Wednesday, October 8, 2025

Two Seed Baptist Ideology (XVII)




This chapter is a continuation of the immediate previous chapters dealing with the Two Seed debate that was occurring in the "Signs of the Times" periodical for the year 1849. In the immediate preceding chapters we have noticed what Elder T.P. Dudley wrote as an apologist for Two Seedism in the early 19th century in his pamphlet on "The Christian Warfare." We also began to give some of the discussion that occurred through the "Signs of the Times," a Two Seed periodical, and the leading voice for the newly formed "Old School" or "Primitive" Baptist church. We have cited from several elders on both sides of the debate, from Beebe, Trott, Wilson Thompson, John Watson, Samuel Williams, T. P. Dudley, Thomas Barton, etc. 

In the previous chapter we cited from a letter sent to the "Signs of the Times" by "the Brethren About The Fort Mountain" wherein they, like Elder Samuel Willaims, objected to Two Seed ideas. We will begin this chapter with the reply to their letter by Elder Samuel Trott, who was often ready to reply to any and all who objected to Two Seedism. Trott's reply was published on the first page of the August 15th, 1849 issue of the "Signs of the Times" (Vol. XVII, No. 16; See here) titled "Reply to the Brethren about Fort Mountain." In it Trott says:

"In my communication in the 10th No. present Vol. Signs, in replying to brother Barton's query concerning the churches being created in Christ Jesus before the foundation of the world, I took the ground, that the expressions "Created in Christ Jesus," naturally involved the idea that his church was created in his creation, as the Head of his church, and of course, as far back as he has stood as her Head. I referred to I Cor. xv. 45 as sustaining the same idea, and Col. i. 15 as further justifying that application of the idea of creatureship to our Lord in reference to his headship."

When the scriptures speak of being "created in Christ Jesus" (Eph. 2: 10) and becoming a "new creature in Christ Jesus" (II Cor. 5: 17, etc.), the Two Seeders say that this creation occurred before the foundation of the world, from past eternity, in conjunction with Christ being begotten of the Father and being created a Mediator, and when his human soul (and body too according to some, but more on that later) was created. That is certainly a strange and novel view. It is the traditional view to say that this creation occurs when one is converted and born of the Spirit, when he is regenerated. With this view, one can see how the Two Seeders denied any change in conversion, regeneration, or the new birth. 

One can also see (if he has read our previous chapters showing where certain Hyper Calvinists such as Joseph Hussey, in the early 18th century, began to say that the human soul of Christ was what was begotten when he was begotten as the Son of God in eternity past) how an Arian view of the Sonship of Christ contributed to giving birth to the idea that the children of God were begotten or created when Christ was begotten. 

Trott wrote further:

"They (the Fort Mountain brethren) try to convince the minds of the readers that Christ was never made a Quickening Spirit as so expressly asserted in that text...I will answer the questions they put to me. The first is, Whether the quickening and life giving spirit of God is a created existence? I answer decidedly yes.--The text under consideration I think gives me full authority to answer. It says, "The last Adam was made a Quickening Spirit." A Quickening Spirit I presume they will admit must a life giving spirit. To be made is equivalent to being created."

So, does I Cor. 5: 45 and the words "the last Adam was made a quickening spirit" imply all that Trott and the Two Seeders affirm? Certainly not. Benson in his commentary rightly says:

"And so it is written — With respect to the animal body, Genesis 2:7. The first Adam was made a living soul — God gave him animal life, in many respects resembling that of other animals; the last Adam was made — Rather was, or is, for there is nothing in the original for made; a quickening Spirit — Having life in himself, and quickening whom he will: imparting even a more refined life to men’s bodies at the resurrection, than that which they formerly possessed."

Not only that, but Christ having life in himself is an affirmation that the man Christ, or divine Son in his incarnate state, has such life. So Jesus said:

"For as the Father has life in Himself, so He has granted the Son to have life in Himself." (John 5: 26 nkjv)

The incarnate Son was granted divine powers and attributes as a man, but this does not mean that he did not have these things as the eternal divine Son of God. Wrote Dr. Barnes in his commentary:

"Hath he given - This shows that the power or authority here spoken of was "given" or committed to the Lord Jesus. This evidently does not refer to the manner in which the second person of the Trinity exists, for the power and authority of which Christ here speaks is that which he exercises as "Mediator." It is the power of raising the dead and judging the world. In regard to his divine nature, it is not affirmed here that it is in any manner derived; nor does the fact that God is said to have "given" him this power prove that he was inferior in his nature or that his existence was derived."

We should compare "made a quickening spirit" with "made flesh" (John 1: 14). He was God the Word and God the Son before he was made flesh and before he was given life to give as such to others.

Trott wrote further:

"...but Christ being the Beginning of the creation of God, I understand no, for Christ is that beginning...But Christ being the Beginning of the creation of God, and the First Born of every creature, must in this sense have been created or brought into existence before these, and therefore before time. As no other reading has been attempted to be given these texts, Rev. iii.14 and Col. i.15, I still think them good authority as they read. But as they do not satisfy these brethren, I will produce other corroborating texts. In John i.4 we read, "In him was life; and the life was the light of men." This is said of the Word as he in the beginning was with God, and was God, vs. 1. Will any person after candid reflection say of this life that is so particularly spoken of as distinct from the Word as being declared to be in the Word; and again as to prevent mistake, it is said that the life was the light of men, not simply it was the light, &c, that it is itself the Word or the essential existence of the Godhead? If not, must they not admit that this life that it was a produced, that is, a begotten or created existence in the Word, or be driven to the necessity of admitting that there are other self existences than God, and therefore other Gods?--If then this life was not a self existence, then it may properly termed a creature as being produced of God."

In preceding chapters we have shown how Two Seed ideology sprang partly from an Arian view of the Sonship of Christ. Many first generation Hardshell Baptists did not agree with the Two Seeders on their interpretation of the texts above. We don't want to be too repetitious in giving citations from Two Seeders for we could give many. We only want the reader to see how error on the doctrine of the Trinity and on Christ' eternal Sonship led to Two Seed ideology.

Thomas Barton, who we have previously cited, writes to Trott in response to his and the Fort Mountain brethren in the Sept. 15, 1849 issue of the "Signs of the Times" as follows.

"An allusion has been made, I presume, to a difference of opinion between brother Trott and myself on the "Bond of Union." 

"True indeed; we differed; but if I understand the matter properly, the difference is not essential. I presume we agree as to the facts of this union; that the union has existed as long as Christ has existed as Head, and the church as his body...Our difference therefore is simply in reference to that which constitutes the bond by which they are held together. I took occasion in my communication to propose a query on the subject of creation.--My reason for doing so I will now give.--From my first reflection on Eph. 2: 10, I have understood it to have reference to the conversion of the sinner, and particularly gentile sinners; but when I found brethren for whose opinions I entertained the highest respect, and I am sincere in saying that I regarded them as far superior to myself in knowledge and wisdom: I say, when I found such brethren taking a very different view of that text and of its connection, I began to think that perhaps that I was wrong, and, for a considerable time I was agitated on the subject: and indeed, I may say, I was unsettled in my mind on the question; and with a view of getting all the light I could, I proposed the query. Since then I have read and heard in conversation much on the subject, all which has left me just where I was, until I was led to give it another investigation, and if ever in my life I investigated a subject with an honest and sincere desire to obtain a correct understanding of it, I did so on this occasion; the result of which is a more full confirmation of the correctness of my first view I took of it, than ever. I am now as fully satisfied, as I am on any subject in the bible, that Paul, or the Holy Ghost through him, was treating, not on what was done for the church in eternity, but what is done for her in time, in the conversion of the gentiles. True all that is done for her in time is the result of what was done for her in eternity."

"I cannot however see that this difference goes to affect any fundamental principle of the gospel."

Barton was correct in his interpretation. What is strange, however, is Barton's esteeming the leading ideas of Two Seedism to be no great error. I see that Barton's feelings were fairly common among the first generation of "Primitive" Baptists. If one reads the "Signs of the Times" in the 1830s and 1840s he will see many leading elders who wrote to that paper in support of it who would later become opponents of Two Seedism, men like John Watson, John Clark, Grigg Thompson, etc. It is also strange that they could declare non fellowship for Mission Baptists for supporting missions and theological education, etc., and yet tolerate such heresies of the Two Seeders. 

