The following is a reprint from The Baptist Gadfly from 2009. Since it was written I have added much more evidence and posted it here in The Old Baptist Test blog.
Reprint (see here)
I have offered evidence in my book, "The Hardshell Baptist Cult," about how the predominant view of the first "anti-mission" Baptists on regeneration, new birth, and conversion, was one that had steps or stages to it, and one that made a distinction in "begetting" (seed planting) and "birth" (deliverance from the womb) of the children of God.
See here
And here
And here
I have also some articles showing how this two or three stage model of regeneration or new birth is also held to by many Presbyterians, of the past and present.
See here
And here
And here
I have shown how the Campbellites also developed their own paradigm, one that also made the begetting to be different from the birthing.
See here
And here
I have shown that this is an old view among Baptists, having a long tradition, although it has not always been uniformly believed and presented, there being variations on the paradigm. Samuel Richardson, a signer of the first London Baptist Confession in 1644, held to this view.
See here
I have also discovered an article from the old Hardshell periodical, "The Christian Doctrinal Advocate and Spiritual Monitor," an article wherein the same views have been expressed, an article titled - "HOW CAN A MAN BE BORN WHEN HE IS OLD? John 3: 4."
This writer also makes a distinction between the "begetting" and the "birthing" of the children of God. The "begetting" is "regeneration" but the "birth" is "conversion," as many of his "Old School" brethren. He did not believe that all the "begotten" would also be "born," while other Hardshells believed all the elect would be both begotten and born, both regenerated and converted. This writer also makes two births from the words of Christ to Nicodemus, rather than one.
He wrote:
"Brother Jewett,—This question with its answer (though old) is yet new, and is profitable for doctrine, etc., unto the man of God, and unto this day it is as a light that shineth in a dark place. Our Lord taught Nicodemus, that except a man was born again, he could not see the kingdom of God; upon this, Nicodemus with surprise asked the above question, answering which, Jesus said, Except a man be born of water, and of the Spirit, he cannot enter into the kingdom of God. (i. e. born in a two fold sense.) That there are two senses in which Christians are born again, is evident from our Lord's answer to Nicodemus, and from many other passages of scripture. My object in this letter is to present my view of the nature of these two modes of brth, which the christian experiences before he enters into the kingdom of God, and which a man may experience, even when he is old. The first is the birth of the Spirit, (as noticed first by our Lord ver. 3. Except a man be born again, etc.;) this is the implanting of spiritual life into the soul,--the law of God written upon the fleshly table of the heart, which makes the creature a new creature,--furnishes him with new senses, and he becomes dead to his old ways, and his old hopes, as Paul says, 'when the commandment came, sin revived, and I died.' Rom. 7;9. Having spiritual understanding, in his measure he is prepared to understand spiritual things, and beholding himself condemned by the law of God, he sees no way of salvation. Being burdened with guilt he dares not lift up his eyes to heaven, but smites on his breast, crying, "God be merciful to me sinner." This birth is called also a quickening, a passing from death unto life. See John 6: 63. 'It is the Spirit that quickeneth,' and I John 3;14, "We know, that we have passed from death unto life, because we love the brethren." I think it is evident from the effects of the change, that passing from death unto life is the same as the birth of the Spirit; for love of God is the effect, or evidence in both figures: Every one that loveth, is born of God. I John 4; 7. To be born of the Spirit, is to be prepared to receive spiritual instruction; passing from moral death to spiritual life is the same preparation; hence I cannot distinguish between these two figures as used in the scriptures. This change is termed, exclusively, the work of the Spirit, no instrument--no means are of any purpose in producing the birth of Spirit; but those who receive this change are called to it by the power of God, not according to their works; but according to his own purpose and grace, which was given them in Christ Jesus, before the world began. 2 Tim. 1; 9. Born, not of blood, nor of the will of the flesh, nor of the will of man. John 1; 13. Surely no instrument can be of any use in the hand of God, in raising the dead; but life to the dead, must be communicated by the sovereign power of him who spake all things into existence, even so he quickeneth whom he will. John 5; 21. It is a prevailing idea that the Lord makes use of various means in effecting the birth of the Spirit. Reading the scriptures, hearing some affecting story, suffering afflictions, etc.; but most generally the preaching of the gospel, are said to be means in the hand of God in effecting this birth. To tell of the means used in the birth of the Spirit, would be telling whence it came; but the sword of the Spirit cuts off this idea at once. Thou canst not tell whence it cometh; so is every one that is born of the Spirit. John 3: 18 (John 3:8 SG). That the gospel is not a means of the Spirit is taught by the effect that it has upon the natural man; it is preached to the Jews a stumblingblock, and unto the Greeks foolishness. I Cor. 1; 23. Also, it is said to be a savor of death unto death, instead of a means of raising the dead. 2 Cor. 2; 16 By this, I do not suppose we are to understand that a man's guilt is increased by hearing the gospel preached; but that it witnesses to his state by exciting his enmity--wherefore it is enited (sic) death unto death. But unto them that are called, (born of the Spirit) it is the power of God, and the wisdom of God, i.e. the gospel is unto (in the estimation of) them, the power of God, etc. Many think, and preach that a man is not born of the Spirit until he has experienced a season of godly sorrow for sin; and a hungering and thirting after righteousness, etc.; but these are signs of spiritual life, evidences that the soul is born of the Spirit, he has spiritual discernment, and is no more a natural, but a spiritual man: for the natural man receiveth not the things of the Spirit of God; for they are foolishness unto him, neither can he know them, because they are spiritually discerned. I Cor. 2; 14."
