My articles on Two Seedism in my "Hardshell Baptist Cult" book (blog) were written many years ago, and in chapters 37-39 (See here, here, and here) one can see many citations on "eternal vital union" and on the no change view of regeneration or "hollow log" doctrine. In those chapters I cited from those who opposed these ideas, from Elder Grigg Thompson and Elder Lemuel Potter. We will elaborate on Thompson's and Potter's attack on Two Seedism in upcoming chapters. We will also cite from others. We could multiply citations from Beebe, Trott, and others to show what their views were on Two Seedism, for they were always writing to promote that heresy.
We have been looking at the debate that occurred in the "Signs of the Times" for the year 1849 and in this chapter we will continue to do so. We could give numerous citations from the 1830s also that show where Beebe and Trott and others were promoting Two Seedism, which I did in those three chapters mentioned above that are in "The Hardshell Baptist Cult" writings. In fact, as I will elaborate on in a future chapter, it seems clear to me as a historian of the "Primitive" or "Old School" Baptist sect that it was Wilson Thompson who should be credited with first promoting Two Seedism and not Daniel Parker.
Let us begin with a look at what was written in the "Signs of the Times" for Sept. 1st, 1849 (Vol. XVII, No. 17; See here). In that issue Elder Beebe responds to E.S. Dudley (not the same person as T.P. Dudley) who opposed Two Seedism. I will not cite all that E.S. Dudley wrote and published by Beebe, but will rather begin with Beebe's response, under the title "Reply to Brother E.S. Dudley." Wrote Beebe:
"We profess but little acquaintance with metaphysics, and our style and manner of writing may be too awkward and clumsy to be readily comprehended by brethren of more refined attainments."
I find this remark by Beebe quite ironic, for he and his Two Seed brethren were indeed deeply acquainted with metaphysics and mysticism. In Elder Lemuel Potter's book against the doctrine of the eternal seed, titled "A DENIAL OF THE DOCTRINE OF ETERNAL CHILDREN, OR TWO SEEDS IN THE FLESH," and under the sub heading "THE NEW BIRTH" (1880), he disagrees with what Beebe said about metaphysics. That book can be read (here) at the Primitive Baptist Library's Web page. In that book Potter wrote: "About half a century ago metaphysics was introduced among the Old School Baptists..." This he said in reference to Two Seedism, which he also confessed to being inclined to believe himself when he was young in the ministry.
Beebe also wrote in his rebuttal to E.S. Dudley:
"Our beloved brother inquires, "If the existence, merely, of the life of the church, in Christ justifies the idea of seminal union, may we not also claim seminal union on account of the natural life; seeing that we derive both from God?"
That is an excellent question, and which shows where Two Seed ideology leads. It leads to the idea that every human being has existed from eternity in God. Wrote Beebe in reply:
"If our dear brother can perceive, from his own experience, from his own reading of the scriptures, and from all that has been said and written on this important subject, no higher relationship than that the children of God exist in their spiritual life only as creatures of the creative power of God, we must despair of being able to enlighten him by anything we can say."
Notice that Beebe does not answer the penetrating question. All he does is repeat his thesis that all the children of God existed in their spiritual life in eternity, although created, which is a contradiction. That is why many who opposed Two Seedism would often mock the Two Seeders for believing in "eternal created beings." But, how can what is created be eternal, without a beginning? But, this is exactly what the Two Seeders taught, especially as it relates to the begetting of Christ the Mediator and Son of God, which they say implies derivation, and a point in time when he was created or begotten, but who would also say that Christ has always been, from eternity, the Mediator or God-Man.
The argument by Dudley was that Beebe would have to say that the life given to Adam was likewise already seminally in God prior to his being created. In fact, this ideology would force Two Seeders to affirm that every created thing has been "in" God from eternity.
