6:44,45,65 and such souls come to Christ in a view of the blessings of grace, of righteousness, and strength, peace and pardon, salvation and eternal life; these are the goodness of the Lord, they flow unto him for with great eagerness, swiftness, and cheerfulness."

Dr. Gill continues, in his views, which run counter to the Hardshells:

"2b2c6. The grand and principal act of faith, or that by which it is more frequently expressed is, receiving Christ; "as many as received him, even that believe on his name", #Joh 1:12 where receiving Christ is interpreted of believing on him. Christ is received, not into the head; for not all that say Lord, Lord, shall enter into the kingdom of heaven; but into the heart; for it is with the heart man believes in the Son of God unto righteousness; and in it Christ dwells by faith. A soul made sensible of its need of Christ and his righteousness, and of salvation by him, comes down from self-exaltation and self-confidence, and "receives Christ joyfully", as Zacchaeus did."

(His By Grace--"John Gill: A Body of Doctrinal & Practical Divinity-Practical Book 1, Chapter 6")

Jesus affirmed that all the elect, those whom the Father had "given" to him in covenant, before the foundation of the world, would "come to me." By this coming they will be made to live spiritually, being brought out of death in sin. Every elect person will be drawn by the Father. Drawn to what? Drawn to Jesus Christ, drawn to faith in him. That is what the context absolutely shows and the Hardshells are simply blind and deceiving themselves to disassociate "faith in Christ," as they do, and a "coming to him" spiritually and savingly with the mind and understanding, with their ideas about "regeneration."

Who teaches that all the elect will be brought to faith in Christ? Not the Hardshells. Who teaches that all that the Father gave to Christ will be drawn to Christ in their hearts, minds, and in their understanding? Not the Hardshells. Who teaches that, in regeneration, the Father "teaches" people about his Son? Not the Hardshells. Who teaches that this teaching of the Father produces in the mind of his elect faith in Christ? Not the Hardshells. Who teaches that the elect "learn" something in regeneration, in this "coming to Christ"? Not the Hardshells.

They have no right to be called either "Primitive" or "Baptist" with these heretical views.

I will again challenge all the Hardshells to show me any proof from Scripture that the "coming to Christ" that is connected with the new birth is on the "sub-conscious level" and unconnected with that "faith in Christ" that comes "by the gospel." I do not want your "carnal reasonings," I want Scripture citations that say that "coming to Christ" is as you all define the phrase. I also will keep the inspired words of Paul before you constantly, who said, rhetorically, an in order to stir up the brethren in their missionary work, "how shall they believe in him of whom they have not heard? And, how shall they hear without a preacher?"

If you, in your "vain reasonings," come up with some kind of "faith in Jesus" that does not come through hearing the message of Christ proclaimed by a messenger, it is not the "faith of God's elect." Paul is against all your "metaphysical speculations," and against all your vain attempts to make those in heathen lands, who have not heard the gospel, possessors of "faith in Christ" and people who have "come to Christ" on some "mystical" "non-cognitive" manner. Bunk!

Again, this "coming to Christ" is, as the Baptists I have cited above aver, a "mental" act," and an "act of the will," that fulfills the words of the Psalmist who said, "Thy people shall be willing in the day of thy power."

Michael Gowens wrote:

"The primary issue at stake might be defined by the question, “Does God employ the use of external means in the eternal salvation of sinners? Is grace mediated to the sinner through human agency? Does the church play an instrumental role in eternal salvation?” Those answering in the affirmative were loosely and informally termed “means” Baptists, and those responding in the negative were labeled "antimeans" Baptists."

And again he writes:

"The position that Christianity, whether through the preaching of the gospel or the receiving of the ordinances, is the medium (or means) of salvation must necessarily answer the question, “How were men saved prior to the age of the Church?”

Yet again, the “means of grace” view would deny salvation to everyone who is unable to process propositional truth. If the mind must receive and affirm the basic facts of the gospel message as the instrument of personal salvation, then how might those who are cognitively incapacitated to process rational thought be saved?

And again:

"Those who affirm the “external means of grace” position tend to explain these cases in terms of “exceptions to the rule”. Deceased infants, people with...some form of brain injury, are extraordinary cases and God has provided an exception (so they say) for them. But I wonder how such an argument squares with John 3:8, a verse that plainly teaches that everyone who is born again is born again the same way. I suggest that every sinner that is saved, whether he possesses intellectual capacity or not (and whatever his age or level of personal maturity) is an extraordinary case of God’s amazing grace."

It is absurd and illogical to say that everyone is an "extraordinary case." To say "extraordinary case" implies that there is an "ordinary" case. If what Gowens said is right, then all the elect are saved in an "ordinary" way and none in an "extraordinary" way! Now, seeing he claims to be an "Old" and an "Original" Baptist, why is he diametrically opposite, in his sentiments above, on the infant and the idiot, to what was believed by the English and American Baptists, as expressed in the London and Philadelphia Confessions of Faith? Did they share his view? Did they believe that everyone was regenerated precisely alike? NO! They even used the terms Gowens abhors, "ordinaray" and "extraordinary"!

Also, why not answer those "Hardshell Buster" questions dealing with this topic? If all are regenerated the same way, why would they not all either be born again in infancy or born again as Paul on the Damascus Road?

Also, why cannot the Spirit AND the Bride both say "come" to the heart of the sinner? Why cannot both be said to speak this divine imperative which is the cause of sinners coming to take the "water of life" and living therby? Why does the Spirit saying "come" exclude the Bride saying the same? Can the Spirit not say that in unison with the Bride? In such a case, would the Spirit not be the Father in the birth and the Church the Mother? Oh yes, but Hardshells have no "mother" in this birth, even though they make everything in the natural birth to apply in the spiritual birth. The calling of the Spirit is the efficient cause but the calling of the Bride is instrumental in it. Yea, the Spirit speaks through the Bride, speaks through the messengers of the gospel that he sends.