In the "Signs of the Times" for July 18th, 1849 (Vol. XVII, No. 14; See here) Elder Samuel Williams, who we have been citing in the previous chapters, wrote the following to Elder Beebe:

"I have just received the 12th number, present volume, of the Signs: and I am much pleased with your reply to my letter contained in the same paper. I freely admit, that Jesus Christ is the life of the church; and that life existed prior to the creation of this natural world. But, I have never understood that "life" to be the church. I believe the church as a body, is composed of sinners of Adam's race--and that sinners of Adam's race are adopted into the family of God. In God's appointed time, that "life" enters into the "vessels of mercy"--quickens their dead souls--washes them from all sin by the "washing of regeneration"--and is in them the spirit of adoption, whereby they cry Abba Father, I agree with you, my brother, that the natural or mortal body, does not become a "new creature" until the resurrection day. And I am glad that you admitted that the SOULS of God's children are "quickened" and become "new creatures" by being born again."
 
I agree with Williams that Beebe's argument to prove the preexistence of the souls of the elect or church based upon the fact that the "life" that is given is uncreated and eternal is invalid. Two Seedism is read into the scriptures which speak of sinners receiving eternal life. Receiving eternal life does not mean receiving an eternal spirit child of God. When a sinner is saved he partakes of the "divine nature" (II Peter 1: 4) but it would be a stretch to think that this implies that because the divine nature is without beginning so too are the children of God or those who are partakers of the divine nature in time. The preexistence of the divine life and nature does not necessarily infer the preexistence of the souls of the saved.

Williams says he is pleased that Beebe agrees that the souls of sinners, "of Adam's race," are "quickened" and made "new creatures" when they are born of the Spirit in time. This affirmation by Beebe, as we have previously seen, was objected to by Elder Dudley, a fellow Two Seeder as Beebe.

Wrote Williams:

"With your answer to my second question I do not fully agree. I believe that the apostle in the second chapter, of the Epistle to the Ephesians, in speaking of the great change wrought in the souls of his brethren by the Spirit of the living God. Consequently when he says---"we are his workmanship, created in Christ Jesus unto good works," he means by the word "created," the regenerating influence of the Spirit, by which their souls were made new creatures."

"These few lines I have written for the satisfaction of my brethren who may have read my letter containing the questions to which you have in a kind manner replied, in the 12th number of the present Volume of the Signs of the Times." 

After publishing the communications of Elder Williams and the circular by Elder Dudley (which we spoke of in the previous chapter) in the "Signs of the Times," in 1849, several people jumped into the discussion, such as Elder Trott, who wrote a lengthy reply to the queries of Williams and in defense of Dudley and his Two Seed views. Grigg Thompson also writes in the November 1st, 1849 issue of the Signs. (See here) Also, a writer named E. S. Dudley wrote in opposition to T. P. Dudley and Two Seedism. 

It was in the 1840s and 1850s that Two Seedism became the main topic of discussion among the "Old Schoolers." Some of those who became fervent opponents of Two Seedism nevertheless wrote brotherly remarks to the "Signs of the Times" and to other Two Seed Primitive Baptist periodicals, such as to the "The Southern Baptist Messenger," begun in 1850 by Gilbert Beebe's son, Elder William L. Beebe, and published out of Covington, Georgia, and to the "Herald of Truth," mentioned by Elder Watson in "The Old Baptist Test" and seems also to have been a leading paper of the Two Seeders. 

Elder John Clark often wrote to the Signs until he began opposing Beebe and Two Seedism in the early 1850s, and began publishing "Zion's Advocate," and then in 1873 published "Exposure of Heresies" wherein he attacked the "Arianism" of Beebe, Trott, and others. Many years ago I sat in our local library and read this little book, getting it via an inter library loan. We will also see what lengthy remarks Grigg Thompson had to say against the "Arianism" of Two Seedism. After Clark began his periodical "Zion's Advocate" in 1854 he became a recognized leader of those who came to be known as "Clark Old School Baptists" and who were opposed to those who were known as "Beebe Old School Baptists" or "Beebeites." 

In November, 1897, Sylvester Hassell, Hardshell historian, wrote some things in his paper the "Gospel, Messenger" which was later made into a booklet titled "The Relations Between Those Called the Beebe and the Clark Old School Baptists." (It can be read online here

It seems that the first two periodicals of the "Primitive" or "Old School" Baptists represented the two sides in the Two Seed debate. The "Signs of the Times" published out of New York, edited by Beebe and the peridical where Trott did much of his writings, was first, beginning immediately after the Black Rock Address, and had the support of that Convention for starting that periodical. It became the impetus for Beebe and sons running a publishing business out of New York. Shortly thereafter the "Primitive Baptist" periodical was begun in 1836 with Elder Mark Bennett as editor with the full support of Elder Joshua Lawrence, one of the foremost leaders in the Kehukee Association of North Carolina, and published out of Tarbor, N.C. However, the periodical titled "Christian Doctrinal Advocate and Spiritual Monitor" preceded both the above Hardshell periodicals. This periodical was first supported by nearly all the founders of the Hardshell sect. It's editor was Elder Daniel E. Jewett. Many old issues of this periodical are available to read online. I have read many issues. When Jewett passed away Elder C.B. Hassell married his widow, and the children of Jewett became step brothers and sisters of Sylvester Hassell. Later Beebe would purchase Jewett's periodical and is why the "Signs of the Times" would say on each page of issues of that periodical "Advocate and Monitor." I believe Jewett's paper preceded that of the "Signs of the Times."

In a separate article titled "Reply to Brother Dudley" by Gilbert Beebe in the "Signs of the Times" for July 1st, 1849 (Vol. XVII. No 13; See here), Beebe writes:

"The two particular points involved in the consideration of this text, to which our attention is called, are 1. the origin of these children, and 2. How they became united to their federal Head, the second Adam. 

"First, the origin of these children...we presume that brother Dudley is as well satisfied that these children had their origin in God, as we are."

"We are free to express the strong conviction of our mind as the seed of Christ, they had their origin in him as their seminal Head, and divinely appointed Mediator, long before they became partakers of flesh and blood. Some of them we know existed as the seed of Christ, when he poured out his soul unto death, for at that time he saw all his seed, and some of them have never until the present time been developed as partakers of flesh and blood: only as they had an earthly or natural existence in Adam the first, from the day that man became a living soul."

"Christ existed as the Son of God before he was made of a woman; and so his seed existed in him as their Mediator and seminal Head, before they were created in Adam. When we speak of the existence of Christ as the Son of God, the Mediator, the Head of the Church and the Life of his people, before he became incarnatewe do not allude to his absolute Godhead, for in his Godhead he is the Eternal, the self-existent God, in the most absolute sense of the word, but we allude to what he was as the beginning of the creation of God, and the First-Born of every creature. And thus existing in his Mediatorial character, the fullness of the Godhead, and the fullness of the church were embodied in the Mediatorial existence." 

"He was the Son of God before he partook of flesh and blood, and his seed were the children of God in his sonship before they partook of flesh and blood. Brother Dudley will perceive that while we ascribe to Christ absolute Godhead, in the most absolute and unlimited sense of the word; and as such deny that he is second, subsequent, or inferior to any other God, we refer every title applied to him in the scriptures, which implies derivation, emanation, generation, or dependence, to his Mediatorial headship of his church, which is his body, the fullness of him that filleth all in all, excepting only such titles as are used in special reference to his humanity. (to be concluded in the next part)"      

Here Beebe once again gives some of the leading tenets of Two Seedism.

In Beebe's second article, which was published in the next issue of the "Signs of the Times" (for July 18, 1849; Vol. XVII, No. 14; See here) and addressed to "Brother Dudley" Beebe wrote:

"Second:--The second point for consideration, is, "How they became united to their federal Head, the second Adam?" The original seminal union and identity of the church as the body, which Christ as the Head has probably been sufficiently discussed in the first division of our article; but we suppose brother Dudley's enquiry to embrace the subject of experimental union--for certainly neither he nor any other intelligent brother can conceive of the existence of a living head, and a living body belonging to that living Head, and at the same time disconnected, or disunited."

We have noticed this line of argument before. The Two Seeders reasoned that since Christ has always been the Mediator and Head of the church, so must the church (body) have always existed. But, this is false reasoning for it is built upon false premises. Christ being a mediator and head of the church was only true in the decrees of God before he became such in time when he became a man. Christ was appointed such in eternity past, but that does not equate to his actually being so. Christ was my appointed Savior even before I was born or existed. To say that Christ was my Savior before I was born does not mean that I existed before I was born. 

Wrote Beebe:

"...the matter of union concerning which our brother inquires, must be that experimental union which is developed in the saints when Christ is formed in them the hope of glory. How this is brought about involves considerations second in importance only to what we have already expressed our views upon."