Another idiocy of the Two Seeders is that they must affirm that not only were descendants of Adam in Adam but also in every other ancestor of any person. In other words, not only did I exist as a person in Adam, but also in all my ancestors. So, when my father got married, I also got married by being in him. When he sinned, I also sinned in him. Etc. But, all this is ludicrous and incredible. They carry way too far the implications of Paul's words in Hebrews 7: 9-10, where Paul says that Levi was "in Abraham" and therefore Levi paid tithes when Abraham paid tithes to Melchisedec. They ignore, it seems, Paul's preface to those statements, where he said "so to speak," which simply means that Levi was in some sense in Abraham. But, Two Seeders "went to seed" about this text. (pun intended) The phrase "in the loins of" is a biblical expression that refers to being a descendant or part of an ancestor's lineage. It doesn't mean Levi was biologically present inside of Abraham, but that he was part of the same ancestral line, and therefore Abraham's actions were representative of Levi's future actions.
Every saved person was in the mind and heart of God from eternity. But, that does not mean that every saved person actually existed. We also say that all humans were "in Adam," as Paul affirmed, because God appointed him to be the head and representative of the whole human race. It is also true that, in a manner of speaking, everyone was "in" Adam seminally, because they come from his seed. But, affirming these things does not necessitate that we believe that every human existed in Adam as a person. An oak tree is derived from the acorn, yea even from the first acorn, but that does not mean that an existing tree, as a tree, existed in the acorn. Adam's body came from the dust of the ground. Should we say then that his body preexisted in the dust? Of course not. Yet, the proposition that affirms that saved people have existed from eternity by a "seminal union" with Christ and God the Father leads to the same kind of absurdity. I could build a table from the wood of an oak tree. Likewise, it would be absurd for me to say "that table preexisted in the tree."
The only union between God or the Son of God with the elect (foreknown believers) before the world was created, or before anything else, i.e. in eternity past, was the one that was envisioned by the Father, Son (or Word), and Spirit. This was not an actual union, or a vital union of life, because the elect did not then exist, but it was a union ordained in God's eternal decrees of what shall in time be.
The elect were not made "new creatures," or "created in Christ," before they had physical existence, nor before they were converted to faith in Christ and turned from their sins. When Paul says that the elect, or believers, were "chosen in Christ before the foundation of the world" (Eph. 1:4), and "who has saved us and called us with a holy calling, not according to our works, but according to His own purpose and grace which was given to us in Christ Jesus before time began" (II Tim. 1: 9 nkjv), Two Seeders say that this proves that Christ as a man existed before time began and all the elect also literally existed in Christ before time began. But, this is not what Paul is saying. They forget that God often in scripture "calls those things which do not exist as though they did" (Rom. 4: 17 nkjv). So, what is being described is what is occurring in the divine council between the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit.
It is interesting that John Gill often said things that came very close to affirming Two Seed ideology, as we have previously seen, though he denied the preexistence of the humanity of Christ. Here is his commentary on II Timothy 1: 9:
"...but according to his own purpose and grace; salvation is according to both: it is according to the purpose of God; God resolved upon the salvation of some; in pursuance of this resolution, he set up Christ as the Mediator; and it being necessary that he should be man, this was agreed to, and a body was prepared him...It is a gift, and a free gift, not at all depending upon any conditions in the creature, and entirely proceeding from the sovereign will of God; and it was a gift from eternity; there was not only a purpose of grace in God's heart, and a promise of it so early, but there was a real donation of it in eternity: and though those to whom it was given did not then personally exist, yet Christ did, and he existed as a covenant head and representative of His people; and they were in Him, as members of Him, as represented by Him, being united to Him; and this grace was given to Him for them, and to them in Him; in Whom they were chosen, and in Whom they were blessed with all spiritual blessings."
Here Gill denies that God's people personally existed before time began. He does acknowledge that Christ existed. Surely he means Christ in his divinity as the Son of God existed, and not in his humanity, as we have seen, and shows that he did not follow Hussey in his belief in the eternal humanity of Christ. However, in the above citation he does say that Christ was "set up as a Mediator," and yet says that it was "necessary that he should be man" and that "a body was prepared for him." So, Gill in this instance shows that he was coming very close to affirming Two Seed propositions. So, how and when was this body prepared for Christ? If his humanity was essential for him being the appointed Mediator, and Gill says he was set up as a Mediator before time began, then he is asserting that Christ's human body existed before time began.