He writes further:

"Our insistence that the saving work of Jesus Christ is directly applied by the sovereign and immediate work of the Holy Spirit begs the question, “How, then, should such passages that speak of human instrumentality and the use of means be interpreted?” I answer, they should be interpreted in terms of means by which the child of God is equipped to live the life of Christian discipleship.

But, you do not tell people to interpret by the "context," but simply tell them to apply your man-made rule that says, "any passage that has conditions or means attached is not eternal (regardless of the context) and any passage that does not seem to have conditions or means attached may be safely interpreted as dealing with regeneration and eternal salvation."

That is a clear case of taking non-Biblical premises and propositions to to the Bible rather than acquiring them from the Bible. Let me ask the Hardshells to produce their "premise" from the Bible. Where is it said, no salvation that depends on means or the wills of the regenerated is not eternal salvation"?

Gowens writes further:

"Scripture plainly teaches that people are brought to believe in Christ through the agency of gospel preaching: “Who then is Paul, and who is Apollos, but ministers by whom ye believed?” (1 Cor. 3:5); “Neither pray I for these alone, but for them also which shall believe on me through their word” (Jno. 17:20; cf. Eph. 1:13; Jno. 1:7). We do not deny that the child of God is brought to evangelical faith in the Lord Jesus Christ by means of the preaching of the gospel. It is the gospel that spells out the details of our Lord’s identity as the Son of God, the incarnation, virgin birth, vicarious death, bodily resurrection, glorious ascension, heavenly session, and triumphant return. These great facts are not known apart from God’s special revelation in the gospel."

In view of the above, I ask; how can they "come to Christ" for "life" without "believing on him" in the manner laid out in the gospel of John? Gowens admits that one can be an "unbeliever," one who does not "know" Christ, nor has "come to him" with the heart, mind and understanding, and yet who is nevertheless "regenerated" and has "life." Yet, "he who does not have the Son," wrote John, "does not have life." (See I John 5:12)

He admits that God uses his ministers of the word to "create" faith in Christ. Does this take away from this being God's "creation"? Is "faith" not "begotten" of God according to John? (5:4)

Here is a striking statement from Gowens:

"The sinner does not come to Christ to get salvation."

(See his article "Born Again: The Doctrine of Effectual Calling")

Can you believe that a man who professes to believe the Bible would say that? Is that not against what Christ taught in the passages cited at the outset of this chapter? I know that Gowens would admit that the "coming" of those verses relates to "regeneration." He is one who also argues that only PB's interpret correctly on the uses of the word "saved" in the Bible. They argue that "context" tells them "when" to interpret a verse as relating to "temporal salvation" and which to "eternal salvation." I have shown already how this is but wishful thinking for they mutilate "context." They certainly do it here in John 6 for obviously "coming to Christ" is equated with "believing" on him, on his words, on "learning" from the Father.

He says again:

"The effectual call is a call to eternal salvation; the gospel call is a call to repentance and faith (Acts 2:38; Acts 3:19; Acts 17:30; Acts 20:21; Acts 26:20). The effectual call is a call to sonship; the gospel call is a call to discipleship. God speaks directly in the effectual call; God speaks through men in the gospel call. The effectual call is always obeyed; the gospel call is frequently disobeyed, shunned, and resisted. The effectual call is a creation; the gospel call is a communication. The effectual call is directed to the dead; the gospel call is directed to the living. The effectual call is an internal call; the gospel call is an external appeal. The effectual call produces life (2 Tim. 1:9); the gospel call produces light (2 Tim. 1:10). The sinner responds involuntarily in the effectual call (like Lazarus). The gospel call, however, calls for a voluntary, decisive response ("...harden not your hearts" - Heb. 3:15). The conclusive testimony of Scripture is that the effectual call precedes the gospel call and that the effectual call gives a man spiritual life, while the gospel call gives a man knowledge and understanding. This distinction between regeneration and gospel conversion is essential."

All this is well and good so far as it goes, but to say that the "effectual call" does not happen in conjunction with the "gospel" call is against the Bible and the Old Baptist Confessions of Faith. Let me cite the old circular letter written by that real Old Baptist, Elder John Gano, on behalf of the Old Philadelphia Association.

“The Circular Letter of 1784, written by Elder John Gano, is upon the tenth chapter of the Confession of Faith–“Effectual Calling.” Under the sub-section, dealing with “Its Efficacy,” he writes:

“It is effectual to bring the subjects of it to a piercing sense of their guilt and impurity."

But, the Hardshells do not believe that those who are effectually called "sense" anything! Recall that Sarrels says that regeneration "produces no internal sensations." Gowens says no "belief" of any kind is connected with it!