Here again we see unique terminology, jargon that is peculiar to Two Seed Primitive Baptists. We have already noticed in previous chapters how the word "manifested" is such a word, carrying connotations that are not normally understood by Bible believers. In the above we see the word "experimental" and this is another word often used today by "Primitive Baptists" who are no longer Two Seeders, it being one of those remnants of Two Seedism. I heard that word "experimentally" many times when I was a young "Primitive Baptist" preacher. Most did not believe in justification by faith, but in justification in eternity, as did many of the first Two Seeders, and would say that faith only justifies "experimentally," meaning it is only when he experiences or realizes that he is justified. 

Another word Beebe uses is "developed." In Beebe's thinking, after a child is conceived in the womb, he is yet undeveloped, and needs time in the womb to develop as a child of God, and even when delivered from the womb, the child still needs to develop or mature. In Two Seedism the child was conceived as seed when Christ was begotten by the Father in eternity past, which begetting of Christ was not expressive of his shared divinity with the Father, but of his becoming a Mediator and Head of the church, the body of Christ composing all the elect. That being so, being born into the world (partaking of flesh and blood) and being born again were instances where the eternally begotten children of God are in time developed. As I have written many times through the years in my blogs, many of the first Hardshell Baptists believed in what is called the three stage model of birth. The first stage being the implantation of the divine seed (corresponding to the time when an elect person is 'regenerated'), the second stage being the time spent in the womb (corresponding to the time where a fetus is 'developed' in the womb and to the time when a person is under Holy Spirit conviction of sin), the third stage being "deliverance" (corresponding to the time when the convicted sinner is delivered from guilt in conscience and receives a hope in Christ). Beebe would agree with this except that he would put the origin of the seed in Christ in past eternity.

Notice that Beebe's "experimental union" is not actual union, for he places union with Christ to a time in past eternity when Christ was begotten, created, or made a Mediator and Head, which involved the creation of his human soul. 

Wrote Beebe:

"Thus having, by virtue of pre-existing relationship, union and identity, sustained legally the character, and performed effectually the work of a Redeemer he has "Gone up with a shout, and with the sound of a trumpet." 

The only relationship that Christ had to any man, elected or not, in eternity past, was in the mind and foreknowledge of God. God, who exists outside of time, saw every man who would ever come into existence and in foreknowledge of this ordained that Christ should be the legal representative. Beebe and the Two Seeders think that this is nonsense, arguing that no one can be the representative of someone who does not yet exist. But, this is a case of willing ignorance for the scriptures show that this is not so. God knew Jeremiah before he was formed in the womb (Jer. 1: 5). David said that God did foresee him even before he existed. (Psa. 139: 13-17) Long before King Cyrus was born, God said he was his servant or anointed one to execute his will. (Isa. 44: 28-45: 1-7) He was appointed the head and representative of his empire even before either he or his empire came into being.

Wrote Beebe:

"In the prosecution of this blessed work the heirs of immortality are made to hear the voice of the Son of God and live; and when thus made alive they are made to feel and realize their lost and helpless condition as sinners against God, and to despair of salvation through any work or merit of their own, and when sufficiently humbled before God, Christ is revealed to them as their Life, their Righteousness, Sanctification and Redemption."

Notice the Two Seed order of things in the above testimony. He puts conviction of sin as a result of having been saved by hearing the voice of the Son of God and coming to life, rather than as a prerequisite for being saved. This aspect of Two Seedism still exists today among even those "Primitive Baptists" who say that they have declared non fellowship with Two Seedism. As I have pointed out in several articles through the years, this ordo salutis makes the Holy Spirit to bear witness to a falsehood, for if the ones convicted of their lost condition are not really lost, then the Holy Spirit is lying. If they are "alive" before they "feel and realize their lost and helpless condition as sinners" then they are no longer in that condition, and so if the Holy Spirit tells those spiritually alive sinners that they are lost, he is not telling the truth. 

Wrote Beebe:

"Not to make them sons, but because they are sons, God sends forth the spirit of his Son into their hearts, and his spirit witnesses with their spirits, that they are born of God. Now they experience and enjoy this union with their Second and anti-typical Adam; and they are made to know him and the power of his resurrection and the fellowship of his suffering."

Beebe, in the above remarks, alludes to these words of the apostle Paul: 

"To redeem them that were under the law, that we might receive the adoption of sons. And because ye are sons, God hath sent forth the Spirit of his Son into your hearts, crying, Abba, Father." (Gal. 4: 5-6 kjv)

Beebe, along with today's Hardshells, even though they reject Two Seedism, nevertheless also teach that Paul is affirming that one is an actual, living, son of God before he is indwelt by the "Spirit of his Son." If we say that this receiving of the Holy Spirit occurs when a sinner is born again or regenerated, then such an interpretation says that one is already a born again son of God before he receives the Spirit, or before he is born again.

First, Beebe's view that says that these Galatian believers were begotten sons from eternity, being begotten when Christ was begotten, is against the text, for Paul says that Christ' work of redemption was in order that sinners might be placed into the position of sons, and thus disproves that they were already his sons before he redeemed them. 

Second, Paul is not denying that the sending of the Spirit into hearts is what makes anyone a son of God.  Let me paraphrase what he is saying:

"And because you Galatians are presently sons of God as believers, through God's workmanship, God has obviously or evidently, prior to this, sent his Spirit into your hearts to make you cry Abba, Father." 

There is no way the text can be read to say:

"Because you are regenerated, God has sent forth his Spirit into your hearts to cause you to believe."

Paul has already affirmed to the Galatians that they had received the Spirit by faith. (Gal. 3: 2)

I could say - "because you are citizens the state has authorized it and made it so." In saying these words I do not mean that I was a citizen before the state authorized it, but only that my being a citizen implied or inferred that the state has defined me as such. In logic it is "If A, then B." I could also say "because you are a male, God has given you an XY chromosome." A necessitates B, being a consequent of B.

In the next chapter we will continue to look at some of the debate that took place in the "Signs of the Times" in the year 1849.

Monday, October 6, 2025

Discerning God's Presence With You



The above text promises that the Lord's presence is within all those who open the door of their hearts. If you have done that, you can be sure that the Lord is not only with you, but in you. He has made your heart a home, a dwelling place, a temple and it is so that you might enjoy God's presence. What greater guest could anyone have in his or her house? No one will ever regret that his body has become a house for the Lord. Rather, all those who have opened their hearts and lives to the Lord will enjoy God's presence, and we call this having communion and fellowship with Lord God. That idea is expressed in the above text where the result of the Lord entering into a man is that he can then dine with the Lord in his inner being. How few professing Christians enjoy this glorious communion! What delights are they missing out on!

The etymology of the word "enthusiasm" means "God within." One of the names of the Lord Jesus Christ is "Immanuel" which means "God with us." Is God within you? How can you know that God's presence is with you and in you? Do Scriptures enter your mind? Do you sense God's presence when you read the Bible?

God In Your Thoughts?

"The wicked in his proud countenance does not seek God; God is in none of his thoughts." (Psa. 10: 4 nkjv)

The lost do not have God dwelling in their thoughts. The saved do have God dwelling in their thoughts. It is in our meditations upon the Lord and his word that we joyously experience God's presence. It is when the believer is in deep thought about the Lord that God's presence becomes very real, a time when he can sense the presence of the Lord. If you want to discern God's presence, then begin thinking upon him regularly throughout your day.

God In Your Praises

"But thou art holy, O thou that inhabitest the praises of Israel." (Psa. 22: 3 kjv)

Not only can we be sure of God's presence when we are meditating upon God and his word, but also when we are praising him sincerely and in truth.

God In Your Humble Spirit

"For thus saith the high and lofty One that inhabiteth eternity, whose name is Holy; I dwell in the high and holy place, with him also that is of a contrite and humble spirit, to revive the spirit of the humble, and to revive the heart of the contrite ones." (Isa. 57: 15 kjv)

God is far away from the proud in heart. However, he dwells with the humble and meek. If you would enjoy and realize God's presence, then you must begin with inviting him into your heart, and by daily meditating upon his word, and by daily praising him. 

Notice these words of the Lord Jesus:

"Jesus answered and said to him, “If anyone loves Me, he will keep My word; and My Father will love him, and We will come to him and make Our home with him." (John 14: 23 nkjv)

If you want the Father, the Son, and the Spirit to dwell within you, begin by opening the door of your heart to him, and by meditating upon his word, and by keeping his word.

Every believer has the same promise that God made to his servant Moses.

