The Divine Library (8)

In this chapter we will focus on the Book of Revelation's book (or scroll) with seven seals. It is one of the most mysterious books in the divine library and bible teachers and commentators have not been uniform in their interpretation of it. In my own efforts to ascertain the significance of this seven sealed book I was helped much by what Dr. J.A. Seiss wrote in one of his more famous books titled "The Apocalypse." He connected this book, and with what occurs in conjunction with the book's opening and the breaking of its seals, with redemption. 

Most bible students do not see the events and scenes of Revelation (or the Apocalypse) with redemption. How are the awful scenes of famine, death, slaughter, plagues, earthquakes, etc., connected with "the day or redemption"? 

The Seven Sealed Book

"And I saw in the right hand of him that sat on the throne a book written within and on the backside, sealed with seven seals. And I saw a strong angel proclaiming with a loud voice, Who is worthy to open the book, and to loose the seals thereof?" (Rev. 5: 1-2 nkjv)

To see the proof that the seven sealed book of the Apocalypse is a book of redemption one needs to read Jeremiah chapter 32. In my series titled "Redemption" I wrote on this seven sealed book extensively. I have moved all of these chapters into a blog all their own (here). They are also in this blog beginning (here) and the rest immediately following in the archives for the months of April through July of 2018. In chapter one I cite these various words of Seiss from his book "The Apocalypse":

"It is not ecclesiastical history, which this book is introduced to foreshow, but something to which all ecclesiastical history is only the prelude and introduction, and which the Scriptures call “The redemption of the purchased possession.”

It may be well here for us to correct a misapprehension which largely obtains in the common conception of what redemption is. When this word is used, most men’s minds go back to the birth, life, death, and resurrection of Christ, and think of something already accomplished and complete in the blessed facts of the blessed Saviour’s history. This is well enough as far as it goes, and touches indeed, the great central particulars on which redemption reposes. But, viewed as a whole, redemption is a vastly wider and more wondrous thing."

"Redemption has its roots and foundations in the past, but its true realization lies in the future, and connects directly with the period and transactions to which our text (Rev. chpt. 5) relates."

"The Scriptures everywhere point forward to Christ’s Apocalypse, as the time when first the mystery shall be finished, and the long process reach its proper consummation. Jesus talked to His disciples about the signs which were to precede His coming, and said, “When these things begin to come to pass, then look up, and lift up your heads; for your redemption draweth nigh.” (Luke 21:28.) In His view, then, redemption proper, or in its true reality, lies far more in the future than in the past; so much more that the past is hardly to be named apart from what is yet to come. And with all Paul’s glorying in the cross, he did not hesitate to say: “If in this life only we have hope in Christ, we are, of all men, most miserable;” and that “the whole creation groaneth and travaileth in pain together until now; and not only they, but ourselves also, which have the first fruits of the Spirit, even we ourselves groan within ourselves, waiting for the adoption, to wit, the redemption of the body.” (1 Corinthians 15:19; Romans 8:22, 23.) He speaks of Christians as indeed “sealed with the Holy Spirit of promise,” which he commends greatly, but which he pronounces the mere “earnest” or pledge penny of something vastly greater — of an “inheritance” still future, which is only to come at a yet unaccomplished “redemption of the purchased possession.” (Ephesians 1:13, 14.) To him, therefore, redemption is still largely a subject of hope. There is an inheritance pledged, and a possession purchased, but it is not yet redeemed. The action of claiming, disencumbering, and taking possession of it is still future. And it is just this action that is brought to our view in the taking up of this book and the breaking of its seals."

"The word redemption comes to us, and takes its significance from certain laws and customs of the ancient Jews. Under these laws and customs, it was impossible to alienate estates beyond a given time. Whatever disposition one may have been forced to make of his lands, and whoever might be found in possession of them, the year of Jubilee returned them to the lawful representatives of their former owners." 

"Upon this regulation there was founded another, which made it the right of the nearest of kin to one who, through distress or otherwise, had alienated his inheritance to another party, to step in and redeem it; that is, to buy it back, and retake it, at any time, or at such times not falling within certain stipulated intervals. When an inheritance was thus disponed away by its rightful possessor, there were two books, or instruments of writing, made of the transaction, the one open, and the other sealed, specifying price and particulars. These books or mortgage deeds went into the hands of the one to whom the property was thus made over. A sealed book thus became a standing sign of an alienated inheritance, but so held as to be liable to be recovered on the terms specified. And when any one legally representing the original proprietor, was found competent to lift and destroy that sealed instrument, and thus to buy back what had been disponed away, he was called the goel, or redeemer, and the inheritance was considered redeemed, so far that he now had full right to dispossess of it whoever might be found on it, and to enter upon its undisturbed fruition."

"From this it will be seen, that the transactions which John witnessed, in regard to this sealed book, accord precisely with this ancient arrangement for the redemption of inheritances. And the coincidence is so complete, and sealed books in Scripture are so much confined to this particular sort of writings, that I take it as separating this book in God’s right hand from all other subjects to the one subject of forfeited inheritances."

"We also know very well, that there has been an inheritance forfeited and disponed away for these thousands of years, and that for all this time the proper heirs have lain out of it, and had no proper possession of it. That inheritance we know to be just ta panta — the all things — in which man, in his first creation, was installed, and which God made good, and sin made evil. Everything testifies that it was a high, holy, and blessed investiture. But, alas, its original possessor sinned, and it passed out of his hands to the disinheritance of all his seed. The sealed book, the title deeds of its forfeiture and mortgage, are in the hands of God, and strangers and intruders have overrun and debased it. And from the days of Adam until now, those deeds have lain in the Almighty’s hands, with no one to take them up or to dispossess the aliens."

“Seven seals” are upon this book, indicative of the completeness of those bonds of forfeit which have all this while debarred Adam’s seed from their proper inheritance. The original estate is totally gone from man, apart from some competent Redeemer. Just as the final taking of the book, and the breaking of its seals, eventuate in complete redemption, and the full reinstatement of the acknowledged seed into the blessedness which sin forfeited, and the Goel redeemed, so those seals unbroken, set forth the completeness of the alienation, and the thoroughness of the incumbrances which are upon the estate, until that competent Goel has performed his work."

"This book was “written within and on the back.” This again tends to identify it with these books of forfeited inheritances. Within were the specifications of the forfeiture; without were the names and attestations of the witnesses; for this is the manner in which these documents were attested."

In this series I cited the following words from the prophet Jeremiah, also cited by Seiss, and made the following comments.

"And Jeremiah said, The word of the Lord came unto me, saying, Behold, Hanameel the son of Shallum thine uncle shall come unto thee saying, Buy thee my field that is in Anathoth: for the right of redemption is thine to buy it. So Hanameel mine uncle's son came to me in the court of the prison according to the word of the Lord, and said unto me, Buy my field, I pray thee, that is in Anathoth, which is in the country of Benjamin: for the right of inheritance is thine, and the redemption is thine; buy it for thyself. Then I knew that this was the word of the Lord." (Jer. 32: 6-8 KJV)

Notice what this text reveals about Hebrew laws of forfeiture and redemption. It speaks of the "redeemer" (Hebrew goel) who has "the right of redemption" (authority "to buy" or "buy back") and "the right of inheritance" ("the redemption is thine"). Because of sin, our "rights" to all good are lost, but because of the "redeemer" (Christ), they are restored. Further, because the rights are restored by the redeemer paying the price of redemption, they can then be enforced and such enforcement restores what was lost to those who are redeemed.

"And I bought the field of Hanameel my uncle's son, that was in Anathoth, and weighed him the money, even seventeen shekels of silver. And I subscribed the evidence, and sealed it, and took witnesses, and weighed him the money in the balances. So I took the evidence of the purchase, both that which was sealed according to the law and custom, and that which was open: And I gave the evidence of the purchase unto Baruch the son of Neriah, the son of Maaseiah, in the sight of Hanameel mine uncle's son, and in the presence of the witnesses that subscribed the book of the purchase, before all the Jews that sat in the court of the prison. And I charged Baruch before them, saying, Thus saith the Lord of hosts, the God of Israel; Take these evidences, this evidence of the purchase, both which is sealed, and this evidence which is open; and put them in an earthen vessel, that they may continue many days." (9-14)

Here is a description of redemption as it deals with restoring a lost inheritance. There are "books" (scrolls) in connection with the acts of redemption. There is an "open scroll" and a "sealed scroll." Notice how these legal documents are described. Jeremiah says "I subscribed the evidence, and sealed it." He speaks of "the evidence of the purchase." He did all this redeeming transaction in the "presence of the witnesses that subscribed the book of the purchase." In a similar manner are real estate transactions performed in our day in our country.

When a person borrows money on his real estate, the lender receives a "mortgage" or "deed of trust" in exchange. However, unlike borrowing money through a pawn shop for personal property, the borrower (mortgager) retains possession and legal ownership. When the borrower is foreclosed upon, all rights to possession and ownership are forever lost, and there is no "right of redemption." Also, "deeds of trust" or "mortgages" are publicly recorded documents (or "open according to the law and custom") and disclose certain items to the general public. However, the "note" is not recorded, but is kept sealed so far as public view is concerned. The note contains particulars that the deed of trust does not contain, which is private information of concern to only the parties involved, namely the borrower and the lender."

Wrote Seiss:

"It is in the right hand of God. No literal hand is described; but, so to speak, it was on the right hand of the undescribed and indescribable One who occupied the throne. This is significant of His high and supreme right to what the sealed instrument binds. Failing from man, it reverted to the original Giver. Sin cannot vitiate any of the rights of God. Satan’s possession is a mere usurpation, permitted for the time, but in no way detrimental to the proprietorship of the Almighty. The true right still lives in the hand of God, until the proper Goel comes to redeem it, by paying the price, and ejecting the alien and his seed."

