Hatfield left this comment:
"By the sovereign providence of God, I came across this article that I assume was written by a Mr Steven Garret. I do not know the person and he made no attempt to discuss my written article on baptism. Yet, he is so wise that he can tell me I am wrong without ever discussing the issue with me. NOt does he tell me of my errors, but he informs everyone that I am arrogant. This is an amazing evaluation since we have never met nor had any communication except this one article. The man processes great wisdom indeed. I have been called many things, but I believe it is the first time I have been accused of being "arrogant." My only defense is that I make no claim of greatness or wisdom, only what I read in the Word of God. I am just a sinner saved by the sovereign grace of God and my only hope of salvation is in the precious death of Jesus Christ. I do have some beliefs that I hold which I believe are based on the Word of God as I have been given understanding by the Holy Spirit. If that makes me to be arrogant, than I am guilty. The write also make the false accusation against me that I believe that only Primitive Baptists are saved. This is totally false. I believe that all God's elect are saved by Jesus Christ's death, regardless of what denomination they may belong to. I wish the writer had communicated with him, I might have saved him from making so many false statements."
My Reply
The old link for Hatfield's article is not available (wonder why?). It was for aberdeen primitive baptist church. However, the same article can be read here at Hatfield's church's web page of Mayhew PB church.
Yes, by the "sovereign providence of God"! However, for what purpose did God will for you to find this article? Or, do you deny that providence is but the actual working out of his eternal decrees (predestination)?
Is that purpose of God in order that you might be given opportunity to defend yourself and your article on the "administrator" of water baptism? So that you can say what you have said and even perhaps to correct me? Or, perhaps, so that you and others might be corrected? Has anyone else ever taken the time to review your doctrinal position on the subject? Should you not be glad that someone took the time to do so?
Since when do I need to first contact a person who writes a public article before I critique it? That is not only an undue requirement but highly impractical.
Also, since when do I have to have met in person an author before I can critique that writer's public writings?
Further, detecting arrogance in a person does not require meeting that person or knowing him personally. Arrogance can be, and often is, detected in that person's words and in their stated beliefs. Don't you see?
Further, I have, like others before me, pointed out the Hardshell "arrogance" many times. This arrogance is seen in their writings and in what they say about themselves and others. Should I take the time and find some examples?
For instance, note the citation I have given often from Dr. J.M. Peck who lived at the time of the division over mission methods.
"The name by which they designated themselves was Primitive, or Old School, Baptists; and they claimed that all Baptists were originally of their contention, which certainly was not the fact. "They arrogate to themselves," says J. M. Peck who was a contemporary, "the name of Old School Baptists because they reprobate all these measures (missions, education and Sunday schools, etc.), and declare non-fellowship with all Baptists who have anything to do with missionary work or any of those forms of active benevolence, and with all who hold correspondence with or fellowship missionary Baptists. In this charitable act they cut themselves off from at least nineteen-twentieths of all our Baptists in the United States, unless we can admit that a mere fragment of a party can exclude a vast majority" (J. M. Peck, Baptist Banner and Western Pioneer, July 4, 1839)."
Thus, brother Peck was one of the first to identify "arrogance" with the the Hardshell psyche. Further, as I have shown in numerous instances, Hardshells say many things that reveal their arrogance, an arrogance that is often "cloaked" (like other sins) in external shows of "humility."
Is brother Hatfield willing to discuss the issue of his article with me and others? He seems perturbed that I did not locate him, find his phone number, call him, and discuss my criticisms of his views before publicly writing against them. The fact is, when I was writing on the subject of the administrator of baptism, I looked for Internet articles by PBs on that subject and I found (providentially?) the writing by Hardshell Hatfield. He was a good source for what PBs today believe on that subject.
Hatfield knows my father. Dad and I sometimes spoke of him. I believe dad was in his home. I believe they had some minor differences.
Comment from Hardshell "Anon"
"You have forgotten, or never new of the simplicity of the doctrine of Jesus Christ. God had nothing to do with those who are not his and says he never knew them, and told them to depart. God does not even try to save those who are not his. You don't understand what the word hell means, You don't understand what the words saved means, and You do not understand what dead in trespasses and sins means. You are in danger of a hell fire that has nothing to do with eternal hell. You are creating for yourself a self created, self inflicted hell here on this earth for yourself. The power of death and life is of the tongue...You have outstepped bounds and damned yourself to a self created hell here on this earth. I suggest you shut it down. You believe in a weak sniveling puny little god. And you are about to get stepped on." April 1, 2019 at 9:07 AM (see here)
What is ironic to me is how this comment came to me shortly after the comment from Hatfield. The irony is seen in how the above Hardshell evinced the arrogant spirit that Hatfield had referenced in his separate and independent comment!
There is so much that smacks of biblical ignorance in these words that it is hardly worth the effort to respond. Obviously, this Hardshell is either a Universalist or Quasi Universalist.
If this brother really wants to discuss the issues he raises, then we welcome him.
Get stepped on? By whom? The Hardshells? God? If the former, how so? If the latter, how so? If the latter, will it be only a "temporal" smashing or squashing? Will it only bring me a temporal Hell?
Want to "reason together" to see which of us believes in a "puny little god"?
Let me suggest that we begin our discussion of the points you raise by looking at the words of our Lord in Matthew 23: 33-35.
"Ye serpents, ye generation of vipers, how can ye escape the damnation of hell? Wherefore, behold, I send unto you prophets, and wise men, and scribes: and some of them ye shall kill and crucify; and some of them shall ye scourge in your synagogues, and persecute them from city to city: That upon you may come all the righteous blood shed upon the earth, from the blood of righteous Abel unto the blood of Zacharias son of Barachias, whom ye slew between the temple and the altar." (KJV)
It seems clear that these words of Jesus uproot your proposition that says "God had nothing to do with those who are not his."
He certainly is dealing with those that are not his in these words. Surely "serpents" and "generation of vipers" are not descriptive of those who are his!
Further, the "damnation of hell" cannot be a mere temporal suffering that is confined to this life.
Gill on Matthew 23:33:
The phrase, (Mnhyg lv hnyd) , "the judgment, or damnation of hell", is a phrase often used in the Talmud F16, and Midrashes F17 of the Jews; and intends future torment, and the everlasting vengeance and wrath of God, the unquenchable fire prepared for the devil and his angels, and which impenitent unbelieving sinners cannot escape.
No comments:
Post a Comment