"And He said, “My Presence will go with you, and I will give you rest.” (Exo. 33: 14 nkjv)

Make your heart and home a dwelling for the Lord. Make him the guest there. His presence will sustain and bless you.

Sometimes even those who have God dwelling within them lose sight of God, cannot sense his presence as in previous times. But, God has never left, for he has said "I will never leave you." (Heb. 13: 5) However, he may withdraw his immediate felt presence so that you may be disciplined. In such times, a believer should return to prayer and praise, and he will then find that God will return as before.

Thursday, October 2, 2025

Campbell On Baptism When He Was Baptist




Back in 2009 I wrote a synopsis of the arguments I used in a debate over whether water baptism is essential for eternal salvation. (See here) I have had several debates with the "Church of Christ" sect, sometimes known as "Campbellites" (because Alexander Campbell was the chief leader of those who were first called "Reformers" and who caused some division in Baptist churches), on this issue. Alexander Campbell and his father Thomas Campbell were at first Presbyterians, then became Baptists when they came to believe that only immersion was the proper mode of baptism. As time went on, however, he began to teach things that Baptists could not accept. He was one of the leaders in the "anti mission movement" along with those who came to be known as "Primitive" or "Old School" or "Hardshell" Baptists and for awhile was quite popular with the Baptists, even having debates with others in which he defended Baptist beliefs. This is why B.H. Carroll Jr. called Campbellites and Hardshells religious twins. (See these postings on this here and here)

In the following citation Campbell taught the truth about water baptism, arguing that water baptism does not really or actually remit sin, arguing that the blood of Christ does that. Rather, he taught, at the first that water baptism is when sins are washed away "formally," and follows actual cleansing by the blood of Christ applied by faith. I agree with this Baptististic view of Campbell. I cited these words of Campbell from his debate with Presbyterian W. L. McCalla (1823):

"The blood of Christ, then, really cleanses us who believe from all sin. Behold the goodness of God in giving us a formal proof and token, of it, by ordaining a baptism expressly "for the remission of sins." The water of baptism, then, formally washes away our sins. The blood of Christ really washes away our sins. Paul's sins were really pardoned when he believedyet he had no solemn pledge of the fact, no formal acquital, no formal purgation of his sins, until he washes them away in the water of baptism."

"The intelligent and well instructed Christian, however, is baptized to obtain the formal remission of his sins."

"He appointed baptism to be, to every one that believed the record he has given of his Son, a formal pledge on his part of that believer's personal acquittal or pardon..." (pg. 135-37)

The debate can be read (here)

In baptism a person makes a public confession and makes a pledge of fealty to Christ and the church. I Peter 3: 21 is a good text that helps to sustain Campbell's idea of "formal" remission of sins. I wrote on this in the context of my debates on water baptism with Campbellites. (See here) This is why baptism is called a "sacrament." In that post I wrote:

The English is simply a transliteration of the Latin word "sacramentum" which means an oath. That is the basic meaning of a sacrament. It means an oath, an obligation, a vow. In legal terminology it means a pledge...But this word had a particular meaning. It was used of a military oath of allegiance. A military oath of allegiance was called the sacramento, when the Roman armies made their oath of allegiance to their country and to their emperor."

Water baptism ceremoniously, pictorially, ritually, and "formally" washes away sins. This is what Annanias meant (who would be the one to baptize the one who was to become the Apostle Paul) when he said to Paul:

"And now why are you waiting? Arise and be baptized, and wash away your sins, calling on the name of the Lord." (Acts 22: 16 nkjv)

Water baptism served to show to others that new believers were identified with Christ and his followers. It is what a "badge" is to soldiers. It is a token, or formal proof, that sins have been washed away.

I am thinking about putting all my writings on the debate over the necessity of water baptism for salvation into its own blog as I have done with other subjects.

Sunday, September 28, 2025

Two Seed Baptist Ideology (XVI)



In this chapter we will continue our review of the apology given for Two Seedism by Elder T.P. Dudley of Kentucky in the early to mid nineteenth century. But, before we do this, I want to let the reader know that in my recent readings I have come across the entire review of Dudley's "Christian Warfare" as given by John M. Watson. It can be found in the "Signs of the Times" by editor Gilbert Beebe in Vol. xvii for Feb. 15, 1849. (See here) In that same issue Beebe responds to Watson's Review, from which we have previously cited. We will later perhaps give more citations from Beebe's response in the "Signs of the Times." In 1849 there was a good bit of exchange of views and discussion over the leading propositions of Two Seedism. We will give a good bit of this debate beginning in this chapter.

Since writing the previous chapter I have also noticed that Elder Wilson Thompson wrote an article for the Signs which shows that he did in fact believe in Two Seedism, the preexistence of the persons of the elect, the preexistence of the humanity of Christ, and the no change view of regeneration. I will post these citations in upcoming chapters, along with other citations from him that I have previously cited in years past in articles in the Old Baptist Test blog. So, Grigg Thompson, Wilson's oldest son, did not tell the truth when he said (as I remember reading somewhere) that his father did not hold Two Seed ideas. I will hunt for that citation where Grigg said this. It may be from the debates Grigg had with Elder Mark Bennett, who once was editor of the "Primitive Baptist" published in North Carolina, but who later left the Hardshells and joined the Missionaries, and then had a couple debates with Grigg Thompson. Or, it could be from a writing he sent to "The Primitive Baptist" periodical published in North Carolina. I have cited from these Thompson debates with Bennett previously in this blog.

So far we have identified several of the leaders of Two Seedism among the "Old School" Baptists: Daniel Parker, Gilbert Beebe, Samuel Trott, T. P. Dudley, and Wilson Thompson. We have also seen who were the first leaders of the opposition to Two Seedism among the Old Schoolers, "Primitive Baptists," or "Hardshells," such as John M. Watson, R.W. Fain, and John Clark. In upcoming chapters we will add to this number, from Elders George Y. Stipp, Lemuel Potter, C.H. Cayce, Grigg Thompson, etc. 

We have been citing from J. Taylor Moore's biography of Dudley, wherein he gives citations from Dudley and where he himself defends Dudley and Two Seed ideology. See Moore's writing (here). We will begin by reviewing an article that appeared in Beebe's "Signs of the Times" periodical, the first periodical for the Old School cause after the Black Rock Address in 1832 (that officially brought about the separation of anti mission Baptists from the general Baptist family), and written by Dudley and addressed to Beebe. Beebe, on more than one occasion, endorsed the views of Dudley and promoted the same Two Seed views in various writings, as we have seen in previous chapters. In that article Dudley seems to think that Beebe has backtracked on his Two Seed views. That article is titled "THE SOUL OF MAN" and written from Lexington, Ky., Aug.15, 1849. However, that article is not in the August 15th, 1849 issue of the "Signs of the Times" (as you can see by reading that issue here). It does appear in the October 1st issue (1849). In that article, as given by Moore, Dudley begins as follows:

"MY DEAR BROTHER BEEBE: 

From the moment I read your response to Elder Williams’ queries in No.12 of the SIGNS, I have had it in contemplation to write to you, and drop some suggestions for your consideration – knowing Elder Williams, and being satisfied that I know the motive which prompted him in propounding the queries to you, I was prepared for his exultation at your admitting that the soul is regenerated. That brother Beebe, has committed himself in his reply to Elder Williams, I think will be manifest upon his re-examining the following positions taken in his reply. “If what we have thus far written on this query be correct, then nothing in the christian is a new creature, but what was actually in Christ.” A little lower down on the same page you say, “And this quickening is the communication of new life to the soul, which was dead, by the which that soul is made alive, and becomes a new creature.” 

In upcoming chapters we may perhaps give the back and forth conversation or debate from Elder Samuel Williams of Lebanon, Ohio and Elder Gilbert Beebe on Two Seedism and published in the "Signs of the Times." It is in Beebe's reply to Williams that Dudley thinks Beebe has contradicted himself and upheld a view that is against Two Seedism, wherein Williams affirms that "the soul is regenerated" and the "soul is made alive and becomes a new creature." I think Dudley is right, that Beebe does contradict his previous writings in promoting the Two Seed idea about regeneration not changing a person's soul or making him a new creature. Later we will see not only Beebe's reply to Williams but his reply to Dudley also. Further, Elder Samuel Trott, from whom we have already cited, jumped into the debate and addressed remarks to Williams on the leading points of Two Seedism.

Wrote Dudley:

"Now, I ask brother Beebe, was the soul actually in Christ? If not, and I think on reflection, brother Beebe will admit it was not, are you not found in conflict with yourself? “And so it is written the first man Adam, was made a living soul.” “And he called their name Adam.” “The last Adam was made a quickening spirit.” “As is the earthy, such are they that are earthy; and as is the heavenly, such are they also that are heavenly.”