"John knew by that Spirit in which he was, what that sealed book meant. He knew that if no one was found worthy and able to take it from the hand of God, and to break its seals, that all the promises of the prophets, and all the hopes of the saints, and all the preintimations of a redeemed world, must fail. He understood the office of the Goel, and that if there was failure at this point, “the redemption of the purchased possession” must fail. Could it be possible that this should be? Had he all this while been hoping, and preaching, and prophesying what should, after all, not be accomplished? Was the promised inheritance, now at the ripened moment for its recovery, to go by default into eternal alienation? How could he bear the thought?

That book, unlifted and unopened, is the Church’s grief and distress. It bespeaks the inheritance unredeemed — the children still estranged from their purchased possession. But that book opened, is the Church’s joy and glory. It is the assertion of her reinstatement into what Adam lost — the recovery to her of all of which she has been so long and cruelly deprived by sin. Until, therefore, that book is opened, and its seals broken, the people of God must remain in privation, sorrow, and tears."

“And He came and took [the book] from the right hand of Him that sitteth upon the throne.” 

This is the sublimest individual act recorded in the Apocalypse. It is the act which includes all that suffering creation, and the disinherited saints of God have been sighing, and crying, and waiting for, for all these long ages — for six thousand years of grief and sorrow. It is the act which carries with it all else that is written in the succeeding part of this glorious revelation. It is the act by virtue of which the world is subdued, Babylon judged, Antichrist destroyed, the dragon vanquished, death overthrown, the curse expunged, the earth made new, and the reign of everlasting blessedness and peace made to cover its hills and illuminate its valleys, and transform it into an unfading paradise of God. It was the lifting of the title deeds of the alienated inheritance — the legal act of repossession of all that was lost in Adam, and paid for by the blood and tears of the Son of God. Heaven looks on in solemn silence as that act is being performed. The universe is stricken with awe, and grows breathless as it views it. And the Living ones, and Elders, and all the hosts of angels, are filled with adoring wonder and joy, as if another FIAT had gone forth from God for a new creation."

Of course, discussing this glorious book of redemption or title deed to all things lost by sin requires much more commentary. That is why I recommend reading my blog dedicated to the subject of redemption for I go into more detail than here. I have only given a portion of what Seiss wrote and I encourage the reader to read Seiss' book on the Apocalypse, which should be available to read for free online. His commentary on the seven sealed book is in his lecture on Revelation chapter five. But, I will make a few comments before we end this chapter.

Very few commentators connect the opening of the seven sealed book with final redemption at the second coming of Christ. Ellicott in his commentary lists some of these views when he wrote (highlighting mine):

"But what is meant by the book? Numberless interpretations have been offered: it is the Old Testament; it is the whole Bible; it is the title-deed of man’s inheritance; it is the book containing the sentence of judgment on the foes of the faith; it is the Apocalypse; it is part of the Apocalypse; it is the book of God’s purposes and providence. There is a truth underlying most of these interpretations, but most of them narrow the force of the vision. If we say it is the book which unfolds the principles of God’s government—in a wide sense, the book of salvation (comp. Romans 16:25-26)— the interpretation of life, which Christ alone can bestow (see Revelation 5:3-6), we shall include, probably, the practical truths which underlie each of these interpretations; for all—Old Testament and New, man’s heritage and destiny, God’s purposes and providence— are dark, till He who is the Light unfolds those truths which shed a light on all. Such a book becomes one “which contains and interprets human history,” and claims the kingdoms of the earth for God."

I agree with the fact that many of the views enumerated above do have some truth, but nevertheless fail to mention its connection with redemption. The view that says that the seven sealed scroll is part of the Apocalypse is certainly true. But, "the Apocalypse of Christ" (the divine title to the book of Revelation) has to do with the second coming of Christ and all that is connected with it and final redemption is one of the grand things happening as a result of that second coming. Those who think that the scroll simply is a book foretelling future events also miss hitting the mark, even though the coming Apocalypse (revealing) of Jesus Christ from heaven is yet future.

However, the seven seals on the scroll have not been broken, nor has its contents written on the inside been made known. The opening of the seven seals has not yet occurred, but it will occur in conjunction with that time "when the Lord Jesus shall be revealed (apocalypse) from heaven with his mighty angels taking vengeance on them that know not God and obey not the Gospel of our Lord Jesus Christ." (II Thess. 1: 7-8 kjv) Part of a Redeemer's work is not only to liberate the captives from their bondage but to act as the family Avenger and bring vengeance to the ones who enslaved the redeemer's kin. Now let us cite the whole context from Revelation chapter five about this fascinating little book.

"2 Then I saw a strong angel proclaiming with a loud voice, "Who is worthy to open the scroll and to loose its seals?" 3 And no one in heaven or on the earth or under the earth was able to open the scroll, or to look at it. 4 So I wept much, because no one was found worthy to open and read the scroll, or to look at it. 5 But one of the elders said to me, "Do not weep. Behold, the Lion of the tribe of Judah, the Root of David, has prevailed to open the scroll and to loose its seven seals." 6 And I looked, and behold, in the midst of the throne and of the four living creatures, and in the midst of the elders, stood a Lamb as though it had been slain, having seven horns and seven eyes, which are the seven Spirits of God sent out into all the earth. 7 Then He came and took the scroll out of the right hand of Him who sat on the throne. 8 Now when He had taken the scroll, the four living creatures and the twenty-four elders fell down before the Lamb, each having a harp, and golden bowls full of incense, which are the prayers of the saints. 9 And they sang a new song, saying: "You are worthy to take the scroll, And to open its seals; For You were slain, And have redeemed us to God by Your blood Out of every tribe and tongue and people and nation, 10 And have made us kings and priests to our God; And we shall reign on the earth." (Rev. 5: 2-10 nkjv)

Why did John weep deeply and long because the seven sealed scroll was not opened, and no one being found worthy or qualified to break the seals and disclose its contents? It was because he knew that as long as that scroll remained sealed there would be no redemption of what was lost by sin. That would mean man's salvation was not possible. However, Christ as the Lamb of God was worthy, and he first paid the price for redemption by the shedding of his blood and sacrificial death, and was qualified to be the Goel because he also a near kinsman to man by having become a man himself.

As each seal is opened some act of redemption is occurring, though what occurs is all the awful horrors and terrors described in the book of Revelation. But, keep in mind that Christ is acting as an Avenging Redeemer and is punishing the wicked for their rebellion and refusal to worship only the one true God, and ridding the world of the proud, the lawless, all who are squatters whom the Avenging Redeemer will uproot from the earth in fulfillment of ancient prophecies. The opening of these seals bring complete redemption to believers and also to the whole groaning creation (Rom. 8: 19-22), but it brings divine retribution to all who love not the Lord Jesus Christ, many of whom chose the Antichrist instead. The opening of the seals takes in what is called in scripture "the day of judgment and perdition of ungodly men" (II Peter 3: 7), "the day of wrath" (Rom. 2: 5; etc.), "the day of vengeance" (Isa. 63: 4; Luke 21: 22; etc.), "the day of the Lord" (Amos 5: 18; I Thess. 5: 2; etc.), negative things for many, but positive things for the few who are the children of God, for this same time period is their "day of redemption," and day of rejoicing. This truth is seen in Amos chapter five (referenced above).

"18 Woe to you who desire the day of the Lord! For what good is the day of the Lord to you? It will be darkness, and not light. 19 It will be as though a man fled from a lion, And a bear met him! Or as though he went into the house, Leaned his hand on the wall, And a serpent bit him! 20 Is not the day of the Lord darkness, and not light? Is it not very dark, with no brightness in it?" (5: 18-20 nkjv)

The day of the Lord and the day of redemption will be for a good end purpose for the people of God, but it will be for a bad end for the those who have chosen other gods and covenanted with the Devil. In the above text this day of the Lord, for those who will find it to be a time of vengeance upon them, will begin with the beginning of a day of tribulation, described above in being a dark day when a man is in danger of being a prey to a lion, and if escaping that, to meet a bear, and if he escapes that, to go into a house for safety but ironically being bitten by a venomous snake. The Book of Revelation describes the coming of the Lord and the opening of the seals of the redemptive scroll as a time of "great tribulation" (Rev. 7: 14 and in the sermon on the mount in Matt. 24), which is what the text above in Amos likewise says. The apostle Paul described the day of vengeance in the same way when he said:

"since it is a righteous thing with God to repay with tribulation those who trouble you, and to give you who are troubled rest with us when the Lord Jesus is revealed from heaven with His mighty angels, in flaming fire taking vengeance on those who do not know God, and on those who do not obey the gospel of our Lord Jesus Christ." (II Thess. 1: 6-8 nkjv)

Bringing "tribulation" upon those who have rejected God and his Son and the Gospel and its offers of salvation is connected with Christ being revealed from heaven, which is his Apocalypse. 

What is written on the outside (seen for all to read) of the seven sealed scroll? What is written on the inside (which is hidden from the view)?

In the next chapter we will, however, have more to say about this sealed book because we see it mentioned later in the Apocalypse, and we should not end our focus on this divine book in the library of God without looking at those texts where we see in chapter ten where a mighty angel has a "little book" in his hand and where the apostle John is told to go take the book and to eat it. Needless to say, this book of redemption is perhaps the most important one in his library, so far as we are concerned. 