Gano continues, saying:

"The mind is deeply convicted...the soul is affected with a view of its sinfulness and malignity of sin in its nature, as entirely opposed to the holy law of God; hence arises an abhorrence of sin, as vile and odious, and a sense of its demerit as deserving eternal death. This call produces a consciousness of the absolute impossibility of our contributing in the least towards a recovery from this wretched condition, and destroys all confidence of help in the flesh. It is a call to Christ, and gives a view of Him in His suitableness and ability as a Savior; the merit of His obedience and sacrifice, and the treasures of His grace are all suitable are all brought into view, which creates desires of an interest in Him, and resolutions of looking unto and relying wholly upon Him for salvation; at the same time cordially acknowledging desert of rejection from Him, and yet strengthened to rely entirely upon and surrender all unto the disposal of Christ; setting to our seal that God is true; believing the record He has given of His Son, which is eternal life, and that this life is in His Son. The changes produced are from darkness to light, from bondage to liberty, from alienation and estrangedness to Christ to a state of nearness and fellowship with Him and His saints.” (Hassell, page 564, 565)

Now it is easy to see that Gowens' views on "effectual calling" are not in keeping with the first Baptists in this country believed. Gano represents the beliefs of the Baptists of his time. I could also cite at length here the writings of John Gill in his "Body of Divinity," wherein he states that the "internal" and "external" calls are both required to bring about the "effectual calling," both "regeneration" and "conversion."

According to Gowens a man who has been "effectually called" has NOT been called to either "faith" or to "repentance"! Also, according to what he wrote above on the distinctions between the "gospel call" and the "internal call of the Spirit," a man who is "called" to "faith and repentance" has not been "called to salvation" thereby! According to him the "call to sonship" is not a "call to discipleship." A man then may be a "sheep" and yet never do any "following" of Christ! We see how far removed his view of the call of God through the gospel and the power of the Holy Ghost is from that of Elder Gano and the real Old Baptists.

If one will study this matter a little more deeply he will see that one cannot have "come to Christ" who does not "come after him." There is initial "coming," as when the sheep first here the "voice" of the Shepherd, but they do not stop hearing that voice! Rather, they continue to hear it! And, they also continue to "follow" the "voice of the shepherd." Will our modern Hardshells say that they are no longer hearing the "voice" of Christ? And, if they say they do, in what manner are they hearing that "voice" post regeneration?

It is interesting too that the citation giving the writing of John Gano in the circular letter was from Hardshell "historian" Sylvestor Hassell. Even more interesting is the fact that Hassell again does what he is accustomed to do in his "history." He stops his citations just short of sentences which go contrary to him and his Hardshell views. Here is some from the rest of Gano's circular letter that Hassell conviently left out (in brackets).

"I. The call. This is an act of sovereign grace, which flows from the everlasting love of God, and, is such as irresistible impression made by the Holy Spirit upon the human soul, as to effect a blessed change. [This impression or call is sometimes immediate, as in the instance of Paul and others; though more ordinarily through the instrumentality of the word and providence of God.]" p. 227
(Baptist History Collection CD 1.0 from Baptist Standard Bearer, Inc. & sent to me by Brother Robert Vaughn)

The following is on "Biblical Hermenuetics" from Gowens.

"For instance, the verb "to save" in Ephesians 2:8 refers to salvation from sin in the basic theological sense. If that definition, however, is inserted into another verse, say, I Timothy 2:15 ('Notwithstanding she shall be saved in childbearing...'), a contradiction emerges between the two verses, for Ephesians 2:8 teaches that salvation is by grace and I Timothy 2:15 teaches that salvation is in the process of parenting. Does 1 Timothy 2 refer to the same kind of salvation as Ephesians 2? Obviously not. The salvation of 1 Timothy 2:15 must be interpreted in terms of its immediate context."

I will have occasion in upcoming chapters to examine Brother Gowens' and his Hardshell brethren relative to whether they do properly "interpret" the Scriptures, whether they in fact "rightly divide the word of truth" as they claim, and whether or not they interpret "strictly by the context," and whether their overall "hermeneutics" are sound or not.

What is there in the "context" of John 5 & 6 that leads one to think that "coming to Christ" is not done with the mind and the understanding, that it is not connected with faith in Christ and his gospel message of salvation? If one paid close attention to the "context" he would not take Hardshell view on what it means to "come to Christ" for "life" and "salvation."

Here is what Elder Samuel Trott, Hardshell founding father, wrote about "faith" and "salvation" and about "coming to Christ."

"That the dead faith, cannot be the faith which is of the operation of God, I think every child of grace will admit. Of course, it can be nothing more than an exercise of the natural mind. The living faith has, as already noticed, a controlling power over the mind, bringing it with all its powers into submission, to the will of God; it is still nothing but a dead faith. It has no spiritual life, and therefore produces no spiritual action, nor makes any true application of the consolations of the gospel."

Here it seems that Trott believed, like the Philadelphia Confession, which he endorsed (at least till he became an anti mission Hardshell), what all sound Baptists believe today. He says that "faith" is the product of the "operation of God." This faith controls the mind, and brings the mind, the heart, and the will into submission to God.

This is not what today's Hardshells believe about "saving faith," or "living faith," the faith God creates in the hearts of all his elect. He also believed that this "faith" produced "spiritual action." That certainly is contrary to modern Hardshell views on "regeneration" and on that kind of "faith" that comes with it. They rather believe that there are "no actions produced" or incited in the work and act of "regeneration." Trott also believed, at least in this citation, that the "faith" that is "alive" is one that has had an "application of the consolations of the gospel" made to it.

I consider the above remarks very contradictory and can only owe the reason to the fact that his views, like his cohort Beebe, were evolving and so in a state of flux for awhile. Today's 5th generation Hardshells are more precise in their remarks on faith, repentance, conversion, and regeneration. However, they say less that is truthful. I lay this to the fact that the closer back the Hardshells go in their attachment to the Old Confessions the nearer the speak the truth about these things. The further the Hardshells have gotten away from those old Confessions the less their language is correct on faith, repentance, and the new birth. They began to take "reactionary views" on these topics so they could "put teeth into" their opposition to missions.