Beebe, in defending Two Seedism in previous writings, has upheld the view that being born again or regenerated made no change in the "Adam man." The "new creature" was "created in Christ Jesus" in past eternity, according to Beebe, and not when a man is converted. Being "born again" in time is simply the time when the previously begotten spirit of the children of God enters into the Adam man, according to Two Seedism. When it does enter the man, this eternal child of God is not changed, for he remains a pure holy spirit, nor does this entrance change the Adam man in either body, soul, or spirit. This is why this Two Seed idea of no change in regeneration came to be called the "hollow log" doctrine. It is a metaphor for the Two Seed idea of the new birth. Like as a rabbit enters into a hollow log and its entrance and presence therein does not change the log at all, so too does the preexistent child of God's entering into a human being in the new birth not change the man. Being "born again" to Beebe was simply a time when the entrance of the child of God into the Adam man "manifests" that he is now a God's child.

So, let us give some citations from the editorial that Beebe wrote as an answer to the questions of Elder Williams and to which Dudley felt the need to correct Beebe. It can be read (here) in the June 15th, 1849 issue of the "Signs of the Times" (Vol. XVII, No. 12) It is an editorial titled "Reply To The Queries Stated by Brother S. Williams, In His Letter of the 91 page".

Wrote Beebe:

"If brother Williams will admit that Christ is the only begotten Son of God, and that we are sons, which, of his own will he hath begotten; then he must also admit that we were begotten in him, as Mediatorial Head of the church. And if he denies this position, we challenge him or any other being to prove that we are or can be children of God in any other than a nominal sense.--Nor will it avail to say that we are vitally related to God by regeneration: for in regeneration that life which was and is in Christ only, is communicated to us. Regeneration does no more originate spiritual life, than generation does natural life. It does not originate, but it communicates to us that life and immortality which Christ only hath, and which cannot exist in us until Christ is formed in us the hope of glory. It will be found much easier to deny and denounce this doctrine than to overthrow it. In this we have not only a nominal union, but a union of existence--of Head and body."

So, being "born again" only makes a person a child of God in "a nominal sense"? The word "nominal" means "in name only." This is a novel, weird, and heterodox view of the Christian teaching about what it means to be "born again." The apostle John had a different idea about it however. He wrote:

"But as many as received Him, to them He gave the right to become children of God, to those who believe in His name: who were born, not of blood, nor of the will of the flesh, nor of the will of man, but of God." (John 1: 12-13 nkjv)

Beebe also denies that "regeneration" is the time when a sinner becomes vitally united to Christ. His view is that the children of God have existed from eternity and had a vital (life) union with Christ. According to John believers were not children of God before they believed and received Christ.

When Beebe says that "regeneration" does not "originate spiritual life" he is again denying what is clearly taught in scripture. Of course spiritual life has always existed, for God is Spirit and Life, but affirming that does not in any way infer that those who are given eternal life in time when they believe already had it from eternity! When he says that being born again "communicates" that "life and immortality" that Christ has always had, he thinks that this means that God "communicates" to an Adam or natural man this eternal child of God. Ridiculous, and yet many of the first "Primitive" or "Old School" Baptists believed it. It is highly ironic that Beebe would claim to be "primitive" or "old school" when he has such a new and novel view of what happens when a sinner is born again.

Beebe also says that his Two Seed view is not easy to refute or overthrow! How deluded was he and other Two Seed Primitive Baptists!

Wrote Beebe:

"Query 3. (As asked by Williams) "Were those quickened spirits (referred to in brother Trott's quotations from brother Dudley's paper) in the first Adam when he sinned? If not, were they ever dead in sins?" Answer: The souls of all God's people which are quickened and made alive by regeneration or by the communication of spiritual life to them--were all in Adam, did all sin in Adam--did all die in Adam--and were all left, so far as their existence was identified with Adam under the same wrath and condemnation that Adam was under; but that life of God which is communicated to them in regeneration, by which they that were dead are quickened and made alive, was not in Adam, did not sin in him, and never was dead in trespasses and sins."

Again, the error of Beebe is clearly seen in the above answer given to the questions asked of Williams. He makes a gigantic inferential leap that is completely without warrant. It is against reason and scripture. He thinks that the affirmation that the "life of God," or "spiritual life," being from eternity necessitates believing that the children of God existed from eternity! He falsely equates "life of God" with "children of God." This is clearly a case of "handling the word of God deceitfully" (II Cor. 4: 2), "corrupting the word of God," (II Cor. 2: 17) and "twisting" or "perverting" the scriptures. (II Peter 3: 16) As we will see, Williams affirms these very things in his attempts to "overthrow" the Two Seed view of Beebe.

Wrote Beebe:

"Query 4. (As asked by Williams) "Does the apostle mean that the man is a new creature, or that a new creature has come into the man?" 

"If what we have thus far written on this query be correct, then nothing in the christian "is a new creature" but what is actually in Christ."

"The. foregoing remarks are in answer to the first part of the query; the other branch of it remains to be answered, viz. "Or that a new creature has come into the man?" "We understand that the soul, not the natural body of the saint, is quickened in being born again. And this quickening is the communication of new life to the soul, which was dead, by the which that soul is made alive, and becomes a new creature. The life which is thus communicated, was not in that soul before he was born again; and this life is from Christ, who only hath immortality, and it is Christ; and consequently is the new, and not the old creation. And farther we believe that the same change substantially, which is effected in the soul by the new birth will also be effected in the bodies of all the saints, when that new and spiritual life which was given them in Christ Jesus before the world began, shall be communicated to them at their first resurrection; so that they shall not be raised up out of their graves in their old Adamic natures, but as particles of the new creature, "which after God, is created in righteousness and true holiness." 

It is these statements by Beebe that provoked Dudley to write to the "Signs of the Times" and to make the comments he did as cited above. He thinks Beebe has contradicted himself by those comments, and indeed he does. Perhaps it shows that at this date (1849) that Beebe, like some other Two Seeders, were beginning to doubt the truthfulness of their views on the new birth. Later we will see where Williams later writes to the Signs to tell Beebe how glad he was to hear Beebe affirm that the soul of man was made spiritually alive when he was regenerated or born again. He does still emphasize that the eternal life that the sinner receives in his soul in being born of God in time existed from eternity, and that this is equated with children of God existing from eternity. 

In response to Beebe's editorial reply to the questions of Williams, we have the following written to Beebe and the "Signs of the Times" by "the Brethren About The Fort Mountain." I will give some of the leading parts of that communication.

"Dear Brother Beebe: In Number Ten, of the present volume of the Signs of the Times, we notice a communication from Brother Barton, on the subject of love being the bond of union."

"And passing over several remarks from Brother Trott, which we, the brethren, do not think exactly accord with our views, we, Brother Barton and the Ketocton brethren, are asked, "to point out any definite period in time where Christ was made (or created) a quickening Spirit, and then first stood as the Head of spiritual life in believers." 

By "Brother Barton" Beebe intends Elder Thomas Barton (1787-1870), a close friend of Beebe and yet reluctant to accept all of the Two Seed views of Beebe and Trott. He was present at the "Black Rock Convention" in 1832 when several Hyper Calvinistic churches declared non fellowship with other Baptists who supported missions, theological education, etc. 

From the above letter from the "Fort Mountain" brethren it appears that Barton believed what the Fort Mountain brethren believed, which was a denial of two of the leading ideas of Two Seedism, the preexistence of the children of God, and the no change view of regeneration.

They continued:

"We, the brethren about the Fort Mountain, by our experience and the word of Truth, never were taught to believe in any other quickening power than the Holy Ghost: neither do we believe that the Holy Ghost by his renewing us in the spirit of our minds (souls) created little independent gods in us; or that our Adamic nature is pure, in whole, or in part. Neither do we believe that the Head of the church is a creature, and that we are the creatures of that creature, this, we consider would be degrading the Head...but the spirit giveth life" (or quickeneth) and that spirit of life, or life giving spirit, is a self existent principle of life, and can, and does impart new life, spiritual life to sinners dead in trespasses and sins, and this new life is planted in the soul of the sinner, and is the new man, and eternal life."

This is a denial of the Two Seed idea that the dead sinner is not changed, does not go from being spiritually dead to being spiritually alive.