Two Seed Baptist Ideology (LII)

Benjamin Keach (1640–1704) is the namesake of "Keach's Catechism" (also known as The Baptist Catechism), a 17th-century Particular Baptist catechism, though it was likely compiled by William Collins (d. 1702) following a 1693 General Assembly commission. Keach did write a separate, earlier catechism in the 1660s called Instructions for Children (or The Child's Instructor), for which he was pilloried. The catechism was officially authorized by the British Particular Baptists in 1693. "A very interesting "advertisement" was appended to the fifth edition of the Confession (1720)" said James M. Renihan (See here) which states: 

 

"This Confession of our Faith, together with the brief Instructions of the Principles of Christian Religion, or the Catechisms, both with the proofs in the margin, and also that with the words of the scriptures at length; with this Confession, put forth by the ministers, elders, and brethren of above one hundred congregations of Christians, baptized on profession of their faith in England and Wales, denying Arminiainism, owning the doctrine of personal election and final perseverance: having sold the property, right and title of the printing thereof, to John Marshall, bookseller, at the Bible in Gracechurch Street, by us, William Collins and Benjamin Keach, it is desired that all persons desirous to promote such useful books, do apply themselves to him".

If one reads this catechism he will see even more clearly what the signatories of the 1689 London Confession believed about salvation and will see that the footnotes that the "Primitive Baptist" ministers who attended the 1900 A.D. "Fulton Convention" attached to certain sections of the 1689 confession are indeed a gross perversion of what those 1689 English Baptists really believed. Keep in mind that the Philadelphia Confession of Faith (Baptist), ratified in 1742, was a copy of the 1689 with two additional articles added concerning the singing of psalms and the laying on of hands. 

In my article "From Keach's Catechism"* I wrote (See here):

"Benjamin Keach was a signer of the Second London Baptist Confession of 1689 and a leader of Particular Baptists in England and America. He was also a prolific writer and defender of the faith. He wrote "Keach's Catechism"* which was often attached to the London and Philadelphia Confessions, the confession that all the oldest Hardshell churches endorsed." 

*"Joseph Ivimey asserts "it is probable that the Baptist Catechism was complied by Mr. Collins, though it has by some means or other been called Keach's Catechism"."

I also wrote:

"The Hardshells who met in Fulton, Kentucky, in 1900, met to restate their continued acceptance and endorsement of the old London/Philadelphia confession. One wonders how they could do this since the confession clearly teaches that God saves his people through faith, through the preaching of the gospel."

I have numerous articles in "The Old Baptist Test" blog giving citations from the signers of the 1689 confession from their voluminous works which show what they believed and it is these beliefs that they wrote into the 1689 confession. I cite from men like John Spilsbury, William Kiffin, Hanserd Knollys, Hercules and William Collins, Benjamin Keach, and others. Surely many of the fifty one ministers at the Fulton convention knew this, and yet tried to convince their followers that they were Hardshell in beliefs. Now let me cite from Keach's catechism, which was attached to the old confession.

Q. 34. How does the Spirit apply to us the redemption purchased by Christ?

A. The Spirit applies to us the redemption purchased by Christ, by working faith in us, and thereby uniting us to Christ in our effectual calling.

(Eph. 2:8; 3:17)

Q. 35. What is effectual calling?

A. Effectual calling is the work of God's Spirit, whereby, convincing us of our sin and misery, enlightening our minds in the knowledge of Christ, and renewing our wills, He does persuade and enable us to embrace Jesus Christ, freely offered to us in the Gospel.

(2 Tim. 1:9; John 16:8-11; Acts 2:37; 26:18; Ezekiel 36:26; John 6:44,45; 1 Cor. 12:3)

Q. 92. What does God require of us, that we may escape His wrath and curse, due to us for sin?

A. To escape the wrath and curse of God due to us for sin, God requires of us faith in Jesus Christ, repentance unto life, with the diligent use of all the outward and ordinary means whereby Christ communicates to us the benefits of redemption.

Q. 93. What is faith in Jesus Christ?

A. Faith in Jesus Christ is a saving grace, whereby we receive and rest upon Him alone for salvation, as He is offered to us in the Gospel.

(Heb. 10:39; John 1:12; Phil. 3-9; Gal. 2:15,16)

Q. 96. How is the Word made effectual to salvation?

A. The Spirit of God makes the reading, but especially the preaching of the Word an effectual means of convincing and converting sinners, and of building them up in holiness and comfort, through faith unto salvation.

(Ps. 119:11,18; 1 Thess. 1:6; 1 Peter 2:1,2; Rom. 1:16; Ps. 19:7)

Q. 97. How is the Word to be read and heard that it may become effectual to salvation?

A. That the Word may become effectual to salvation we must attend thereunto with diligence, preparation and prayer, receive it in faith and love, lay it up in our hearts and practice it in our lives.

(Prov. 8:34; 1 Peter 2:1,2; 1 Tim. 4:13; Heb. 2:1,3; Heb. 4:2; 2 Thess. 2:10; Ps. 119:11; James 1:21,25)

Thus, the Fulton "footnotes" are lies, perversions of the words of the Old Baptists, and are unworthy of those who call themselves "Primitive Baptists."

What the Baptists who wrote and signed their names to the 1689 confession believed is the same belief they wrote in the above catechism. The fifty one elders at the Fulton assembly were saying that the ministers and churches that authorized the 1689 confession believed as they on predestination and salvation and yet many of them surely knew that this was not true. This was a deceitful act and by this they have no credibility.

The Baptist catechism of the Charleston association, which was organized in 1751, and put forth in 1813, says the same things about salvation as did Keach's catechism. Notice these questions and answers:

Q. How may we know there is a God? 

A. The light of nature in man and the works of God plainly declare there is a God (Rom. 1:19,20; Ps. 19:1, 2, 3; Acts 17:24); but his word and Spirit only do it fully and effectually for the salvation of sinners (1 Cor. 2:10; 2 Tim. 3:15,16). 

Q. What is the word of God? 

A. The holy scriptures of the Old and New Testament are the word of God, and the only certain rule of faith and obedience (2 Tim. 3:16; Eph. 2:20). 

Q. May all men make use of the holy scriptures? 

A. All men are not only permitted, but commanded and exhorted to read, hear, and understand the holy scriptures (John 5:38; Rev. 17:18, 19; 1:3; Acts 8:30).

Q. How are we made partakers of the redemption purchased by Christ? 

A. We are made partakers of the redemption purchased by Christ, by the effectual application of it to us (John 1:11,12) by his Holy Spirit (Titus 3:5,6). 

Q. How doth the spirit apply to us the redemption purchased by Christ? 

A. The Spirit applieth to us the redemption purchased by Christ, by working faith in us (Eph. 1:13, 14; John 6:37, 39; Eph. 2:8), and thereby uniting us to Christ, in our effectual calling (Eph. 3:17; 1 Cor. 1:9). 

Q. What is effectual calling? 

A. Effectual calling is the work of God's Spirit (2 Tim. 1:9; 2 Thess. 2:13, 14), whereby convincing us of our sin and misery (Acts 2:37), enlightening our minds in the knowledge of Christ (Acts 2:18), and renewing our wills (Ez. 36:26, 27), he doth persuade and enable us to embrace Jesus Christ freely offered to us in the gospel (John 6:44, 45; Phil. 2:13). 

Q. What is faith in Jesus Christ? 

A. Faith in Jesus Christ is a saving grace (Heb. 10:39), whereby we receive and rest upon him alone for salvation, as he is offered to us in the gospel (Jn. 1:12; Is. 26:3, 4; Ph. 3:9; Gal. 2:16). 

Q. What are the outward means whereby Christ communicateth to us the benefits of redemption? 

A. The outward and ordinary means whereby Christ communicateth to us the benefits of redemption are his ordinances, especially the word, baptism, the Lord's supper, and prayer; all which means are made effectual to the elect for salvation (Mt. 28:19, 20; Acts 2:42, 46, 47). 

Q. How is the word made effectual to salvation? 

A. The Spirit of God maketh the reading, but especially the preaching of the word, an effectual means of convincing and converting sinners, and of building them up in holiness and comfort through faith unto salvation (Neh. 8:8; Acts 26:18; Ps. 19:8; Acts 20:32; Rom. 1: 15, 16, 10: 13, 14, 15, 16, 17; 15:4; 1 Cor. 14:24, 25; 1 Tim. 3:15, 16, 17; ). 

Q. How is the word to be read and heard, that it may become effectual to salvation? 

A. That the word may become effectual to salvation, we must attend thereunto with diligence (Pr. 8:34), preparation (1 Pet. 2:1, 2), and prayer (Ps. 119:18); receive it with faith and love (Heb. 4:2; 2 Thes. 2:10), lay it up in our hearts (Ps. 119:18), and practice it in our lives (Luke 8:15; James 1:25).

This is the true "primitive" or "original" Baptist belief. The so-called Primitive Baptists who assembled in Fulton, Kentucky in 1900 are not, though they claim to be. They cannot find Baptists before the 19th century who believed as they do. They are therefore a new sect of Baptists. Since "Primitive Baptists" are Landmarkers they believe that for any church to be a true and legitimate church it must be a descendant of other legitimate churches in a chain of churches going back to the first churches established by the apostles. Since they cannot show such a succession through the English or American Particular, Regular, or Separate Baptists, they have tried, since the failure of the Fulton convention to find it through the English Particular Baptists who authored the 1689 confession, to find another succession. 