"I shall now proceed to write my views concerning the birth of water. And first, I have no idea that it has any reference to the ordinance of baptism; for baptism sets forth a death, burial & resurrection, but I think it is not termed a birth in the scriptures. But by the birth of water I understand the deliverance of the soul from his burden of sins-bringing the prisoner out of the gloomy prison house into the light and liberty of the children of the Kingdom of God, to a participation of the consolations of the saints of God. Christ formed in him the hope of glory. In effecing this birth, the Lord makes use of means, the gospel of Christ, which in many places in the bible is termed water, living water. This change, or deliverance of the soul is called a birth in different places in the scriptures. See Paul to the Gal. 4; 19. My little children of whom I travail in birth again, until Christ be formed in you. Also I Cor. 4; 15. Though ye have ten thousand instructors in Christ, yet not many fathers: for in Christ Jesus I have begotten you through the gospel; but he thanks God that he had baptized but few of them. Hence Paul's begetting them in Christ was not baptizing them; but a birth into the kingdom of God, through faith that was in Christ Jesus, which made them fit subjects for baptism. So the eunuch was begotten through the gospel by Philip, who afterward baptized him. For this end, Christ gave gifts unto men for the perfecting of the saints, for the work of the ministry, for the edifying of the body of Christ, to open their eyes, and to turn them from darkness to light, and from the power of Satan unto God, that they may receive forgiveness of sins, etc. Acts 26; 18. Now it is evident that Paul's ministry was not to open the eyes of the natural man, for he is not blind, but sees, therefore his sin remains; he is whole and needs not a physician. He is not under the bondage, or power of Satan, but is free and willing subject of his kingdom; but the soul that is born of the Spirit is in bondage, a prisoner until liberated through the gospel, receives forgiveness of sins, etc., through faith in Christ Jesus."
Observation
One of the reasons why I reject this model of "regeneration" (begetting) and "birth" (deliverance) is seen in the above words wherein the Hardshell apologist states that the divine begetting and regeneration instantly brings one into bondage, to a sense of guilt and conviction of sin. The scriptures do not teach this. Rather, they teach that the removal of guilt from the conscience, by faith in the blood of Christ, and the joy that comes thereby, IS the very the experience of regeneration, new birth, or of the divine begetting.
I also do not see how Paul makes a distinction, in the verses cited by the writer, between the begetting and the birthing.
I also do not believe that Christ is giving two requirements for entering the local church, but not for entering heaven, but believe the "kingdom of God" is speaking of the future eternal glories of the saints, and thus of what is necessary for entering heaven. I also do not believe that Jesus is alluding to two distinct births when he speak of being "born of water and the Spirit," but of one birth. I also believe that all who are "begotten" are "birthed" or "delivered." (See Isaiah 66: 8,9)
See here for the citation
Thus, I have found now numerous sources which show that many of the first generation Hardshells held to the view that the begetting was distinct from the birthing, that regeneration was without means, but the birthing was by means. Some of these believed that all the elect would be both begotten and born, both regenerated and converted, while others, like the above writer, did not.
I have shown that this was the view promoted by Elders Beebe and Trott of the "Signs of the Times" periodical, of Elder Wilson Thompson and William Conrad of Kentucky, and other first generation Hardshells. Elder Clark, who later, in 1854 started the famed Hardshell periodical "Zion's Advocate," supported Elder Jewett and the paper "The Christian Doctrinal Advocate and Spiritual Monitor," from whence the above article was taken, writing to it frequently.
It is easy for me to see how the 2nd and 3rd generation Hardshells soon gave up this model of their forefathers, believing that the begetting and the birthing were the same, but believing that conversion and faith were not necessary for eternal salvation.
No comments:
Post a Comment