They continued:

"Brother Trott has quoted two texts as proof of the creatureship of Christ, we do not understand them as he does; but we assure our brother, we desire to give the fairest construction that we can to the Tenor of Truth.--The first is Rev. 3:14, "And unto the angel of the church of the Laodiceans write; these things saith the Amen, the faithful and true Witness, the beginning of the Creation of God." Great stress is laid on these words "the beginning of the Creation of God." Let us compare it with the 8th verse of the 1st chapter, "I am the Alpha and the Omega, the beginning and the end saith the Lord, which is, and which was, and which is to come, the Almighty." How the beginning? The first creature that God ever created? no, for it is written, "In the beginning God created the Heaven and the Earth." And he calls himself the Almighty in Rev. 1:8. He is the beginning of Creation, none ever created before him. He is the author of Creation, as will clearly appear from the second text quoted, Col. 1:15, "Who is the image of the invisible God, and the firstborn of every Creature." 

In earlier chapters we showed how the Two Seeders were semi-Arian in their views about Christ not being the Son of God by eternal generation, but denoting his being begotten or created as a Mediator, which involved him having three natures rather than two. We have also addressed how they are very similar to the way Arians interpret Rev. 3: 14 and  Col. 1: 15. We made the same remarks that the above brethren did in response to this Arianism.

They continue:

"He is not born first, if it has reference to his humanity, for he was not born for four thousand years after the Creation. What can the first born mean? If you will read the 16, 17, 18, and 19th verses after the one quoted, it will appear very clearly; that he is before all Creatures, that he is the Creator of all creatures." 

Christ being the "firstborn" is true in several respects in scripture. As respects his divinity, he is not begotten in the same sense that humans are begotten, nor in the same way he was begotten of God in his humanity when conceived by the Holy Spirit in the womb of the virgin Mary. As the eternal Son of God he is the "only" or "unique" Son of God, which is intended simply to convey the idea that he and the Father are one, or equal. The term "firstborn" in this respect denotes Christ's rank over all creatures. 

Interesting is the fact that in this same issue of the Signs Elder Grigg Thompson writes a short piece and says nothing about the things being discussed relative to Two Seedism. Why was this? Why did so many Hardshells write often to the Signs of the Times at first without denouncing Two Seed ideas? Especially in light of the fact that many of them later decided to publicly and intensely oppose it? Albert Barnes in his commentary wrote:

"He does not say that, in all respects, he resembled the first-born in a family; nor does he say that he himself was a creature, for the point of his comparison does not turn on these things, and what he proceeds to affirm respecting him is inconsistent with the idea of his being a created being himself. He that "created all things that are in heaven and that are in earth," was not himself created. That the apostle did not mean to represent him as a creature, is also manifest from the reason which he assigns why he is called the first-born. "He is the image of God, and the first-born of every creature, for - ὅτι hoti - by him were all things created." That is, he sustains the elevated rank of the first-born, or a high eminence over the creation, because by him "all things were created in heaven and in earth." 

In the next chapter we will continue to cite from the debate that was carried on in the Signs of the Times in 1849. 

Friday, September 26, 2025

Update, Prayers Needed

This past week my wife Paulette found out that her cancer in one of her lungs has returned. It is the same lung she had a cancer spot in twelve years ago and which was killed by radiation. On October 14 she will have a PET scan to obtain more needed information about the tumor and then decide what is next. I am hoping that it can be taken care of again by radiation and not surgery, for I don't think she is strong enough for such. We ask for your prayers. On September 14th she turned 73. She has had COPD (emphysema) for about eight or nine years, and has been on oxygen ever since. She has taken all this as a super trooper. If we both make it till October 25th, we will have been married for forty years. I thank God in my prayers each day that he gave her to me. 

If I live till October 5th, I will reach my 70th year. A milestone. When I was young I had it in my head that I would not make it to old age. I have my own health issues. I have a heart stent, put in when I had a heart attack about 4-5 years ago. I also was diagnosed with pulmonary fibrosis five years ago. My older brother Eddie died from it in June. He had it for twelve years. Most don't live that long. So, I know my time is short. 

I am hoping I can finish my series on Two Seedism. I am doing a lot of reading from old "Primitive" or "Old School" Baptists periodicals from the nineteenth century and taking notes. I also would like to finish some other series I have begun, or want to begin. I want to finish my writings on the four horsemen of the Apocalypse. I have written extensively on the white horse, red horse, and black horse. So I only have to write yet on the pale green horse. I also have some finishing chapters on my long series titled "God's Elect or World's Elite?" I also want to write a series on "prevenient grace." I also have hundreds of initial drafts on numerous subjects and biblical texts. 

I am thankful for brethren Kevin Fralick and Ken Mann for being contributing editors to this blog. I hope they will keep writing after I am gone to be with the Lord. I am thankful for our readers, the number of which grows each month, setting records. I have numerous blogs, many of which are for specific subjects. See the link list on this web page. We are on track to have a hundred thousand page views this month for all these blogs. 

Brothers and Sisters, I believe we are on the verge of the time of the Apocalypse and Great Tribulation which will "come upon all the world to try them which dwell upon the earth." (Rev. 3: 10) I have a separate blog to which I am moving all my writings on the second coming. I possibly will add to this in the coming months, the Lord willing. I am thrilled that we have seen evidences of a possible end time revival and ingathering, with many sinners turning to the Lord before it is too late. We saw preludes to this in the Asbury phenomenon. Brother Mann and I both wrote articles on this back in 2023. (See this page for a list of those articles - here) We see it now in the aftermath of the martyrdom of Charlie Kirk, a warrior for the Lord. For years now I have been praying for an end time revival before the "time of the Gentiles is fulfilled" (Luke 21: 24). I have been praying for a restoration of the charismata, for the miraculous gifts. Paul said that we should "earnestly desire spiritual gifts, especially to prophesy." (I Cor. 14: 1) If the rapture occurs towards the end of the great Tribulation, which I believe is the case, then end time believers will surely need these gifts in order to be kept safe. Since they will not be able to buy or sell when the Antichrist reigns, being able to turn stones to bread would be a great help. If saints will then be unable to pay for a doctor, gifts of healing will then be of great help. Etc. In the days of the Judges we read:

"Gideon said to Him, “O my lord, if the LORD is with us, why then has all this happened to us? And where are all His miracles which our fathers told us about, saying, ‘Did not the LORD bring us up from Egypt?’ But now the LORD has forsaken us and delivered us into the hands of the Midianites.” (Judges 6: 13 nkjv)

I don't think there will be any reason for the saints in the time of the great tribulation to say "where are all his miracles" because they will be occurring often as a way to "keep" the saints from the evils of that awful time.

Let us be ready for what is coming. Let us warn our neighbors and friends. Let us do all we can to win souls to Christ before it is too late.

Wednesday, September 24, 2025

Signs in the Heavens?




“Immediately after the tribulation of those days the sun will be darkened, and the moon will not give its light; the stars will fall from heaven, and the powers of the heavens will be shaken." (Matt. 24: 29)

Over the past month I have watched numerous videos on two particular comets, or interstellar objects, that are in our solar system, one called 3/Atlas the other called Swan (or c2025 R2). One such is given by astrophysicist Michio Kaku titled "9 Hidden Objects Discovered Escorting 3I/ATLAS Through Our Solar System!" (See YouTube video here). One I watched today is titled "Seven visitors Are Approaching Earth, 3I/ATLAS Brings its Friends" (See here). This video tells us that there are seven other comets also in our solar system and is what some are calling a "swarm." Just awhile ago a new video with updated information has appeared in YouTube by Kaku and gives amazing information. Instead of seven other comets there was suddenly nine, and then ten, with more showing up each day. These other comet-like interstellar objects are putting out massive amounts of power, more than Atlas which is leading the way. Each is emanating ten gigawatts of power! (See that video here) It gives more information for us laymen. These speeding objects seem to be contradicting known laws of physics. They seem to be made of materials unknown to us, with properties never seen before.

The two leading comets, especially Atlas, are not behaving like a comet and scientists cannot say it is a comet. Some speculate it is an alien spaceship. Atlas is travelling faster than anything we have ever seen. It also slowed down when approaching the sun (on the other side from earth), something that comets do not do. It has also changed course, another thing that is odd. Many think it is a machine. It is not composed of water and ice and dust as are most comets. They are made of nickel, cobalt, and materials we do not know, and they radiate light and power, even bending light. In the next month Atlas will reappear, after being hidden on the far side of the sun, so that our telescopes can track it again. Swan is coming from another part of deep space, outside of our solar system, and appears to be coming to intercept Atlas, with each coming near the far side of the sun at about the same time. Fascinating. Some NASA and other space agencies say it will come close to the planet Mars and has a chance of hitting it if it alters course a little. If that happens, we can expect Earth to receive many fragments from that explosion.