This is what Hardshell Michael N. Ivey attempted to do in his work titled "A Welsh Succession Of Primitive Baptist Faith And Practice." However, he miserably failed in this effort as I showed back in 2011 when I wrote a series of articles proving this, and showing how the Welsh Baptists of the 17th and 18th centuries in Wales did not believe as do the Hardshells, and that Ivey did to the old confessions and writings of the Welsh Particular Baptists what the Fulton Hardshells did to the 1689 confession. You can see these articles in the Old Baptist Test blog for the year 2011. The first in that series can be read (here). 

Now, let us look at the APPENDIX TO FULTON CONVENTION, which gives what a prior convention of "Primitive Baptist" ministers put forth just two months prior to the convention in Fulton. This appendix was attached to the Fulton convention's publishing of their remarks on the 1689 London confession. That appendix says (emphasis mine):

"We, the undersigned elders and brethren, pursuant to a request made by brethren of Patoka Association of Primitive Baptists, now convened at Oakland City Church, in Oakland City, Indiana, on the 27th day of September, 1900."

One wonders why the "Primitive Baptists" at the start of the twentieth century felt the need to come together and state their beliefs in relation to the 1689 confession and to what their forefathers believed. In the introduction to the Fulton confession the fifty one ministers speak of how the "Primitive Baptist Church" (which they call "Zion") is torn apart by numerous factions. By their convention they hoped to unite all these factions, but they did not succeed, for it is in the nature of the Hardshells to be schismatic.

In the appendix, the elders who first assembled in Indiana wrote (emphasis mine):

"We believe the Scriptures teach that there is a time salvation received by the heirs of God distinct from eternal salvation, which does depend upon their obedience. The people of God receive their rewards for obedience in this life only. We believe that the ability of the Christian is the unconditional gift of God."

There is no mention of this so-called "time salvation" in the 1689 confession nor in any other Baptist confession prior to its invention by the Hardshells. You do not see it in any of their church articles of faith in the early 19th century either. When the "Primitive" or "Old School" Baptists began to deny that God uses his written word and the message of the Gospel in the eternal salvation of sinners they were forced to explain how this denial could be true seeing there are so many texts in the Bible that clearly show otherwise. So, what they did was to invent this idea of a "time salvation," which said that it was a salvation that was conditioned upon faith, repentance, evangelical conversion, and perseverance in the faith, but that it was not necessary for eternal salvation. In one of my many articles on this novelty in bible interpretation (See here) I cited from two elders who stated what they mean by "time salvation." 

"When salvation refers to what God does for man without action on his part, and by the meritorious work of Christ, they know and realize that it refers to salvation in its highest order; preparing one to live with God in glory after death. When salvation is mentioned in connection with the acts of men; or man is to perform some action to bring about a better situation for himself, they know it is to be to the child of God (one freed from the guilt of sin), and refers to a timely deliverance, or something that is for man's benefit while he lives here in the world."

This new innovation in bible doctrine was invented in order to uphold their man-made thesis, one first given by the Two Seeders, which said "nothing a person does in life determines whether he goes to heaven or hell" and the one which said that "the gospel is only for the temporal benefit of those who are already children of God from eternity." 

 

Next the Indiana gathering wrote:

"Section 5, Chapter III.: “God hath chosen in Christ unto everlasting glory, out of His mere free grace and love, without any other thing in the creature as condition or cause moving Him thereto.” Although the two-seed doctrine was not thought of at the time this Confession was written, yet this article clearly condemns the two-seed doctrine in all its phases."

By "this confession" they mean the 1689 London Confession. Notice that they mention one of the tenets of Two Seedism dealing with the Calvinist doctrine of "unconditional election," which we in previous chapters (beginning with chapter 27) had much to say, especially when reviewing what Elder Grigg Thompson wrote about it in his 1860 work "The Measuring Rod." We have already seen where the Fulton convention of elders likewise mentioned Two Seed views in their footnotes to their version of the 1689 London confession. 

I find it interesting that these brethren who assembled in Oakland City, Indiana stated that "the two-seed doctrine was not thought of at the time" that the 1689 "confession was written" because the same thing could be said about their novel doctrine of "time salvation"! It is stunning that these brethren apparently failed to see this gross incongruity. 

Next the Indiana convocation said:

"...so we oppose the two-seed doctrine because it seeks to find some quality in man that stands as the cause of his election to glory, while Paul speaks of God’s people, “were by nature the children of wrath, even as others”.

The assembled elders in Oakland City and in Fulton may have opposed certain Two Seed tenets, such as the doctrine of eternal children, yet they still held to other Two Seed tenets, such as we have just named. Also, by their divorcing conversion from regeneration, and by their saying that nothing a person does determines whether he goes to heaven, they too believe in a "no change" view of regeneration. Those who followed the Fulton Convention's dictates would continue to move towards the "hollow log" view by affirming that by affirming that becoming a regenerated or born again person does not make that person a believer in the true God, nor in Jesus Christ, not in the Gospel, and does not guarantee that the one regenerated will persevere. 

Some who read this series on Two Seedism might wonder why we have written a few chapters on the Fulton Convention. It is because of several reasons. First, because in both the Oakland City and Fulton assemblies there is mention of Two Seed views. Second, because the footnotes attached to the 1689 confession show them advocating several of the leading tenets of Two Seedism. 

In the next chapter we will return to reviewing some additional things that Elder Potter wrote in his rebuttal of Two Seedism. Following that we will have a chapter on what Elder George Stipp wrote against Two Seedism. Following that we will observe what Elder C.H. Cayce and others have said on the subject. We will then have some closing thoughts on what we have previously written and bring to a close, for the time being, our writings on the history and heresies of Two Seedism.

The Divine Library (7)

In this chapter we will look at the "Book of Life," or what is called the "Book of Life of the Lamb." As we will see, this book is more like a record book or registry. We will also see how a person's salvation is determined by whether or not his or her name is written in this book. When the disciples who Christ sent out to preach and to heal the sick returned from their mission they rejoiced saying that "even the demons are subject to us through your name." In reply Jesus said:

"And He said to them, "I saw Satan fall like lightning from heaven. Behold, I give you the authority to trample on serpents and scorpions, and over all the power of the enemy, and nothing shall by any means hurt you. Nevertheless do not rejoice in this, that the spirits are subject to you, but rather rejoice because your names are written in heaven.” (Luke 10: 18-20 nkjv)

The apostle Paul, whom most scholars believe wrote the book of Hebrews, also spoke of believers having their names written in heaven when he wrote:

"To the general assembly and church of the firstborn, which are written in heaven, and to God the Judge of all, and to the spirits of just men made perfect." (Heb. 12: 23 kjv)

A year or two ago Brother Mann, a contributing editor of this blog, sent me a song titled "I Know My Name Is There" and I fell in love with it. The words of this lovely song celebrates the fact that a believer's name is written in the Book of Life. The lyrics says:

1 My name is in the Book of Life, O bless the name of Jesus! I rise above all doubt and strife, And read my title clear. Chorus: I know, I know my name is there; I know, I know My name is written there.

2 My name once stood with sinners, lost, And bore a painful record; But by His blood the Savior cross'd, And placed it on His roll. [Chorus]

3 Yet inward trouble often cast A shadow o’er my title; But now with full salvation blest, Praise God! it’s ever clear. [Chorus]

4 While others climb thro' worldly strife, To carve a name of honor, High up in heaven’s Book of Life, My name is written there. [Chorus]

Though you can find many Videos of churches and groups singing this song on YouTube, yet this is the one brother Mann sent to me I believe (listen here).

Another song that speaks of the names of believers being written down in heaven's book is the one titled "A New Name In Glory" whose lyrics are:

1 I was once a sinner, but I came Pardon to receive from my Lord. This was freely given, and I found That He always kept His word.

Chorus: There's a new name Written down in glory, And it's mine, (And it's mine,) oh yes, it's mine! (yes, it's mine!) And the white-robed Angels sing the story, "A sinner has come home." (home, has come home." For there's a new name written down in glory, And it's mine, (And it's mine,) oh yes, it's mine! (yes, it's mine!) With my sins forgiven I am bound for heaven, Nevermore to roam.

2 I was humbly kneeling at the cross, Fearing naught but God's angry frown, When the heavens opened and I saw That my name was written down. [Chorus]

3 In the Book 'tis written, "Saved by grace." Oh, the joy that came to my soul! Now I am forgiven, and I know By the blood I am made whole. [Chorus]

In the prophecies of the prophet Daniel we find another reference to this divine record book.

“At that time Michael shall stand up, The great prince who stands watch over the sons of your people; And there shall be a time of trouble, Such as never was since there was a nation, Even to that time. And at that time your people shall be delivered, Every one who is found written in the book." (Dan. 12: 1 nkjv)

So we see that one of the books in God's library is this divine registry, which is called the "Book of Life."

Book Of Life

"And I urge you also, true companion, help these women who labored with me in the gospel, with Clement also, and the rest of my fellow workers, whose names are in the Book of Life." (Phil. 4: 3 nkjv; see also Rev. 17: 8)

Of all the good things that the apostle Paul could have said about his "fellow workers" who "labored" with him "in the gospel," he chose to say that their "names are in the Book of Life." How did he know this? Notice that he did not say "whose names I hope are in the Book of Life," which is how my Hardshell brethren would want it to read, for they believe that no one can be sure in this life that he or she is saved, and the reason they give is that no one has read the Book of Life. However, Paul was sure that the believers he named above had their names written in the Book of Life. Further, a person could not rejoice that his name was in the book of life, as Jesus exhorted, if he is not sure his name is written there. 