He says further:

"Many of the children of God, at this day, I have no doubt, go for years, without any special exercise of this living faith; other than in its exercise towards the one great object which is necessary to their being known as believers, namely: its exercise in apprehending the blood and righteousness of Christ, as our plea at the throne of grace, and the ground of our hope of acceptance with God. But the inquiry may further be made, Whence is this living faith, and how is it brought into exercise? It is a spiritual exercise, as before shown, and can therefore be the actings only of the spiritual life of the believer."

He says:

He seems to be caught in a trap here in his explanations about "faith." He at first wants to say a person has "faith" but who has not yet "exercised it." I have heard this argued by modern Hardshells too. He also does not want to say a man has "faith" without that "faith" having an "object." So he says:

"...the one great object which is necessary to their being known as believers, namely: its exercise in apprehending the blood and righteousness of Christ..."

Here he seems to intimate, like modern Hardshells, that one can have a "dormant" kind of "faith" until the day when the Lord is pleased to bring it forth from its hidden state of dormancy" by the gospel. He seems to do as does Beebe and split up the experience of the "new birth" into "stages," as in natural birth.

He says:

"But the Holy Ghost, who knoweth the will of God, knoweth when to call forth the exercises of faith to apprehend Christ as our salvation, Faith must have an object to be believed, set before it. The word of God is the proper object of faith. And by the word of God, I do not understand the scriptures, as such, although they are the proper standard by which to know what is the word of God; but I mean by it, the special application of some portion of scripture to us as a promise, a command, a consolation, or as instruction in doctrine or practice, so that we receive it as the word of God, entering our hearts with power. Now as the scriptures are thus applied by the Holy Spirit, faith is called forth and we believe. Thus when the revelation of Christ Jesus is made to the regenerated person, then he believes, and cannot before. And thus when it is the pleasure of God to bestow some special blessing upon any of His children, He gives them to ask for it in faith frequently, and when we so ask we have the assurance of His hearing us, and therefore of receiving what we ask. See I John 5:14,15."

Here he seems to mix the new Hardshell ideas with those which he was taught from the Old Philadelphia Confession. He seems to believe that the gospel only "calls forth" a dormant kind of "faith" in someone who is "regenerated," but who has not yet had that faith directed to a proper object. Yes, he is contradictory in the above statements. How is that? Well, first he says that for "faith" to be "faith," it MUST HAVE AN OBJECT. Yet, if that is true, what object does that "dormant faith" have before it is called forth in the gospel and given an object?

He writes further:

"This righteousness is our justification, faith is the eye to which it is revealed, and the gospel brings it to view; thus the gospel is called the word of faith, Rom. 10:8; and faith cometh by hearing this word; see verse 17, “So then, faith cometh by hearing, and hearing by the word of God.”

Here Trott seems to take the view that the "coming" of this faith, by the gospel, is its coming forth from its dormant state. I have heard this view expounded before. Elder Tolley held this view. All God's children have this dormant seed faith in their souls in regeneration and then when the gospel is preached, it is called forth, made to "come" out of the person and attach itself to Christ and the gospel. But, that is not what Romans 10 is talking about. When Paul asks, "How can they believe in him of whom they have not heard," he is affirming that a man cannot have faith, in any sense, until he hears the means God has ordained for creating that faith.

He continues, saying:

"The gospel is sent to men as sinners, lying in the ruins of the first Adam, lost and condemned under the sentence of death; and proclaims and reveals the righteousness of Christ, as the justification of the ungodly; A word on faith; faith is a fruit of the Spirit, Gal. 5:22, and so the spirit is called the spirit of faith, because we have no true faith, without it; see II Cor. 4:13, “We having the same spirit of faith,” &c. This faith is peculiar to God’’s elect, Tit. 1:1, because the gospel by which faith cometh and which is the word of faith, and which reveals the righteousness of God to faith, comes with power and the spirit, only to the elect, although the word be preached to all. See I Thes. 1:4,5, “Knowing, brethren beloved, your election of God; for our gospel came not unto you in word only, but also in power, and in the Holy Ghost, and in much assurance.” Christ taught the same where he said, “Ye believe not, because ye are not my sheep, as I said unto you, my sheep hear my voice,” &c. The faith of God’s elect has Christ and his righteousness for its object, and so its object is our justifying righteousness, and so faith as to its object, is our justification; for in this sense Christ is called faith, see Gal. 3:23,25, and so faith is declared to be the substance of things hoped for, the evidence of things not seen, Heb. 11:1, the substance, as to its object, and an evidence to the soul of its interest in that object; by faith really as to its object, CHRIST."

Again, if Christ be the only proper object of faith, then a man has no faith if Christ be not the object. It is admitted that Christ can only be known by the gospel. So, only those who have heard the gospel have the faith of God's elect, the faith necessary for regeneration and eternal salvation.

Trott writes further:

"We see that faith is a fruit of the Spirit, and its office is to lead the soul to Christ, and as an eye to view the righteousness of Christ revealed to it in the gospel, and as a hand to take hold on that righteousness, and build the soul on it, as a sure foundation, and cause it to rejoice in God through Christ, Now men do not feel their condemnation properly until they are quickened by the Spirit; but as soon as they are made alive they begin to feel and see, and so faith is one of the first fruits of the Spirit; it views the excellency of the divine character, and the beauty of holiness, and begins to pant for the living God.