Elon Musk recently hurried up a rocket to try to get to Atlas. However, it is going so fast that it cannot be caught. He hopes however to get into its long unique tail and obtain information about its makeup. Other space agencies of other governments are deeply concerned and racing to send up rockets in order to gain more information about what is going on. 

The above text tells us that there will be things happening in outer space, in the second heaven, in conjunction with the return of Christ and the day of wrath, judgment, and tribulation. He says "the powers of the heavens will be shaken." Could this swarm of comets be a sign of this? Notice also these verses:

"looking for and hastening the coming of the day of God, because of which the heavens will be dissolved, being on fire, and the elements will melt with fervent heat." (II Peter 3: 12 nkjv)

"Therefore I will shake the heavens, And the earth will move out of her place, In the wrath of the LORD of hosts And in the day of His fierce anger." (Isa. 13: 13; See also Heb. 12: 26-27)

Is this swarm of comets the result of this shaking? A prelude to it? In the Book of Revelation, "stars falling from heaven" appears in a few instances, notably in Revelation 6:13 where they fall like figs from a tree "shaken" by a wind, signaling a catastrophic event following the sixth seal. In Revelation 8:10-12 and 9:1, it describes a great burning star falling onto water.

Could these comets be angels and their chariots? The Bible does describe angels, horses, and chariots of fire, particularly in 2 Kings 6:17 where the prophet Elisha's servant sees the mountain "full of horses and chariots of fire" surrounding them for protection. The book of Psalms also mentions God's "chariots" and "thousands of angels" in Psalm 68:17. The coming of Christ will be attended by angels, angels who will come to gather together the elect from the four corners of the world (Matt. 24: 31), and with angels who will be extensively involved in the judgments of the Apocalypse.

My only problem with believing that these comets are such is the fact that it seems to be too soon, for this shaking of the heavens seems to occur after the judgments of the four horsemen of the Apocalypse and not till the sixth seal is opened.

Some scientists have also suggested that these "space travelers" have been impacting the sun. There is a big hole in the sun ("coronal hole) that some think is being caused by Atlas, even though they are normal. It is approaching the other side of the sun and will reach its closest point to the Sun, or perihelion, in late October 2025. Others believe they are, directly or indirectly, causing earth tremors and quakes. There is a video titled "Earthquakes Are Multiplying as 3I/ATLAS Wakes Up the Sun" (here).

I don't know anything for sure about all this. But, I do know that what is occurring in our solar system at the present time is strange.

What think ye?

Tuesday, September 23, 2025

The "Ablest Primitive Baptist Minister"?




Elder Sylvester Hassell, the leading "Primitive Baptist" historian, recognized as such by Hardshell Baptists, in his and his father's (C.B. Hassell) history titled "History of the Church of God" wrote the following in chapter XIX (See here):

"Elder Wilson Thompson (1788-1866), a native of Hillsborough, Kentucky, is regarded as the ablest Primitive Baptist minister that ever lived in the United States." 

How "Primitive Baptists" can hold this man in such high esteem is bewildering. Today's Hardshells mostly reject the idea that one must believe by the gospel to be born again, and yet Thompson did. Thompson was a Modalist or Sabellian, denying the ontological Trinity, and today's Hardshells would reject any minister who taught such. Thompson was also a Two Seed Primitive Baptist and most Hardshells today would say that they have previously declared non fellowship for such. 

I have written numerous articles on Wilson Thompson. I know a lot about his views and his life. I read his biography when I was a young Hardshell. You can read it (here). I have also read his other books: 1) "The Triumph of Truth or, The Scripture of True Guide to Zion's Pilgrims; in Which Some of the Most Important Branches of the Christian Theology are" (1821) and 2) "Simple Truth" (1825) and 3) "An Address to the Baptists of the United States" (1850). You can read the first (here), the second (here). His autobiography can also be read online (here). One can also read the "Signs of the Times" periodical from the 1830s till Thompson's death in 1866. 

I became a member of "Thompson Memorial Primitive Baptist Church" in Franklin, Ohio where my father was the pastor and who chose that name for the church which he founded. He would talk to me a lot about Wilson Thompson, Grigg Thompson his eldest son, and his other relatives, J.M. Thompson and R.W. Thompson, all who were leading Hardshell Baptist ministers. He had such a high esteem for the Thompson clan that he thought it was a good name for their church, especially seeing that it was in the area where Wilson and Grigg Thompson lived for many of their years. Grigg was once a member of the Hamilton (Ohio) "Primitive Baptist Church" in the 1820s (a church he was excluded from for awhile and then reinstated). I was born in Hamilton. My sister, who is a Hardshell Baptist, is a member of Thompson Memorial (though they have changed the name since father's death) and she lives in Lebanon, Ohio which is where Wilson labored for years in pastoring the church there. That old church building is still there though the church has died. Father used to drive me by it. When I visit my sister I drive by the old building. 

I am also well versed in the history of the "Miami Association" of Baptists, taking in the first Baptist churches along the Miami river, a river I lived beside when I lived in Hamilton. It was constituted in 1798, five years before Ohio became a state. Thompson was a leader in this association along with Elder Stephen Gard. When I moved with my mother and step father to a little town called "Reily" I would visit, sometimes with father, the old church building there that was once a Baptist church that split and then disbanded over the division over the "anti mission movement." Father used to tell me - "Gilbert Beebe came through here and preached here." It was called "Indian Creek Regular Baptist Church" and I have a picture of it and a writing on it (here). I.T. Saunders, of Hamilton, was the clerk of the Miami Association for many years and he often wrote to the "Signs of the Times" and supported Beebe. He is buried in the cemetery at the Indian Creek Church, a cemetery I often walked in when I was a teenager and young Hardshell Baptist. Saunders was a staunch supporter of Wilson Thompson and defended him and agreed with him on his denial of the Trinity and took issue with Elder James Osbourn, a founding father of "The Primitive Baptist Church," who accused the Miami Association of holding to heretical views on the Trinity. I don't doubt that he also, along with many others in the Miami Association, believed in Two Seedism. 

I have read Thompson's books, the writings and sermons and debates of his son Grigg, and also the writings of John M. Thompson who served churches in Indiana and in the Miami valley and who was a writer for "The Primitive Monitor" for several years in the late 19th century. I believe he is the nephew of Wilson. Father and I would also talk about Wilson's grandson R.W. Thompson who was also a leading Hardshell in the late 19th century. He was born in Fayette county Indiana as was J.M. Thompson. R.W. was the editor and founder of "The Primitive Monitor" periodical. I have read old issues of this periodical. 

Said Hassell further:

"He moved to Lebanon, Ohio, on a call from the church at that place, and while living there he published two books, “Simple Truth” and “Triumph of Truth,” opposing Fullerism, and thus brought upon himself much persecution. Considering “person” to mean a distinct and separate individual, he objected to the saying that there were three persons in the Godhead; though he maintained the unity of God, and, at the same time, the divinity of the Father, Son and Spirit."

I have written about Wilson's views on the Trinity, along with critiquing Sylvester Hassell's narrative of his views (as stated in the above citation), in this post (here). Clearly Hassell, in order not to deface the reputation of this founding father of his denomination, tried to downplay the views of Thompson, for in other sections of his history, Hassell calls Sabellianism a heresy. Also, though Hassell exults in Thompson affirming that "regeneration" is accomplished apart from means, he does not tell his readers that Thompson believed that the new birth followed regeneration and necessitated believing the gospel. Also, the two books Hassell mentions above were not so much an attack on "Fullerism" but on the Trinity and a defense of Parker's Two Seedism. Hassell does not mention that in those books Thompson affirmed the preexistence of the man Christ Jesus, the preexistence of the children of God, and their eternal vital union with Christ, and his denial that Christ's being the "Son of God" denoted Christ's divinity. 

Said Hassell further:

"In regard to the use and effect of the preached gospel, Elder Thompson held, with the majority of Old School Baptists, that it is not the means of imparting spiritual life to the dead sinner; that as no means can be used to give life to one literally dead, even so no means can be used to give eternal life to those who are dead in sins; that, as all temporal means are used to feed, nourish and strengthen living subjects, and not dead ones, so the preaching of the gospel is the medium through which God is pleased to instruct, feed and comfort His renewed children, and not by which He gives life to the dead sinner whom the Spirit alone can quicken; that the gospel is the proclamation of good tidings of great joy to those who have a hearing ear and an understanding heart to receive it, and to these it is the power of God unto salvation, saving them from the false doctrines of men, and feeding and making them strong in the truth." 