Another objection that my Hardshell brothers give on this subject, along with some other Calvinists, is against the idea that a person's name is written in the Book of Life when he believes and is saved. They argue that the names were written from before the world or time began. So, they would scorn singing "a new name is written down in glory." But, even in the song by that title the lyrics say that it was "when the heavens opened" that the penitent believer "saw that my name was written down." The other song cited mentions the fact that prior to being converted to Christ the believer's "name once stood with sinners, lost, And bore a painful record." In other words, his name was once in the Book of Death, in the list of the condemned, or those we might say who were on death's row.

We must be careful here as Calvinists and not go to extremes. One of the errors of the Two Seed Primitive Baptists was their belief that the elect ones were never lost. If by having one's name in the Book of Life means that a person is saved, then to say that the names of the elect were in the Book of Life from eternity is to say that they were never lost, or never had their names listed in the registry of those who are condemned.

Certainly God knew from eternity who he intended to save, those who were foreknown and predestined. But, this foreknowledge and predestination does not mean that the ones foreknown and predestined were actually saved, for they did not yet exist. The Two Seed Primitive Baptists, however, did believe that the elect preexisted from eternity, and were "in Christ" from eternity. This was an extreme view.

"And all that dwell upon the earth shall worship him, whose names are not written in the book of life of the Lamb slain from the foundation of the world." (Rev. 13: 8 kjv; See also Rev. 21: 27)

Just as there are texts that speak of those who have their names written in the book of life, so there are texts which speak of others whose names are not written in the book of life. This may be what is meant by people being written in the earth as the following text says:

"O LORD, the hope of Israel, All who forsake You shall be ashamed. “Those who depart from Me Shall be written in the earth, Because they have forsaken the LORD, The fountain of living waters.” (Jer. 17: 13 nkjv)

Perhaps being "written in the earth" is the opposite of being "written in heaven." 

Rev. 13: 8 is also an interesting text for it has what is called a "double genitive." The book is both "of life" and "of the Lamb." That text is often disputed as to whether it says that the names were written in the book of life from the foundation of the world or whether it says that the Lamb of God was slain from the foundation of the world. Wrote one commentary:

"There is some doubt about the connection of the words “from the foundation of the world.” Some connect them with the word “written”: this would express that the names were written “from the foundation of the world” in the book. Others connect them with the word “slain”: this expresses that the Lamb was slain from the foundation of the world. For the former view, the similar passage in Revelation 17:8 is cited; but, on the other hand, the phrase “from the foundation of the world” is connected in other parts of the Bible with certain aspects of the work of Christ (1Peter 1:19-20, and John 17:24), and it seems more natural to take the words in their simple order." (Ellicott's Commentary)

It cannot be doubted that both the writing of names in the book of life and the slaying of the Lamb of God are both said to have taken place from the foundation of the world. The passage in Revelation 17: 8 certainly proves the former. It reads as follows:

"The beast that you saw was, and is not, and will ascend out of the bottomless pit and go to perdition. And those who dwell on the earth will marvel, whose names are not written in the Book of Life from the foundation of the world, when they see the beast that was, and is not, and yet is." (Rev. 17: 8 nkjv)

But, this does not deny that Christ too was declared to have been slain from the foundation of the world. The passages given by Ellicott show this to be so. So, rather than being an either/or situation, it is a case where both things are said to have taken place from the foundation of the world.

So, the truth is that what God foreordained to be in the future is spoken of as already having been done. We see this often in scripture. Notice this example:

"(As it is written, I have made thee a father of many nations,) before him whom he believed, even God, who quickeneth the dead, and calleth those things which be not as though they were." (Rom. 4: 17 kjv)

When the Lord said to Abraham "I have made thee a father of many nations" he spoke as if those nations already existed. But, God's ordaining it made it certain that it will be, and so he could speak of it as already done, and is why Paul says the words of God to Abraham are an example of God "calling those things which be not as though they already were." We could give other examples. So, when it is said that both the names being written in the book of life and Christ being slain "from the foundation of the world" it does not mean that this writing and this slaying actually occurred at that time, but that God had predetermined both things. So said the apostle Peter: "Him, being delivered by the determinate counsel and foreknowledge of God, ye have taken, and by wicked hands have crucified and slain." (Acts 2: 23 kjv)

It is a debatable question among Christians as to why God chose to write one person's name in the book of life from the foundation of the world and why he did not write the names of others. Calvinists say that God sovereignly chose who he would save, called the "elect," and that this choice was not based upon anything he foresaw the chosen ones doing, such as foreseeing their believing and repenting, or doing good works, or persevering to the end. Arminians, however, believe that God chose those who he foresaw would believe and therefore wrote their names in the book of life, or determined to do so on that basis. It is not my intention to say much about that question in this series, seeing it is beyond the scope of my focus, which is simply to list the books in the divine library and make observations upon each. However, I will add a few thoughts.

It is true that nearly all of the "church fathers" believed that God chose people, and determined that their names be in the book of life, based upon his foreknowledge of their decision to become believers and to persevere. But, what the church fathers believed is no determinant of what is a right interpretation of the bible, especially seeing that they disagreed on many things. Secondly, even if we grant that God chose those who he foresaw would believe and persevere in faith to the end, the question then shifts to why some have faith and persevere and others do not, or to the question as to whether faith and perseverance are gifts of God. If the latter is true, then God chose some to salvation, and to place their names in the book of life, who he first determined to give the gift of a persevering faith. The following texts tell us plainly that faith is a gift of God and one that is not given to all men. (John 6: 65; Eph. 2: 8-9; Phil. 1: 26; Heb. 12: 2; I Cor. 4: 7) Further, if faith can only be had by hearing the word of God, as Romans 10: 17 says, then those who have not had the word of God were not even given the opportunity to have faith.

Blotting Out of the Book of Life?

“He who overcomes shall be clothed in white garments, and I will not blot out his name from the Book of Life; but I will confess his name before My Father and before His angels." (Rev. 3: 5 nkjv)

This verse is often used by those Christians who believe that a person may be truly saved and then later lose his or her salvation by some sin or by apostasy from the Christian faith. They believe that the text implies that those who do not overcome will have their names erased from the book of life and therefore means that they were no longer saved. However, that is jumping to conclusions. That reasoning assumes that some of the truly saved, some true believers, will fail to overcome. But, the Bible plainly declares that this is not possible. Wrote the apostle John:

"For whatever is born of God overcomes the world. And this is the victory that has overcome the world—our faith. Who is he who overcomes the world, but he who believes that Jesus is the Son of God?" (I John 5: 4-5 nkjv)

The words "whatever is born of God overcomes" is what is called a universal proposition, as in "all x is p." They affirm that it is universally the case that whatever is born of God will overcome. If it were a limited proposition it would say "some things that are born of God overcome." Secondly, the specific thing that John affirms is born or begotten of God is "faith" that the one "who believes that Jesus is the Son of God" possesses. If, therefore, some of those who had this faith lost their salvation and had their names erased from the book of life, then John's affirmation would not be true.

Combining the words of Revelation 3: 5 with I John 5: 4 leads us to say that "all who have God begotten faith will overcome and not have their names blotted out of the book of life." So, once a believer's name is in the book of life, it cannot be erased. 

Societies of men have their records which list the names of living citizens and the names of the deceased. These records are called "vital statistics." States have registries of all marriages, divorces, deaths, and those living. This is why the government has a census every ten years. To be blotted out of the list of the living is the result of dying. In ancient societies a citizen may be expelled from the country and in that case the citizen would have his name erased from the list of living citizens. This is what we perhaps see in these texts about the ancient Hebrew community:

“Yet now, if You will forgive their sin—but if not, I pray, blot me out of Your book which You have written.” And the LORD said to Moses, “Whoever has sinned against Me" I will blot him out of My book." (Ex. 32: 32-33 nkjv)

"Let them be blotted out of the book of the living, and not be written with the righteous." (Psa. 69: 28 kjv)

In commenting upon the former passage Dr. Gill writes the following in his commentary:

"...but rather the book of life, either of this temporal life, and then it means no more than that he wished to die, even immediately by the hand of God, which seems to be countenanced by Numbers 11:15 or else of eternal life, and is no other than the book of life of the Lamb, or God's predestination or choice of men in Christ to everlasting life, which is particular, personal, sure, and certain; and Moses asks for this, not as a thing either desirable or possible, but to express his great affection for this people, and his great concern for the glory of God; and rather than either should suffer, he chose, if it was possible, to be deprived of that eternal happiness he hoped for, and should enjoy."

Moses expressed the desire that, if possible, the Lord would blot out his name from the book of life, would condemn him, if that would save his people. It is similar to the prayer of the apostle Paul who said "I have great sorrow and continual grief in my heart. For I could wish that I myself were accursed from Christ for my brethren, my countrymen according to the flesh..." (Rom. 9: 2-3 nkjv) Or, he could be saying "simply take my life and out of the land of the living." In either case, the desire of Moses and Paul did not imply that God would do what they asked to be done. 

The Final Judgment & The Book of Life

"And I saw the dead, small and great, stand before God; and the books were opened: and another book was opened, which is the book of life: and the dead were judged out of those things which were written in the books, according to their works...And whosoever was not found written in the book of life was cast into the lake of fire." (Rev. 20: 12, 15 kjv)

Those whose names are not in the book of life will be judged by "those things which were written in the books according to their works"; And, all those judged in this manner are cast into the lake of fire. Those whose names are in the book of life are not judged by the books of the law nor by their law keeping. So Jesus said: 

“Most assuredly, I say to you, he who hears My word and believes in Him who sent Me has everlasting life, and shall not come into judgment, but has passed from death into life." (John 5: 24 nkjv)

The reason why believers will not come into judgment or condemnation, nor be judged by the law, is because they have already been justified and freed from condemnation. Notice these proof texts:

"And by him all that believe are justified from all things, from which ye could not be justified by the law of Moses." (Acts 13: 39 kjv)

"There is therefore now no condemnation to them which are in Christ Jesus, who walk not after the flesh, but after the Spirit." (Rom. 8: 1 kjv)

What a precious book in the divine library is the book of life! To be numbered with the living rather than with the dead! You can be sure that your name is written there if you have truly believed in Christ and have sincerely asked him to save you and to come and dwell in your heart. If you truly love Christ and adore him, and serve him gladly, then you can be sure your name is written in heaven. Don't fret over predestination and wonder whether you were chosen before the world began or whether your name was written in the book of life before you were born. Simply know that if you are a true believer that your name is indeed in the book of life and will never be blotted out. Keep in mind also that true believers will overcome.

