I ran across an article today about the Soldier Creek Primitive Baptist Church. Their meeting house is in bad disrepair and they only have $52.50 in church funds. They desperately want to restore the church. It is sagging on its foundation, needs a new roof, and needs to be scraped and painted. They are "asking" the community" for funds to help restore the church. They don't want new windows, they want to restore the old ones, even tho new ones would be half the cost. I guess the church of Christ and its gospel are better with old windows huh? They were founded in 1820. See the article here https://www.tribunecourier.com/news/soldier-creek-church-seeks-to-preserve-church-building/article_a2c1c1ff-c33f-5cdb-9296-2d093813498b.html. Notice also in the article it says how in the old days they gathered under the oak tree to discuss the Bible before being called to the meeting of worship. Doesn't sound too much differently than the Missionaries who first had "Sunday School" under the trees before worship. But I suppose a "discussion" is permissible, whereas a "study" is not?
I find this somewhat ironic, that a Primitive Baptist church, which began by denouncing begging money from the public for spreading the Gospel, now begs for money to restore their building. And who are they begging? They aren't begging other hardshells, but begging from those who are not of them. They love to spout "love for the brethren", but where is that love now? Are there no "brethren" to come to the rescue? Perhaps there aren't enough hardshells left to beg, and what few there are seem to be in a similar situation. So what did the original PB's say about begging for money?
The Kehukee Association declared in 1827 " it was agreed that we discard all Missionary Societies, Bible Societies
and Theological Seminaries, and the practices heretofore resorted to
for their support, in begging money from the public;" The same association also declared "Those brethren contending for the ancient landmarks of Zion were
denounced by their fashionable brethren of the New School party as being
old-fashioned, ignorant people, who would all soon die out and give
place to the younger, fashionable, educated men, who expected soon to
occupy the whole land, and gather in their tithes without any murmuring
or complaint on the part of those who were being fleeced." I suppose there were "prophets" among the Primitives as this statement did indeed come to pass. The hardshell PB's have died out, they have been displaced by educated men,the whole land has been occupied by Missionary Baptists, and they do "gather in the tithes" willingly given by those who desire to see the Gospel preached to everyone. Do some leaders "fleece" the people? Probably. However, if one gives a portion of what God has given them for the expenses of the church and preaching of the Gospel, God is sovereign enough to bless that giving so that it does not return void. Kehukee also said "And they (new School Baptists) declared wherever they went (supposing no doubt it would be so)
that the Old Party would soon become extinct – out of the way entirely,
and give them no further trouble." Is this not now the case? Once again the PB prophets hit the nail on the head! They are almost extinct.
Their "prophets" soon declared false prophecies as well. They predicted the Missionary Baptists would become "afflicted" while the Primitives would prosper, and that the Missionaries would eventually return. Return from what? They never left! The Kehukee Association of PB's said "It is likely their affliction will increase as the prosperity of Zion becomes more and more manifest, and the well established among themselves forsake them and go where they rightfully belong, to the citizenship of the saints and the household of God." This of course, never came to pass. It is not the Missionaries who had their "afflictions" increased, but the Primitives. The Missionaries' citizenship never left the household of God, but they did increase the number of citizens in that household.
Oh how far the hardshell has fallen! The very thing they railed against, they now practice by begging money to survive! Oh if only they were more concerned about the salvation of lost souls, than they are their "historic" building with a congregation of 20 people! When you are more concerned with the salvation of a building than you are about the salvation of people, you are no church of Christ!
Dear brother:
ReplyDeleteI too have written about this inconsistency. Yes, they have often solicited money for projects ever since they began to decry "begging for money." I just hope and pray that some of them will see their many inconsistencies and be led to see the truth, about themselves and about the teachings of scripture in those areas where they left the path.
Excellent post. Blessings.
I also have a post where I cite from a leader in the Kehukee Association when the Declaration was made. Elder Joshua Lawrence said the Kehukee brethren were covetous. Others would later say the same thing about the first Hardshells. They decried not only begging for money but even asking for money; certainly no sermons on giving and no preacher salaries or support even. The covetous were happy about such a stand against asking or begging for money.
ReplyDeleteYes, Lawrence wrote in the Primitive Baptist for 1839:
ReplyDelete"...but this I know to be a fact, that most of the Old School Baptists are a closefisted and covetous set, or else they would not have treated their ministers as they have done for sixty years."
It is my post titled "Hardshells & Mission Opposition XXII" for Oct. 9, 2013. It was in a "Circular Letter to the Old School Baptists Throughout the United States" by Elder Joshua Lawrence (March 9, 1839, Vol. 4). I showed how he said this about begging for money in that printing:
"Ye hirelings, ye beggars, ye agents, ye sea-scourers, ye Boards, ye conventionists, ye traders in memberships, ye track venders and money hirelings, this is not the good old way."
I then showed from "The Primitive Baptist" how he asked for money for the periodical. That is hypocrisy.