Wrote Beebe:
"But our brother adds, "He bestows one in generation and the other in regeneration." This is true, God is the author of both natural and spiritual life, and the former he gave us in Adam, and it is developed in us personally in generation, and it is also true that he gave us spiritual life in Christ, our second or anti-typical Adam, and that that spiritual life is communicated to the saints by regeneration; but what is generation? And what is regeneration? The former is a manifestation or development of that natural seed, which in the natural creation God created in the natural Adam. Nothing can by generation be produced in that relation to Adam that had no seminal existence, in him. Regeneration is the communication of that spiritual life which God gave us in Christ, and which Christ as the Son of God is to his children. Generation manifests us in the same relation to God that Adam sustained, and regeneration reveals the heirs of glory in the same relation to God which Christ as a Son sustains so far as relationship is concerned, for their sonship is in his sonship, their life in his life, their righteousness is in his righteousness, and their heirship is jointly with his, and they are one with Christ even as Christ is one with the Father."
Beebe admits that the life that was given to Adam and to every man came from God. If that is so, using his Two Seed reasoning, then every man preexisted in God. Beebe argues that the spiritual life that is given to people when they are born again was a life that contained their persons, and from eternity. By the same reasoning we may say that the natural life that is given to human beings also contained their persons. This is the substance of the argument that E.S. Dudley makes in the above letter to Beebe. It is a good argument and Beebe stumbles trying to answer it.
Wrote Beebe:
"Regeneration therefore, in forming Christ in us the hope of glory, or in other words communicating the life which God gave us in Christ, to us, brings us experimentally and manifestly into a relationship with God, which natural generation does not."
Why the need to form Christ in someone if that was already done in eternity past in that person? If people already had eternal life in Christ before the world began, and before those people came into actual existence, why the need to communicate it to them when they are born again? Notice again the use of the word "manifestly." Even today's "Primitive" or "Old School" Baptists use this word much, saying that faith and repentance only "manifests" who is regenerated.
Wrote Beebe:
"In the conclusion of our brother's letter, he speaks of his ignorance of those "eternal created things." His closing remarks have suggested the following inquiries in our mind; and if it be lawful for us in our turn to ask questions, we will submit them to our brother for a solution."
Beebe then gives Dudley several questions for him to consider and reply to. But, he does not address the absurdity or incongruity of Two Seedism's belief in "eternal created things." Out of one side of the mouth Beebe and the Two Seeders say that God's elect are created, both as physical creatures and as new creatures in Christ, and out of the other side of their mouths say that they were "in Christ" from eternity.
This is Beebe's first question:
"First. Has the church an existence really and vitally in Jesus Christ, or not?"
Yes, but not from eternity. A believer does not have an actual existence until he is created, first as a human being, and second as a child of God through a new creation when converted to Christ. Those "Primitive Baptists" who opposed the Two Seeders denied "eternal vital union," arguing that such a union takes place in time in the life of everyone chosen when he is by faith joined to Christ.
Beebe's next question to Dudley was:
"Second. If she has, is it a created or self-existent existence?"
The existence of a vital connection with Christ has a beginning and it is when one is joined to Christ by faith. Therefore it is not uncreated nor self-existent.
Beebe next asks:
"Third. If the church was created in Christ Jesus unto good works which God hath foreordained which she shall walk in them, and if Christ has been her dwelling place from everlasting, &c., was she created in Christ before the world began, or did this creation take place subsequently to that event?"
No one is created in Christ Jesus before he exists. It occurs, as we have seen, when one is brought to faith in Christ. We have also refuted the implications and false interpretation of Psalm 90 and verse one. The verse is not saying that God has been a dwelling place for people from eternity, for the text rather says "you have been our dwelling place in all generations." That puts it in time when generations are coming into being. The words "even from everlasting to everlasting you are God" cannot be made to say "from everlasting to everlasting your people have been enjoying your dwelling place."