Two Seed Baptist Ideology (LI)

The Fulton Convention

of

Primitive Baptists

1900 A.D.

Authors of the Fulton Confession

In this chapter we will continue to look at what the Fulton Convention of "Primitive Baptists" said about the 1689 London Baptist confession. We will begin by again citing from Bob L. Ross, from chapter four of his book "History and Heresies of Hardshellism." Brother Ross was a close friend of mine and I loaned him my Hardshell books before he wrote the above booklet. He paid for me to fly to Pasadena, Texas in 1993 to do a series of Videos on the Hardshells, which were done through Larry Wessels and they are available on YouTube. Brother Ross wrote the following (you can read his work here)

"Elder S. T. Tolley, a Primitive Baptist leading minister of Atwood, Tennessee has long been the Editor and Publisher of The Christian Baptist magazine, a periodical which obviously speaks the views of many Primitive Baptist churches and preachers. A few years ago, I had a cordial visit with Bro. Tolley at his address and briefly toured the "Christian Baptist Library" which houses quite a collection of books, minutes, and other historical materials. I was a subscriber to this magazine, and have a collection of Elder Tolley's publication going back many years."

I was also a close friend of Elder Tolley as was my father (who was a "Primitive Baptist" minister for over fifty years). I spent time visiting in his home more than once, in Atwood, Tennessee. Elder Tolley was a good and honest man, unlike the fifty one elders who attempted to pervert the 1689 London Confession of Faith in Fulton, Kentucky. My father was one of the leading ministers on the editorial staff of the "Christian Baptist." I also wrote articles for it.

Ross wrote further (emphasis mine):

"In one of them -- the June 1971 issue -- Elder Tolley headlines a front-page article entitled A Re-Statement of Our Faith Needed. One of the primary targets of the article is the London Confession of 1689. Here are a few excerpts from Bro. Tolley's remarks:

Although the "London Confession" does set forth much of what we believe -- it does not clearly set forth our full and proper views on several points of doctrine.

Although we do accept most of the London Confession of Faith, we certainly do NOT agree with ALL of it! And we would not agree with the wording on some of the points even though we would agree with the sentiments.

To show that the "London Confession" does not set forth the beliefs of Primitive Baptists in full I will here give some excerpts from it: [then follows quotes from chapters 2, 10, 14, and 15].

This quote [from chapter seven of the Confession] has overtones of "Arminianism" in it . . . If a Primitive Baptist preacher should set forth such a statement from his pulpit you would clearly see the clamor that it would justly provoke.

They [signatories of the London Confession] believed that the "elect" are ordinarily called to regeneration and salvation by the medium of the preached word. Primitive Baptists do NOT believe this. This [chapter 10] is NOT the concept that Primitive Baptists hold relative to "Effectual Calling."

Does this [chapter 14] sound like Primitive Baptists sentiment? It is not. We believe that there will be millions of the "elect" saved in heaven who have never, nor will they ever, hear the gospel of the Son of God. [Tolley's comment on chapter 15, paragraph 5 of the Confession].

There are several similar expressions in the "London Confession" that we do not agree with, and some statements that need to be more fully explained in order to show just what is intended."

I find it quite interesting how Elder Tolley can call certain articles of the 1689 confession "Arminianism" and yet find other Hardshell elders, such as we cited in the previous chapter, who call the confession a "Calvinist" "Missionary Baptist" document. Yet, the introduction to the 1689 Confession finds the authors saying that in publishing their confession that they were "denying Arminianism." 

Ross wrote further:

"In Elder Tolley's "Library News," in this same issue, he says:

I have for several years talked with many ministers and other interested individuals about this ["a statement (confession) of faith of the Primitive Baptists of our times"] and there has been much interest in this long needed work.

If any of our readers will read the "London Confession of Faith" (this is the confession of faith that Primitive Baptists are said to believe) you will clearly see the need for re-stating our beliefs -- as we hold today."

In Elder Tolley's January 1983 issue of The Christian Baptist, he is still "grinding an ax" about the London Confession. He refers to chapters 3, 5, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 14, and 15, and says:

It would be hard to understand how any man could fully endorse all that is stated therein and remain in good standing and full fellowship with Primitive Baptists. No one could be well informed on the doctrine and beliefs of the Strict Baptists of England and not understand that they were and are, today, different from Primitive Baptists of America on several important points.

The men who drew up the London Confession of Faith held what we call "absolute" tendencies, and, although they believed in predestination and election, they also believed that the gospel was ordinarily God's ordained means to call the elect to regeneration . . . We have published several articles in THE CHRISTIAN BAPTIST pointing out these discrepancies."

Tolley, like others, was being honest in his interpretation of the 1689 confession. However, in being honest he indicts the fifty one ministers who dishonestly attempted to distort the confession by their footnotes. 

Ross wrote further:

"In the August 31, 1957 issue of The Baptist Examiner, I wrote a short editorial comment concerning the purpose of the Gospel as viewed by Arminians, Calvinists, and Hardshells. W. J. Berry, then Editor of the Old Faith Contender magazine in Elon College, North Carolina, quoted from the editorial and proposed the question to his readers, "Is this the 'Hardshell' Position?" He gave several issues of his magazine to letters from readers who wished to comment on the question, then he followed-up with his own commentary on the matter. Here is what he wrote:

Now we knew that except for minor variations this editor [Bob L. Ross] has described too accurately the position of present-day Primitive Baptists. We also knew that what he gave as the Arminian position was that generally held by Baptists just prior to 1633 (Hassell's History, p. 335, 336), and that what he gave as the Calvinistic doctrine was held by Presbyterians before Baptists espoused it, and was the position formerly held by all doctrinally sound Baptists in America prior to 1800. [As quoted in the Oct. 4, 1958 BAPTIST EXAMINER, p. 2].

In the same article, Elder Berry alleged that Primitive Baptists of this day have "almost completely abandoned" the position of early American Baptists "in actual practice."

So here is a second well-known minister who, in effect, alleged that modern Primitive Baptists are not really "Primitive," so far as having a doctrinal identity with early American Baptists, or the 17th century English Particular Baptists. The Confessions of Faith are the most conclusive "standards" whereby to determine such an issue, and by their own ADMISSION the modern Primitives do not consider the Confessions to be representative of Primitive Baptist doctrine."

It is true that Hardshell historian Sylvester Hassell acknowledges that the forefathers of the Kehukee Association of Primitive Baptist churches were Arminian. The Kehukee churches became Calvinists, and perhaps truly saved, when the Philadelphia Baptist Association sent a missionary to eastern North Carolina, a preacher named John Gano. After his visit in 1754 he reported the "melancholy condition" of North Carolina churches. In 1755, the Philadelphia Association sent ministers, specifically including Benjamin Miller and Peter P. Vanhorn, to North Carolina to reform "General Baptist" churches into "Regular Baptist" (Calvinist) churches. These efforts influenced the establishment of the Kehukee Association (organized 1765/1769), which adopted the strict Calvinist Philadelphia Confession.

I have numerous articles in the "Old Baptist Test" blog under the heading "What The First Hardshells Believed" which show that the general view of the first Anti-Mission Baptists believed in means just as the 1689 confession says, and I have other articles that show that the "no means" view was what Elder Watson called an "innovation." I have given evidence that shows that the "no means" view, and the view that evangelical faith and repentance were not essentials for eternal salvation, originated with the Two Seeders who came after Daniel Parker. This post (here) will give the reader links to those posts. On the question of means both Arminian and Calvinists nigh unanimously agree that God uses the preaching of the Gospel in the salvation of sinners. The Two Seed view is truly aberrant. 

Ross wrote the following under the sub-heading "Hatchet-Job" Done to the London Confession by Hardshell Book":

"Several years ago, a well-known Hardshell preacher, Elder Lee Hanks, compiled a number of historical items and published them under the title, The Church of God. I have the reprinted edition of 1982, published by Elder S. T. Tolley's Christian Baptist Publishing Company, and I have also examined an original edition. The book mutilates the London Confession, not only omitting significant words (indicated by a series of dots), but it even cuts-out entire chapters! It omits chapters 5, 14, 15, and 17 thru 25. It is significant that the material which is omitted includes the same points of doctrine which Hardshells such as Tolley admittedly do not believe, particularly those that express the Baptist position on the use of the Word, or Gospel, in regeneration. At this writing, I have twice written to Elder Tolley and asked him who was responsible for this "hatchet-job" on the London Confession of Faith, but he has not responded. I assume Hanks is responsible until other evidence is presented."