Again, what Old Baptist cannot accept this? But notice how he spoils all he says above we these next words following the above:

"Although the awakened sinner now has faith; its eye is not directed to Christ, but he now sees the glory and justice of God, and the purity of the law, and by the law he has a knowledge of sin; and so he begins to abhor himself and repent; he looks at himself in his fallen state, in relation to the first Adam, and sees that he is a condemned criminal; he reads the law, it sentences him to death and condemnation, and as he is wedded to a covenant of works, and sees not his relation to Christ, he begins to try to reform and keep the law, and work for life; and however long he may work under this legal persuasion, he finds but a poor reward, and at length he finds that all his plans are thwarted, and he is like the woman in the gospel that had spent all she had with physicians, and had got nothing better, but rather grew worse. Now the quickened sinner sees what he is in himself, and in relation to the first Adam, and that in this relation he is condemned to death, and can never be justified by any work or sacrifice in his power; all his hopes of obtaining salvation by the deeds of the law, gives up the ghost, for sin now appears exceedingly sinful, and it takes an occasion by the commandment to slay the sinner, who is ready to say, the commandment is holy, just and good, but I am carnal, sold under sin. Sin works by that which is good, and the sinner dies to all hope of ever being justified by any works of his own, and as if cut off from every other refuge, he cries, “God be merciful to me a sinner.” His expectation being cut off from everything else, he looks to God only, and falls as a pensioner on his mercy and grace, filled with the deepest sense of his condemnation, and the impossibility of being justified by the works of the law. This is his state as he stands in himself, and in relation to the first Adam, and this he clearly sees; but here the gospel reveals to faith the righteousness of God, and by faith the soul views his justification complete in the blood and righteousness of Christ; not that his faith hath justified him, but by faith he sees that which was a truth before he saw it; and his soul seems to melt like wax into the depth of humility, and yet he rejoices, he is amazed at the matchless grace of God, is almost ready to wonder he never saw this before; the fulness of Christ engages his confidence, and the sentiments of the soul is, “In the Lord have I righteousness and strength, he has become my salvation.” Now all this comfort flows from the evidence which faith bears to the soul, of its interest in and relation to Christ the second Adam; and from this view of his relation to Christ, in his death and resurrection, he builds his only hope for salvation in Christ, and this building is what is called the faith of reliance; and so it is written, “The just shall live by faith.” To live by faith is to live relying on Christ, looking to Christ, and trusting in his righteousness, faithfulness, and truth. Faith as an act, has nothing in it to comfort the soul, but it brings all its comforts from its object, and so faith, though one of the first fruits which the Spirit produces in the soul, can afford no comfort to the soul until its eye is directed to Christ, and his blood and righteousness, which the gospel reveals to it, nor even then will it afford comfort to the soul, unless it views the relation in which the soul stands to that righteousness; for we may have strong faith in Christ, as one able to save, and yet have no comfortable assurance that he will save me; as the man in the gospel had a strong faith in the ability of Christ, and said, “If thou wilt thou canst make me clean,” but when faith views him, “The Lord our righteousness,” the soul can rejoice, and say, “In the Lord have I righteousness.”

From: SIGNS of the TIMES: Vol 13 (1845)

Select Works of Elder Samuel Trott
pgs. 316 –– 323

It is a shame that Trott and Beebe did not recognize that God not only begets but brings to complete development, to complete birth, by the gospel, all the elect. He seems to intimate that by saying that "faith in Christ," which is by the gospel, is the "faith of God's elect." Modern PB's will not say that gospel faith is the faith that all God's elect will be brought to possess.

Now let me cite some verses dealing further with "coming to Christ" and "coming after Christ."

Time or Eternal Salvation?

"Come unto me, all ye that labour and are heavy laden, and I will give you rest. Take my yoke upon you, and learn of me; for I am meek and lowly in heart: and ye shall find rest unto your souls. For my yoke is easy, and my burden is light." (Matt. 11:28-30)

On this passage let me cite the Old Baptist Dr. John Gill:

"Ver. 28. Come unto me,....Christ having signified, that the knowledge of God, and the mysteries of grace, are only to be come at through him; and that he has all things relating to the peace, comfort, happiness, and salvation of men in his hands, kindly invites and encourages souls to come unto him for the same: by which is meant, not a local coming, or a coming to hear him preach; for so his hearers, to whom he more immediately directed his speech, were come already; and many of them did, as multitudes may, and do, in this sense, come to Christ, who never knew him, nor receive any spiritual benefit by him: (LIKE THOSE "REGENERERATED INFANTS OR HEATHEN?) nor is it a bare coming under the ordinances of Christ, submission to baptism, or an attendance at the Lord's supper, the latter of which was not yet instituted; and both may be performed by men, who are not yet come to Christ: but it is to be understood of believing in Christ, the going of the soul to him, in the exercise of grace on him, of desire after him, love to him, faith and hope in him: believing in Christ, and coming to him, are terms synonymous, Joh 6:35. Those who come to Christ aright, come as sinners, to a full, suitable, able, and willing Saviour; venture their souls upon him, and trust in him for righteousness, life, and salvation, which they are encouraged to do, by this kind invitation; which shows his willingness to save, and his readiness to give relief to distressed minds. The persons invited, are not "all" the individuals of mankind, but with a restriction,

all ye that labour, and are heavy laden; meaning, not these who are labouring in the service of sin and Satan, are laden with iniquity, and insensible of it: these are not weary of sin, nor burdened with it; not do they want or desire any rest for their souls; but such who groan, being burdened with the guilt of sin upon their consciences, and are pressed down with the unsupportable yoke of the law, and the load of human traditions; and have been labouring till they are weary, in order to obtain peace of conscience, and rest for their souls, by the observance of these things, but in vain. These are encouraged to come to him, lay down their burdens at his feet, look to, and lay hold by faith on his person, blood, righteousness, and sacrifice; when they should enjoy that true spiritual consolation, which could never be attained to by the works of the law.

