"The Church Advocate" Periodical

"The Church Advocate" periodical was first begun by Elder Daniel Parker in 1829 to promote his "two seed" views. What is interesting is the fact that Elder Lemuel Potter, about fifty years or so later, an opponent of "Two Seedism," started a paper and named it "Church Advocate."

"Elder Lemuel Potter resumed publication of his paper, the "Church Advocate" in 1892, to oppose the "means" doctrine. The first issue of the paper in 1892 aggressively opposed those who were introducing these departures. Elder Potter stated that the "Means" party claimed that they had about 100 churches with about 5,000 members." (From Primitive Baptist Library - here)

I have not been able to ascertain when he first began this paper. I do know that he used it to fight two major theological views; Two Seedism and Means. 

I am at a loss to understand why Potter would name his paper after the leader of Two Seedism while supposedly opposing it. Well, if one reads Potter's book "Life And Travels Of A Poor Sinner" (here) he will find Potter saying this:

"When I first joined the church and began to preach, there was a great deal said about the Two Seed doctrine, and the most of our preachers of southern Illinois believed it. It was nothing uncommon to hear a minister speak out in favor of that doctrine in his sermons. It seemed that in our immediate connection, it had the ascendency (sic). Some of the Associations in our correspondence passed resolutions that the belief or disbelief of that doctrine should not be a bar to fellowship. For several years after I commenced preaching, I rather favored it, enough to accept it at least, and without any investigation of the matter, I did not know but what it was the doctrine of our people generally. I finally began to study the matter for myself, and I soon became satisfied that if it was the Baptist doctrine I did not believe it. After trying to discourage the agitation of it for a few years, I studied the matter so much that I finally concluded to write on that subject, which I did, and put out a small work, giving my objections to it, in the year 1880." (pg. 262) 

If he started his paper while still favoring Two Seedism, then the above tells us why. It is because he favored that teaching. 

It is good that he later used that paper to teach people out of Two Seedism, but I wonder if he did not wait not only till he had studied the issue further, but till he thought that Two Seedism was dying? And, so then would want to "jump on the bandwagon" and oppose what he at first favored.

Further, it is interesting that he opposed Two Seedism and Means because it is clear that the anti means view originated with the Two Seeders.

What think ye?