In my historical studies of the "Primitive" or "Old School" Baptists I have learned a good bit about Elder Lee Hanks. I am the one who loaned Brother Ross my copy of the "history" book authored by Hanks wherein he, on one hand, seems to claim affinity with the 1689 confession, but then on the other hand, eliminated large sections of it that he didn't agree with, by the use of the ellipsis (using the "..."). In my writings I have shown where this has been a common practice by the Hardshells. They will often cite from the works of others and use the ellipsis to excise those parts that they don't like, and by cutting out those sections they often totally pervert what the writers they are citing really meant. I wrote about this practice in these posts (here and here). In the latter post I cite where Brother Ross said the same thing, writing:

"...we have learned to watch the Hybrids* carefully when they start "quoting" someone whom they would like to array in their camp on "born again before faith." For some reason, they might fail to give the complete picture." 

*By "Hybrids" he includes the "Primitive Baptists." 

It is interesting that Hanks was one of the ministers who was at the Fulton convention and endorsed the 1689 confession and admitted that this was the confession that his forefathers accepted as a statement of their beliefs.

Ross wrote further:

"This is simply further evidence that the Hardshells of today are not the "original" Baptists, but in reality they have departed from the Baptist faith and constitute a cult formed around their opposition to the preaching of the Gospel to the unregenerate as a "means" used by the Holy Spirit in bringing about to the New Birth. Some may question my use of the term "cult," but when one becomes acquainted with the exclusivism of the Hardshells and their claims, it is obvious that "cult" is the most appropriate term."

This is also what I have shown in my own historical work "The Hardshell Baptist Cult" (you can read all the chapters in that massive work in its own blog here). 

Now let us notice some citations from the "Fulton Confession" and show the articles of the 1689 confession that they felt the need to rewrite in their footnotes.

CHAPTER I. OF THE HOLY SCRIPTURES

1. "The Holy Scriptures are the only sufficient, certain and infallible (a) rule of all saving knowledge, faith and obedience; although the (b) light of nature and the works of creation, and providence do so far manifest the goodness, wisdom and power of God as to leave men unexcusable; yet are they not sufficient to give that knowledge of God and His will which is necessary unto salvation."

7. All things in Scripture are not alike (l) plain in themselves, not alike clear unto all; yet those things which are necessary to be known, believed, and observed for salvation are so (m) clearly propounded and opened in some place of Scripture or other, that not only the learned but the unlearned, in due use of ordinary means, may attain to a sufficient understanding of them. (2)

Now, here is the footnote the Fulton Sanhedrin attached to this 1689 article:

"(1) We do not understand this section to teach that eternal life is obtained by the understanding of or obedience to the scriptures."

They are being deceitful in this statement for the articles above show that the 1689 confession taught that the scriptures were a means in saving sinners and giving eternal life. Many "Primitive Baptists" as we have seen agree that these fifty one elders were purposely denying what the confession says. The 1689 articles say that there is a certain "knowledge of God and His will which is necessary unto salvation" and that this knowledge can only be obtained through the scriptures.

CHAPTER II. OF GOD AND THE HOLY TRINITY

Of God and the Holy Trinity Chapter 2

Paragraph 3

"In this divine and infinite Being there are three subsistences, the Father, the Word or Son, and Holy Spirit,27 of one substance, power, and eternity, each having the whole divine essence, yet the essence undivided:28 the Father is of none, neither begotten nor proceeding; the Son is eternally begotten of the Father;29 the Holy Spirit proceeding from the Father and the Son;30 all infinite, without beginning, therefore but one God, who is not to be divided in nature and being, but distinguished by several peculiar relative properties and personal relations; which doctrine of the Trinity is the foundation of all our communion with God, and comfortable dependence on Him."

Now here is the Fulton footnote:

"(2) We understand the words of “one substance” contradict the idea that God’s people existed eternally in seed or substance in Christ, for this would establish a distinction in substance between the Father and the Son."

This is not the only footnote that mentions a Two Seed tenet. So, in the year 1900 the "Primitive Baptists" of the faction represented in Fulton felt a need to distance themselves from Two Seedism. By this footnote we surmise that there must have been some Two Seed Primitive Baptists who tried to argue that the words "one substance" in the old confession included the Lord's seed or children. 

CHAPTER III. OF GOD’S DECREE

"6. As God hath appointed the elect unto glory, so He hath by the eternal and most free purpose of His will foreordained (m) all the means thereunto; wherefore they who are elected, being fallen in Adam, (n) are redeemed by Christ, are effectually (o) called unto faith in Christ, by His Spirit working in due season, are justified, adopted, sanctified, and kept by His power through faith (p) unto salvation; neither are any other redeemed by Christ, or effectually called, justified, adopted, sanctified and saved, but the elect (q) only. (3)

Now here is the footnote of the Fulton ministers:

"(3) We do not understand the words “all the means thereunto” include other means than those especially set out in this section: “Redeemed in Christ”, “effectually called”, “by His Spirit”, etc."

Of course, when they say "we do not understand" they simply mean "we do not believe," and involve these ministers saying that this is what the writers of the 1689 confession meant. One of the scriptures given by the 1689 confession to support what they mean by "all the means" is this text:

"But we are bound to give thanks alway to God for you, brethren beloved of the Lord, because God hath from the beginning chosen you to salvation through sanctification of the Spirit and belief of the truth: Whereunto he called you by our gospel, to the obtaining of the glory of our Lord Jesus Christ." (II Thess. 2: 13-14 kjv)

So, the authors of the 1689 confession clearly believed that the effectual call was "by our gospel" and the salvation to which the elect were chosen was effected by a "sanctification of the Spirit AND belief of the truth." The means are not limited to the things the Fulton footnotes mention. The article clearly says that "faith" is a means, and they agree with the apostle Paul that "faith comes by hearing, and hearing by the word of God." (Rom. 10: 17)

CHAPTER VII. OF GOD’S COVENANT

"2. Moreover, man having brought (b) himself under the curse of the law by his fall, it pleased the Lord to make a Covenant of Grace, wherein He freely offereth unto sinners (c) life and salvation by Jesus Christ, requiring of them faith in Him, that they may be saved; and (d) promising to give unto all those that are ordained unto eternal life His Holy Spirit, to make them willing and able to believe. (1)"

Now, here is the Fulton footnote:

"(1) By the words “offereth unto sinners life and salvation”, etc., we do not understand that the gift of eternal life is offered to alien sinners, but should be understood as meaning the assurance or enjoyment of spiritual or divine life, as is taught in John 20:30-31; Galatians 6:7-8. The following places in the Confession describe the alien sinners as being unable to accept an offer of life: Chapter XX., Section 4; Chapter IX., Section 3; Chapter III., Section 6; and for further explanation of the doctrine herein set forth and from which said doctrine is deducible, see Chapter XVII., Section 3; Chapter XVIII., Sections 3 and 4; Chapter X., Section 4; Chapter XX., Sections 1 and 4; and 2 Peter 1:10-11."

Again, we have the words "by the words...we understand or do not understand." But, all see, if they are honest, that the words of the confession do mean that God offers eternal life to alien sinners and does not mean offering "the assurance or enjoyment of spiritual or divine life." Further, it is true that the confession does say that alien sinners are unable to accept the offer, but this does not negate the fact that it is offered, for the authors of this confession believed that the power to believe and receive was of God and not of the sinner. When Jesus said to the man with the paralyzed hand "stretch forth your hand" it did imply that the man had in himself the power to obey, the power to obey came from the Lord. 

Elder John Clark, a founding father of the "Primitive Baptist" sect, and editor of Zion's Advocate (1854), believed in means as did many other first generation leaders in the anti-mission movement, and I have many citations from him that show this to be true. In one of my posts I give the following citation which answers the objections raised by the above Fulton footnote:

"But some object and say, Why preach repentance to dead sinners? They can neither hear, see nor understand. That is true; that they hear not, see not, understand not, so far as the preacher is concerned or is able to effect them; but why did the prophet call upon the dry bones to hear the word of the Lord? He answered, “And I prophesied as I was commanded.” That was authority then for all who feared God, and it is still the authority for all such. This objection, however, will lie against all the exhortations and admonitions to the saints as it does against addresses to the ungodly, for the Christian has no more power than the unbeliever. The difference between them is not in the power, but in the will; as it written: "To will is present with me, but to perform that which is good I find not.”"

The theory that we must preach to men according to the power they possess to obey is sublimated Arminianism, and yet; the advocates of it are very fraid of being called Arminians. Christians know, however, by the word of his grace, and by the revelation of that word in their hearts, when it comes in power and in the Holy Ghost, and in much assurance, that Christ’s word is true which says, “Without me you can do nothing.” The Spirit takes the word of Christ and shows it to his people, and thus it is verified in the experience.

To preach to men upon the ground that they have power to do what is commanded, or to refuse to preach to them because they have not the power, shows that the confidence is in the flesh and not in God; that they depend upon the will of the flesh and not upon the power God, and that is the very essence, double refined, of Arminianism.

The minister of Christ does not preach to any class of men upon the consideration of their ability or inability. He has the sentence of death in himself, and therefore cannot trust in himself; and he has no confidence in the flesh of any other, but his confidence, his faith and hope, is in God, from whence alone are his expectations."

("What To Preach and How To Preach" Written by John Clark in Zion's Advocate--August 1875)

You can read other citations from Clark (here, here, here, here, here)

Keep in mind that the Hardshell convention of ministers was attempting to uphold the Two Seed ideas that said "nothing a person does in his life determines whether he will be saved" and said "the gospel or written word of God is only for the temporal benefit of those already saved." We cited elders John M. Watson and Hosea Preslar in earlier chapters who stated this very thing. We also cited from the 1879 minutes of the Powell Valley Association which affirmed this fact.