And I will give you rest; spiritual rest here, peace of conscience, ease of mind, tranquillity of soul, through an application of pardoning grace, a view of free justification by the righteousness of Christ, and full atonement of sin by his sacrifice; and eternal rest hereafter, in Abraham's bosom, in the arms of Jesus, in perfect and uninterrupted communion with Father, Son, and Spirit."

I do not think any Hardshell will endorse what Gill here says.

He writes further upon the taking up of the "yoke of Christ."

"Their sense I take to be this, that a man must first make a profession of his faith in the God of Israel, and then live conformably to his law: agreeably to this, Christ exhorts such persons who come to him for rest and happiness, to profess their faith in him, to embrace the doctrines of the Gospel, to submit to his ordinances, and to walk according to those laws, commands, and orders, which he, as king of saints, has made, and requires obedience to: so those who come to him for life, and believe in him, as the Saviour of their souls, though they are not to trust in, and depend upon any duties performed by them; yet they are not to sit still, or lay aside the performance of good works, or live a licentious course of life, but are always to be doing the will and work of their Lord. And this he calls "his yoke", in distinction from the yoke of the law of Moses, and of the traditions of the elders." (Commentary on Matthew)

How contrary are these views to the following expressed by Beebe on the same passage.

"We have received a communication from the north, over the signature, “A Friend of Truth,” desiring our views in regard to what are called the invitations of the gospel; whether they are addressed indiscriminately to sinners or exclusively to the quickened children of God. We learn from the letter that some of our esteemed brethren are differing seriously on the subject. Such passages as Matthew 11:28-30: “Come unto me all ye that labor and are heavy laden, and I will give you rest,” etc. “Many are called, but few are chosen.” The marriage of the king’s son: “I came not to call the righteous, but sinners to repentance.” Also the first and eighth of Proverbs. Some brethren take the position that these are invitations to sinners indiscriminately, and others contend that these are invitations addressed only to the children of God.

In giving our views we beg leave to differ, very respectfully, however, from both parties. We deny that there are any invitations, either in the law or gospel, to saints or sinners. We think that a little reflection on the subject will satisfy all honest inquirers after truth that it would be altogether incompatible with the eternal perfections of Jehovah to issue invitations to any of His creatures.

First. We will remark that none of the communications from God to men are anywhere in the Bible called invitations, and it is therefore speculative and idle to argue theologically a position or question which has no scriptural foundation, and therefore, like the endless genealogies and questions about the law, which the apostle warns us against, is only calculated to gender strife, but cannot edify or comfort the family of God.

Second. An invitation is a complimentary request or message from a party having, and claiming to have, no authority to enforce the request, or message, which concedes to the party invited the undisputed right to respectfully decline the invitation, leaving it entirely optional with the party invited to accept or decline without transcending his right.

Third. All those who have been brought to a saving knowledge of God will admit that He speaks the word, and it stands fast; He commands and it is done. “Where the word of a king is, there is power,” and God is the King eternal, and the word that proceeds from Him shall not return unto Him void of the work whereunto He hath sent it. Even the carnal Jews perceived that our Redeemer spake as one having authority, and not as the scribes.

Should the writer of these remarks receive a card of invitation from the President of these States, or from the Governor of New York, the fact of its being an invitation guarantees the right to accept or decline without involving a wrong or a crime in doing either. But should either the President or Governor, as chief magistrate of the nation or the State, send an authoritative message to any citizen, summoning him to be or appear at any place, that message would be clothed with all the authority and power of the magistrate from whom it issues; but it could not be regarded as an invitation, because it does not concede to the party to whom it is addressed any right to decline or disobey its authority.

Will any of our brethren contend that when the God of heaven peremptorily says to the seed of Israel, “Seek ye my face,” that they have a right to disobey or regard it only as a mere invitation? If He says to them, “Look unto me, and be ye saved, all the ends of the earth; for I am God, and there is none else,” does this imply that the people thus addressed have the same right to decline it as an invitation to obey it as a sovereign mandate from the throne of God? Since God has commanded men to look to him for salvation, have they a right to look anywhere else for that salvation? If there be any authority implied in the address it destroys the nature of the invitation. Indeed, we cannot, without detraction from a proper sense of the eternal power and majesty of Jehovah, entertain the preposterous idea that He deals in invitations to any of His creatures in heaven, earth or hell. All His words are big with power and high in authority; He worketh all things after the counsel of His own will, and submits nothing to the volition of any of His creature’s wills. But in regards to the passages referred to, they bear the impress of His divine authority; they can none of them be disregarded or disobeyed. The passage referred to, Isaiah 45:22 is a sovereign command to the seed of Jacob scattered to the ends of the earth, to look to Him for salvation, because He is God, and beside Him there is no Savior. All who looked anywhere else, or to any other being, or to themselves, for salvation, were not only guilty of disobedience, but also of idolatry.

The passage, “Come unto me, all ye that labor and are heavy laden,” etc. is sufficiently clear and explicit. It is addressed to all who labor and are heavy laden, and to no others; and whenever and wherever these words are applied by the Holy Spirit to any poor, laboring, heavy laden sinner, that sinner will as surely come to Jesus as it is sure that the dead will rise when the voice of God calls them forth. The dead neither labor nor are they heavy laden, they slumber unconsciously in their graves; and all men are dead in sin, and as destitute of spiritual vitality until they are quickened by the Spirit, as the body of Lazurus was of natural life before Jesus raised him from the grave. But as soon as a sinner is quickened by the Holy Ghost he becomes a laborer, and is burdened with a heavy weight of guilt, and such are called to Jesus and find rest to their souls in bearing His yoke, which is easy, and His burden, which is light. To take the yoke of Jesus is to come under His law, to be baptized in His name and be yoked together in communion and fellowship with His disciples in all the privileges of the church of God. But are the unregenerated called to be baptized and identify themselves with the church of God? Philip did not so understand it when he said to the Eunuch, “If thou believest with all thine heart, thou mayest.” (Acts 8:37) None but believers are called or commanded to be baptized and come under the yoke of Jesus, for they must first be delivered from the yoke of Moses, the yoke of bondage."