Two things need to be stated in reply to Hassell, who is writing to defend Thompson, even though he knew that he held to unscriptural ideas. First, Hassell does not tell us that Thompson in his early days believed that the gospel was a means in regeneration or the new birth. Second, even when he changed his mind and accepted the view that regeneration was effected without the means of the word of God, he still held to the view that the new birth was effected by the means of the gospel. He, like many Baptists in his day, believed that regeneration and being born again were not the same thing, affirming that regeneration corresponded to the implantation of the seed in the womb and the new birth was deliverance from the womb. So, he believed that being born again was effected by the means of the word of truth. Further, Hassell, in the above citation, acknowledges that not all "Old School Baptists" denied means, although he wants the readers (who are Hardshells for the most part) to believe that the majority of the first "Primitive" or "Old School" Baptists denied means in either regeneration or rebirth, but I don't believe that such is the case. Hassell certainly did not prove his assertion. 

Wilson Thompson Denied The Trinity

In my posting "Wilson Thompson's Heresies" (See here) back in 2013 I cited these words of Thompson from his two books mentioned previously.

Thompson wrote:

"...so the God in Christ, or Christ as God, was the only Lord God of the apostles, to the exclusion of all persons distinct from Him." "Some may try to evade the force of all these plain, and pointed Scriptures; by acknowledging that Christ is God, in common with the Father and Spirit; but yet a distinct person, from them both. To destroy this futile and illogical refuge, I will adduce a few pointed texts, which will be like fire among thorns, to this cobweb refuge."

"Now, if the Godhead consists of three equal, and distinct persons, and Christ be only the second one of these, how woefully the apostle missed it, and how improper the caution in the text; but if the apostle be correct, and the whole fullness of the Godhead, to the exclusion of all distinct persons, be in Christ bodily, how woefully the tri-personal scheme misses it, and how well timed the warning given by the apostle to the church, to beware lest any man spoil them through philosophy, etc."

"...neither is there one text that says anything about three persons in the Godhead." In a small Book which I published in 1821 entitled “Simple Truth;” I said something against the notion of three distinct persons in the Godhead; as being a defect in the Trinitarian plan of reasoning. On this account, some men, not very well disposed toward me, have seized this one reference as a good opportunity to poison the minds of their friends against me, by falsely saying, both, in print and verbally, that I had treated the doctrine of the Trinity with the utmost contempt. This is a false allegation, but I hold nothing against any man on this account; to his own master he stands, or falls. By the word Trinity; I understand three in oneBy the divine Trinity; I understand the Father, the Word, and the Holy Ghost; being oneBut I never thought, nor do I yet think, that these three must necessarily be distinct, divine, and equal persons of one indivisible essence, and each of these persons, separately considered, truly and properly God, and yet all of them but one God, in order to the existence of a trinity; nor did I believe, that the three must necessarily be persons at all, in order to the existence of a trinity; nor do I yet believe it."

So, we say to Hassell (even though he is in his grave) and to all those who are "Primitive, Old School, Hardshell" Baptists, is this the man you think is so great as Hassell says?

Wilson Thompson Was a Two Seeder

I have been writing a series on the history and heresies of Two Seedism, or Parkerism, in the Old Baptist Test blog and I even have a separate blog which has all my writings on that subject (See here). I have mentioned Wilson Thompson relative to whether he was or was not a Two Seeder. I plan, in upcoming chapters, to give citations from Thompson that show this to be the case. I ask every Hardshell Baptist who reads this write up this question - "is Thompson the ablest Primitive Baptist minister that ever lived" as Hassell affirms in view of the fact that he was a Sabellian and Two Seeder? In spite of the fact that he believed that the children of God have existed from eternity? In spite of the fact that he believed that the humanity of Christ was what was begotten as the Son of God in eternity? 

Thompson wrote the following which shows that he was a Two Seeder:

"...we are lost when we go to hunt the antiquity of this union. We can only say it is as old as God, for God is love; but love must have an object or it ceases to be, for I cannot love and love nothing; love is that endearing or uniting perfection of God, which could only exist, so long as the object beloved existed; nor could God be love before the object was beloved, neither can love be controlled, for it brings forth, produces, or sets up its own object, that is, must necessarily have an object, in order to have its own existence; and as God is self-existent and independent, His existence as love, brought forth its object, which was the soul of Christ with all His people in it, and the very existence of God as king could only be because He had subjects: for a king without a kingdom, is no king at all; so love without an object is no love at all. So we see that in order to our speaking of God as being love, or His existing as love, there must be an object beloved, and in order to His being a king there must be subjects, and thus the pre-existent soul of Christ, was the object of the love of God and His people in it were the subjects of His kingdom, and Christ was the medium of operation through whom God exercises His authority in the government of His kingdom; for in the pre-existing soul of Christ, the subjects of this kingdom were chosen, before the world, when we speak or read of a choice being made in Christ before the world, we are not to understand, that God was looking through Adams posterity, and picking out one here, and another there, and writing their names in the book of life, and refusing the rest, for they were chosen in Christ before the world and not in Adam; for He did not exist before creation; and the choice was not an act that took place, or was planned some time after the existence of God, either before the world or since, but was a consequence of and inseparable from the existence of God as king, and this kingdom was organized in the pre-existent soul of Christ..."  (DISCOURSE #5 On the Atonement, and Man's Justification by it. in "Simple Truth")

In my present series on "Two Seedism" I show where not only Daniel Parker, but Gilbert Beebe, Samuel Trott, and T.P. Dudley also taught the leading premises of Two Seedism. The latter three were the foremost defenders of Two Seedism. But, we must not exclude Wilson Thompson. The fact that he was a Two Seeder is generally a fact kept concealed by Hassell and a fact that most Hardshell Baptists who hold Thompson in such high regard as Hassell do not know. Thompson was a close friend of Daniel Parker and never said anything against him or his view on the "two seeds." He was also a close friend of Beebe and often wrote into the "Signs of the Times" and never did Thompson object to the Two Seed views being promoted in that periodical. I have shown where Dudley had Thompson's endorsement of his Two Seed writings. In fact, as I will show in upcoming chapters in my series on Two Seedism, he wrote articles in that periodical defending Two Seedism. The above citation also shows that the believed 1) in the preexistence of the humanity of Christ, and 2) the preexistence and vital actual union of the elect, or good seed, in Christ from eternity. These are two foundational beliefs of Two Seedism. In this way he was not only a Sabellian, but an Arian also, for like other Two Seeders he believed their views, which deny that Christ is God by being the Son of God, and affirms that his being begotten by the Father before the world began only produced his human soul, and that he begat all the souls of the children of God at the same time.

In "Warren County Local History" by Dallas Bogan, he writes about "The First Baptists In Ohio And Warren County" (See here) and says the following about Wilson Thompson:

"Salary compensations for the pastor were not noted in the Lebanon Church until 1827, when Elder Wilson Thompson's salary was fixed at $500 annually. The pastors generally had some other means of support other than preaching. Some of them were farmers or farm hands. Elder Thompson practiced medicine during his tenure as pastor." 

Isn't that interesting, my Hardshell brothers? A large majority of the first Hardshells vehemently denounced as an evil the paying of salaries or stipulated amounts for their pastors, but their "ablest minister" took a salary! I did not know that Thompson practiced medicine! Of course, back then, anyone could put up a shingle and say he is a doctor for there were no state licensing or requirements. 

Bogan writes further:

"Responsibility for the division into branches of the Old School and New School appears to have been a publication entitled "Simple Truth," authored by Elder Thompson. Another book written by Elder Thompson was entitled "Triumph of Truth." He became a leader of the Old School Baptists and opposed all religious and moral associations except the church. A meeting of the Lebanon Baptist Church was held on Saturday, October 1, 1836. With this gathering a decision was made to divide the church into two distinctive branches. The Old School branch with sixty-one members formed the West Baptist Church. The New School branch with forty-two members formed the East Baptist Church."

The division in the Miami Association in the 1830s was devastating. The New School party grew and the Old School party died. Old Indian Creek Church, mentioned above, though once a thriving church, died over both the anti mission controversy and the Two Seed controversy. The churches that at first sided with the Old Schoolers were very numerous up and down the Miami River, from Cincinnati, through Hamilton, Middletown, Dayton, etc. I have seen old minutes of the Old School faction of the Miami Association for the late 19th century and seen where in Butler county, where Hamilton is located, there were numerous Hardshell churches. Today there are hardly any. What a falling away! This has a lot to do as a result of the work of Wilson Thompson.