Where Are The PB Debaters?

It is an historical phenomenon that needs to be accounted for in regards to the history of "Primitive Baptists." I speak concerning their debate history. In the decades that followed the 1832 division, the one that produced the "Primitive" or "Old School" denomination (or sect), there were in the first 75-100 years of their existence far more debates with other denominations than there were after that time period. In fact, we can say that, for the most part, when C.H. Cayce and J.R. Daily died (early 20th century), debating died. Why is this? In this day and time there is none. The only debating that the PBs did in the latter end of the 20th century were done mostly by my father and his mostly with Campbellites. The only one of recent years that I know of is one between Elder Danny Parker (not the original Daniel Parker lol) and a church of Christ minister. It can be seen on youtube (Parker got eaten alive). As a side note, I first met Parker in the 70s and saw him in meetings more than once. He is a little older than I. 

I will opine on the reason for this lack of debating today. It was easier for their forefathers to debate because they were not defending indefensible propositions that affirmed that the gospel was not a means in salvation, that faith and repentance were not required for entrance into heaven, and that one did not have to persevere in faith and holiness to be finally saved. It is because they had not yet embraced those false propositions. So, when in debate in those first decades of their existence, they spent their time objecting to methods, to Arminianism, to Pelagianism, to innovations. 

It was not till the end of the 19th century that 2nd generation Hardshells began to have debates where they denied gospel means, denied absolute predestination, denied perseverance, denied calling upon the lost to repent and be saved, etc. The champions in this new paradigm were Lemuel Potter, S.F. Cayce, C.H. Cayce, and John R. Daily. 

When these men died, very few took their places. I believe it is because their new paradigm was showing itself not to be defensible and certainly not in keeping with their historical beliefs. I believe it is apparent that my opinion is correct by looking at how few have ventured to come here and have Christian debate and dialogue. 

If Cayce, Potter, Daily, etc., were alive today, would they not at least try to engage us in discussion? I think so. And, this being true, we may well ask "where are the Cayce's, the Daily's, etc."" 

What think ye?