CHAPTER IX. OF FREE WILL

"4. When God converts a sinner, and translates him into the state of grace, (g) He freeth him from his natural bondage under sin, and by His grace alone enables him (h) freely to will and to do that which is spiritually good; yet so as that, by reason of his (i) remaining corruptions, he doth not perfectly nor only will that which is good, but doth also will that which is evil. (2)"

Now, here is one of the footnotes to this article:

"(2) We understand the expression “when God converts” to mean when God regenerates."

Yes, the Hardshells may "understand" that conversion is not regeneration, but this is not what the authors of the old confession believed. In fact, I have cited many of the old articles of faith of many "Primitive" or "Old School" Baptist churches that say "we believe all the elect will be regenerated AND converted," which shows that they believed that all the elect would be converted to faith in Christ and not regenerated only. In fact, nearly all the old Puritans, and the old Baptists who authored the 1689 confession, saw evangelical conversion as being regeneration. I have numerous proofs of this in my Old Baptist Test blog. I have numerous articles in the Old Baptist Test blog which shows this is the case. For instance, I cite these words from the learned W.G.T. Shedd  (as cited by me here):

W. G. T. Shedd, in his "Dogmatic Theology," Volume 2, pages 492-494, confessed much the same, saying:

"The divines of the seventeenth century very generally do not distinguish between regeneration and conversion, but employ the two as synonyms. Owen does this continually: On the Spirit, III. v. And Charnock likewise: Attributes, Practical Atheism. The Westminster [Confession] does not use the term regeneration. In stead of it, it employs the term vocation, or effectual calling. This comprises the entire work of the Holy Spirit in the application of redemption."

CHAPTER X. OF EFFECTUAL CALLING

"1. Those whom God hath predestinated unto life, He is pleased in His appointed and accepted time (a) effectually to call by His Word and Spirit out of that state of sin and death, in which they are by nature, to grace and salvation (b) by Jesus Christ; enlightening their minds, spiritually and savingly, to (c) understand the things of God; taking away their (d) heart of stone, and giving unto them an heart of flesh; renewing their wills, and by His almighty power determining them (e) to that which is good, and effectually drawing them to Jesus Christ; yet so as they come (f) most freely, being made most willing by His grace. (1)"

Now here is the Fulton footnote:

"(1) We do not understand that sinners are effectually called by the written word in any sense out of that state of sin and death in which they are by nature to grace and salvation but by Christ, the Word of God. The quickening and renewing of the Holy Spirit prepares the sinner to answer the gospel call, as seen in Section 2; 2 Timothy 1:9; 1 John 4:6."

What these Fulton brothers refused to understand about this article of the old confession is what is clearly affirmed by it. By "word" in the above article is not Jesus, and many later "Primitive Baptists" have agreed that this is not what the authors of the confession meant. Not only this, but the Hardshells often do the same with scripture. When they find texts which say that God uses means in the eternal salvation of sinners, they will say "we do not understand this to mean" what it plainly says and so will distort it or explain it away by any means.

"2. This effectual call is of God’s free and special grace alone, (g) not from anything at all foreseen in man, nor from any power or agency in the creature co-working with His special grace; (h) the creature being wholly passive therein, being dead in sins and trespasses, until, being quickened and renewed by the Holy Spirit, he is thereby enabled to answer this call, and to embrace the grace offered and conveyed in it, and that by no less (i) power than that which raised up Christ from the dead. 

3. Elect infants dying in infancy are (j) regenerated and saved by Christ through the Spirit, who worketh when and where and (k) how He pleaseth; so also are all other elect persons, who are incapable of being outwardly called by the ministry of the word. (2) 

4. Others not elected, although they may be called by the ministry of the word, (l) and may have some common operations of the Spirit; yet, not being effectually drawn by the Father, they neither will nor can truly (m) come to Christ, and therefore cannot be saved; much less can men that receive not the Christian religion (n) be saved, be they never so diligent to frame their lives according to the light of nature and the law of that religion they do profess. (3)"

Now here are the Fulton footnotes:

"(2) We understand this section to teach that all persons dying in infancy are of the elect, and will therefore be saved. We do not understand from this that infants and insane persons are saved in a manner different from the manner in which all other elect persons are saved. The word “others” in Section 4 has no reference to infants, but adults who are subjects of the ministry of the Word. 

(3) We understand for man to spiritually profited by the gospel he must have been born of God and made partaker of His divine nature, and by the words “common operations of the Spirit” is understood as teaching that the gospel has an enlightening and moral influence upon all rational men."

Again, what a dishonest and gross misinterpretation of what these articles say! The articles clearly say that anyone who does not receive the Christian religion is not saved. However, that is not what today's "Primitive Baptists" generally believe.

CHAPTER XI. OF JUSTIFICATION

"1. Those whom God effectually calleth He also freely (a) justifieth, not by infusing righteousness into them, but by (b) pardoning their sins, and by accounting and accepting their persons as (c) righteous; not for anything wrought in them, or done by them, but for Christ’s sake alone; not by imputing faith itself, the act of believing, or any other (d) evangelical obedience to them, as their righteousness, but by imputing Christ’s active obedience unto the whole law, and passive obedience in His death, for their whole and sole righteousness; they (e) receiving and resting on Him and His righteousness by faith, which they have not of themselves; it is the gift of God. (1) 

2. Faith, thus receiving and resting of Christ and His righteousness, is the (f) alone instrument of justification; yet it is not alone in the person justified, but is ever accompanied with all other saving graces, and is no dead faith, (g) but worketh by love."

Now here is the Fulton footnote:

"(1) We understand this section to teach that the elect are justified in the sight of the law by the actual work of Christ when He satisfied the law for them, and we believe this is applied to the elect in the work of regeneration, bringing personal righteousness or making their persons righteous in heart. (2) These sections have relation to God’s spiritual and parental government over His children in this world."

Notice how the Fulton Two Seeders omitted any reference to "faith" and its being "the alone instrument of justification" and the way sinners receive Christ and his righteousness. Why is this? Is it not because they believe that faith in Christ is not essential for being saved? How anyone can read the old confession and conclude that they taught that unbelievers may be saved and regenerated is bewildering. 

CHAPTER XIV. OF SAVING FAITH

"1. The grace of faith, whereby the elect are enabled to believe to the saving of their souls, the work of the Spirit of CHRIST (a) in their hearts, and is ordinarily wrought by the ministry of the (b) word; by which also, and by the administration of baptism and the Lord’s Supper, prayer, and other means appointed of God, it is increased (c) and strengthened. (1)"

Now here is the Fulton footnote:

"(1) By the words “faith as ordinarily wrought by the Word” we are taught to distinguish between life and the motions or fruits of life, because faith as one of the acts of life may be instrumentally produced by the Word. (Romans 10:17.) While life itself is the immediate gift of the Almighty, (Romans 6:23), and is antecedent to and the foundation of faith."

This footnote is diametrically opposed to what the article clearly says and it shows just how dishonest and deceitful were these stalwarts of Hardshellism and Two Seedism.

CHAPTER XX. OF THE GOSPEL, AND OF THE EXTENT OF THE GRACE THEREOF

"1. The covenant of works being broken by sin, and made unprofitable unto life, God was pleased to give forth the promise of Christ, (a) the Seed of the woman, as the means of calling the elect, and begetting in them faith and repentance; in this promise the (b) gospel, as to the substance of it, was revealed, and was therein effectual for the conversion and salvation of sinners.

2. This promise of Christ, and salvation by Him, is revealed only by (c) the word of God; neither do the works of creation or providence, with the light of nature, (d) make discovery of Christ, or of the grace by Him, so much as in a general or obscure way; much less that men destitute of the revelation of Him by the promise or gospel, (e) should be enabled thereby to attain saving faith or repentance. (1)

4. Although the gospel be the only outward means of revealing Christ and saving grace, and is, as such, abundantly sufficient thereunto; yet that men who are dead in trespasses may be born again, quickened or regenerated, there is moreover necessary an effectual, insuperable (h) work of the Holy Spirit upon the whole soul, for the producing in them a new spiritual life, without which no other means will effect (i) their conversion unto God."

Now here is the Fulton footnote:

"(1) We are taught by this section that nature does not reveal the scheme of human redemption to man. Nevertheless this fact does not render the work of Christ and the Spirit impossible in the regeneration and eternal salvation of sinners, even in the absence of the preached Word."

Here the Fulton footnote says that the articles of the old confession teach that people who have not the word of God or know not Christ nor the Gospel may be saved and yet this is clearly not what the articles teach. Who were these fifty one elders think they were fooling by these footnotes? The only ones would be the Hardshell lay members who would simply take what these elders said without checking them out.

CHAPTER XXXI. OF THE STATE OF MAN AFTER DEATH, AND OF THE RESURRECTION OF THE DEAD

"1. The bodies of men after death return to the dust (a) and see corruption; but their souls, which neither die nor sleep, having an immortal subsistence, immediately (b) return to God who gave them; the souls of the righteous, being then made perfect in holiness, are received into paradise, where they are with Christ, and behold the face of God in light and (c) glory, waiting for the full redemption of their bodies; and the souls of the wicked are cast into hell, where they remain in torment and utter darkness, reserved to (d) the judgment of the great day; besides these two places for souls separated from their bodies the Scripture acknowledgeth none. (1)"

Now here is the Fulton footnote:

"(1) By the words “immortal subsistence” is not meant that the souls of men are eternal as God is eternal, but that they are eternal in the sense that they possess endless being or shall never cease to exist or die."

Here again we see an allusion to the Two Seed view that the souls of the elect are without beginning, being "eternal children," having been begotten in the Son of God from eternity. What is ironic is that though the Fulton brethren tried to distance themselves from some of the tenets of Two Seedism, yet they still retained some of those tenets.

In the next chapter we will continue this line of thought.