MIDDLETOWN, NY
MARCH 1, 1863

He writes again in a separate article in discussing the question of "universal invitations in the gospel."

"An esteemed and dear friend who has long been held in captivity among the New School Baptists, has recently withdrawn from their communion, writes us that there is still one point of difference in which she cannot yet feel satisfied that the Old order of Baptists are right, and that is the point which we are now discussing; namely, that our pastors confine their addresses to the churches, or in other words, do not preach the gospel to sinners..."

And again:

"First, we will correct a misapprehension of the position and practice of the ministers of our order. While we believe and preach the gospel, as Christ and his apostles did, wherever a door is open for that purpose, openly addressing our preaching to every one within the sound of our voice, the gospel which we preach discriminates between the living and the dead. It is a savor of life unto life, to those who are quickened by the Holy Ghost, and a savor of death unto death, to them that perish. It is "to the Jews a stumbling block, and unto the Greeks foolishness; but unto them which are called, both Jews and Greeks, Christ the power of God, and the wisdom of God." And if our preaching is not a savor of death unto death to the ungodly, and a stumbling block to the Jews, and foolishness to the Greeks, and if it be not a savor of life to the quickened, and if it be not to them that are called, Christ the power of God and the wisdom of God, then it is not apostolic preaching. Who ever knew an Old School Baptist to refuse to preach the gospel to any but saints? We cannot search the hearts or try the reins of those to whom we preach; but the word which we preach makes the discrimination; for it is quick and powerful, sharper than any two edged sword, piercing even to the dividing asunder of soul and spirit, and of the joints and marrow, and is a discerner of the thoughts and intents of the heart; neither is there any creature that is not manifest in his sight; but all things are naked and open unto the eyes of him with whom we have to do. Hebrews 4:12,13. The gospel which we preach is good tidings to the meek; but if any part of our audience are not meek, it is not gospel, or good tidings to them. All who have an ear to hear, are more than welcome to hear what the Spirit saith unto the churches. But if any have not hearing ears, the preachers cannot supply them; for the hearing ear and understanding heart are of the Lord. The Son of God alone has power to cause the dead to hear his voice and live; for the words which he speaks to them, they are spirit, and they are life. Therefore his sheep hear his voice, and he knows them, and they follow him; for he gives to them eternal life, and they shall never perish. He, and he alone has power over all flesh that he should give eternal life to as many as the Father has given him. All this the Old Baptists preach to every creature. But we do not give the children's bread to any but the children, nor do we give what belongs to the dogs to the children."

This article is from "Signs of the Times," -February 15, 1869.

Hardshells lay down this proposition, another one they take to the Bible rather than getting from the Bible.

Hassell writes:

"Though man has fallen and become unable to obey the commandments of God, the nature and law and requirements of God are unchanged and unchangeable. The gospel addresses of the Scriptures are addressed, we believe, to gospel characters—to those persons who have spiritual life, hearing, needs and appetites. These limitations are either directly expressed or implied by the circumstances. Even the letter of the word, where there is any fullness of narration, and the dictates of common sense teach this important fact. Inspired men could, far better than we, read the hearts of those whom they addressed; and they addressed hearers of different characters, and there­fore used sometimes the imperative and sometimes the indicative mood. God’s under-shepherds are directed, not to create, but to tend the flock. I cannot conceive what benefit can be supposed by a believer in sovereign and efficacious grace to be derived from universally and untruthfully extending the comforting spiritual addresses of the gospel to those declared in the Scriptures to be dead in trespasses and sins—Christ expressly forbids that pearls should be cast before swine (Matt. 7:6). Unless the Spirit of God first come and impart Divine life and light to the hearer, such addresses will be forever and totally vain. The imperative mood has no more power than the indicative mood, in the mouth of a preacher, to awaken the dead to life. No language or labor of man, and no fact in creation or providence, independently of the Divine Spirit, has the slightest efficacy to take away the sinner’s heart of stone and give him a heart of flesh. I do not deny that the minister may at times have a Divine persuasion that some of his hearers are spiritually alive, and that he may not then properly address them in the imperative mood."

Every Hardshell upholds this proposition as given by Hassell in the above citation:

"The gospel addresses of the Scriptures are addressed, we believe, to gospel characters—to those persons who have spiritual life..."

Certainly John Gill did not take this view in regard to Matt. 11:28-30. The Old Baptists who wrote the first Baptist Confessions also did not take the view of Hassell and the Hardshells on "gospel invitations."

I will be showing the unscripturalness and how un-Baptistic are the views of the Hardshells on the "invitations" given in the Bible to the lost when I get into the chapter on the addresses and preaching done to the lost in the Bible.

But, I deny, as did both Gill and Fuller that such invitations as given in Matthew 11:28-30 are "to those who are already saved and regenerated."