Beebe then gives his next question which says:
"Fourth. If as the Scriptures affirm, Christ is the same yesterday, to-day and forever, and the church of God is his body, his flesh and his bones; and if she was created in him, chosen in him, sanctified in him, saved and called according to his own purpose and grace which was given her in him before the world began; did Christ, as the Mediatorial Life and Head of the church ever exist without the church existing in him?"
What a stretch and perversion of scripture to think that Hebrews 13: 8 implies or infers all that Beebe thinks it does. He thinks that the verse implies that Christ has always had a physical body, and in this he denies the incarnation. Christ was once without a body, existing only as the divine Son of God, but he became a man, and Beebe's interpretation of Hebrews 13: 8 would say that this would contradict that Jesus Christ was always the same. Jesus Christ suffered and died. Does that mean he 1) has always been suffering and dying, or 2) that he is not the same?
Christ never changed in his deity, although his glorified humanity is now joined forever to his divinity. Christ has changed in his humanity, for he was once a baby and became an adult man, and he also died, and was resurrected and glorified in his body. So, what the text means is that Christ in his essential character is the same. It certainly is an affirmation of the immutability of the Son of God, which is an attribute of divinity. So we read in the first chapter of Hebrews: "Like a cloak You will fold them up, And they will be changed. But You are the same, And Your years will not fail.” (Heb. 1: 12 nkjv) Wrote the great "prince of preachers," Charles Spurgeon:
"Jesus Christ is the same now as He was in times gone by. He is the same today as He was from old eternity...Jesus is the same today as He was when He was here on earth." (As cited here)
About the argument that Christ being predestined to be a Mediator and Head proves that he was always a Mediator from eternity I have already addressed and shown it to be invalid and unwarranted from scripture.
Wrote Beebe:
"If brother Dudley with some others will take the position that the church had no real existence in Christ before the world began, or only prospectively, or in purpose existed in him; we will ask.
Fifth. Does the church now exist in Christ differently from that prospective or pre-ordained sense? and if she does, when did the change take place, and where shall we find the record of such a change? and how shall we reconcile that change with the immutability of Christ, as declared in the above text?"
Of course the church now exists differently from "that prospective or pre-ordained sense." That is because no human being exists from eternity, does not have any actual existence prior to being conceived in the womb. Also, as I have pointed out in previous chapters, Paul says that certain Christian brothers "were in Christ before I was" (Rom. 16: 7). But, if all the children of God were "in Christ" from eternity, then Paul's statement would be false. People are not "in Christ" until they are joined to Christ by faith, or until they are "baptized (placed) into Christ." (Rom. 6: 3-4) Further, a person being "in Christ" is simultaneous with Christ being in a person. Paul speaks of both as occurring when one believes in Christ and turns away from sin and self and to him. At that time the believer enters into Christ and Christ enters into the believer. Beebe's view that this is what has been true from eternity is absurd. Beebe, as we have seen, has referred to Paul's words to the Galatians where he spoke of Christ being "formed in you" (Gal. 4: 19), a verse that upends his Two Seed views, for this forming of Christ in the Galatians was what was occurring in the lives of the Galatians.
Further, a person entering into Christ and Christ entering into a believer does not change Christ. Beebe asks Dudley "where shall we find the record of such a change," but that is a begging of the question, for he has not shown how a person entering into Christ or Christ entering a person changes Christ.
Beebe's next question is as follows:
"Sixth. If the church only exists in Christ prospectively, or in purpose now; will she ever exist in him in any other sense?"
There is of course a difference between something existing in God's mind or determinations and it actually being brought into existence. The cosmos was envisioned and determined to be prior to God actually creating it.
Beebe's final question is this:
"Seventh. Would a prospective or predestinated existence in Christ, constitute any vital relationship between Christ and his people?"
Of course God predetermining to save a person does not constitute a vital relationship, for a vital relationship requires the actual existence of both God and his people. We have already seen where the scriptures say that a vital relationship with God occurs when a sinner believes in Christ and is born again of the Spirit.
No comments:
Post a Comment