"Then said Jesus unto his disciples, If any man will come after me, let him deny himself, and take up his cross, and follow me. For whosoever will save his life shall lose it: and whosoever will lose his life for my sake shall find it. For what is a man profited, if he shall gain the whole world, and lose his own soul? or what shall a man give in exchange for his soul? For the Son of man shall come in the glory of his Father with his angels; and then he shall reward every man according to his works." (16:24-27; See also Mark 8:34 & Luke 9:23)

As I said earlier, to come to Christ is as much the work of God as is coming after Christ, of following him. As the elect do not cease hearing the "voice" of Christ after regeneration, but continue to hear and follow it, so those who have come to Christ will continue to come to him the rest of their lives and will not fail to follow after him. The sheep want to be near the Shepherd and will not feel safe away from him.

The above is a difficult passage for the Hardshells. There is no reasonable way to make the consequences of not following Christ, in the above passage, anything less than eternal condemnation. A man "loses his soul" by not "coming to" and "following Christ." Conversion is necessary for salvation.

"And they brought young children to him, that he should touch them: and his disciples rebuked those that brought them. But when Jesus saw it, he was much displeased, and said unto them, Suffer the little children to come unto me, and forbid them not: for of such is the kingdom of God. Verily I say unto you, Whosoever shall not receive the kingdom of God as a little child, he shall not enter therein. And he took them up in his arms, put his hands upon them, and blessed them." (Mark 10:13-16)

I know the Hardshells want to make these "young children" infants newly born, but they cannot be such because they are described as being old enough to be encouraged to "come to Christ" and of being old enough to be "forbidden" of doing things. A young child receives the kingdom just as every adult, through faith in Christ and in the gospel.

"Then Jesus beholding him loved him, and said unto him, One thing thou lackest: go thy way, sell whatsoever thou hast, and give to the poor, and thou shalt have treasure in heaven: and come, take up the cross, and follow me." (10:21)

Yes, I know, the Hardshells will try to say that this rich young ruler was already saved and born again, but just did not know it. I wonder, however, why Christ did not simply tell him that? When the ruler asked, "what must I do to have eternal life," Christ should have said, if he were of the Hardshells faith, "your asking that question proves you already have eternal life." And yet, Jesus connected the obtaining of eternal life with "coming to" him, with "taking up the cross" of a disciple, and "following" Christ as one of his sheep.

"My sheep hear my voice AND THEY FOLLOW ME." This "following" and "voice hearing" is not something that happens only upon initial regeneration, as most Hardshells will affirm, but is characteristic of the life of the believer from regeneration till death.

"And the lord said unto the servant, Go out into the highways and hedges, and compel them to come in, that my house may be filled. For I say unto you, That none of those men which were bidden shall taste of my supper. And there went great multitudes with him: and he turned, and said unto them, If any man come to me, and hate not his father, and mother, and wife, and children, and brethren, and sisters, yea, and his own life also, he cannot be my disciple. And whosoever doth not bear his cross, and come after me, cannot be my disciple." (Luke 14:23-27)

Again, this is not what Hardshells teach. A man does not even have to be a Christian to be a born again child of God! He may follow some other Savior other than Jesus and yet he is still one who it can be said, came to Jesus! Brother, you put that "logic" in a bird and it will fly backwards. Those who reject the gospel invitations to come to Christ and follow after him, to be his disciple, will not have eternal life, will not sit with Christ and sup with him throughout the ages of eternity. They will not inherit the kingdom of God, the place where this sumptious feasting will take place for those who have come to Christ for salvation.

"Wherefore he is able also to save them to the uttermost that come unto God by him, seeing he ever liveth to make intercession for them." (Hebrews 7:25)

Here it is a coming to God rather than to Jesus. But, really, it is all the same experience. One who comes to God comes to Christ and it is impossible that it be any other way. Yes, I realize that Hardshells do not believe this, but rather believe that one can "come to God" but not "come to Jesus." It is an absurd idea and so opposed to what Jesus constantly taught in the gospel of John. One cannot come to the Father without coming to the Son, and vice versa.

"And the Spirit and the bride say, Come. And let him that heareth say, Come. And let him that is athirst come. And whosoever will, let him take the water of life freely." (Rev. 22:17)

I have already commented upon these words of Christ and spoken of what they teach to us. This "Bride" is our "mother" for we are begotten by the gospel that the Church of Christ has continued to proclaim. The Church and its ministers are "messengers" and "ambassadors" of Christ and so they, with power and authority, "speak in Christ's room and stead," as if Christ himself were speaking. That is what Paul taught about true messengers of the gospel. When they say to men, "be you reconciled to God," it is as if Christ himself were saying it to men himself.

The "thirstiness of soul" in this passage is not an evidence of spiritual life. John Gill did not believe such, nor did the Old Baptists prior to the rise of the Hardshells. Men suffer daily perishing of soul from their sins.

"In the last day, that great day of the feast, Jesus stood and cried, saying, If any man thirst, let him come unto me, and drink. He that believeth on me, as the scripture hath said, out of his belly shall flow rivers of living water. (But this spake he of the Spirit, which they that believe on him should receive: for the Holy Ghost was not yet given; because that Jesus was not yet glorified.) Many of the people therefore, when they heard this saying, said, Of a truth this is the Prophet." (John 7:37,38)

There is no way that any Hardshell can honestly affirm that everyone who was present at this great Jewish feast were born again children of God. I don't think any will even attempt to make that case. But, if all to whom he spoke, at this feast, were not born again children of God, then Christ's invitation to come to him was universal.

It is ludicrous to think that he is inviting to come to him those who have already come to him, who have already eaten and drunk of Christ, who have already received the Spirit. It is very clear to all unbiased minds that the invitation of Christ is to all to come to him for salvation and eternal life.