Saturday, October 18, 2025

The Sabellianism of Wilson Thompson


1788 - 1866

Recently I wrote an entry titled "The "Ablest Primitive Baptist Minister"?" (here). In that post I cited the words of Sylvester Hassell who said that Wilson Thompson was considered the "ablest Primitive Baptist minister" that ever existed up to that time (end of the 19th century). I then showed how this is astounding considering all the serious errors that Thompson believed and advocated. One of those errors was in his denial of the Trinity, that God was three persons, and affirming that the Father is the Son and vice versa. In other words, he was a Sabellian. 

Sabellianism, or Modalism, teaches that a unipersonal God reveals himself in three modes or manifestations, as Father, Son, and Holy Spirit. Therefore the Father is the Son and the Son is the Father. 

The following is from Wilson Thompson's book "Simple Truth" published in 1821. It can be downloaded and read (here). It is a composite of several of his sermons. In DISCOURSE #2, "On The Divinity of Christ," Thompson writes the following (emphasis mine).

"First, We shall attempt to prove that the divine nature of Christ is very God. Secondly, That he is not distinct from the Father, but he is the Father. Thirdly, Show that there is no other God worthy to be worshiped but the God in Christ."

That is classic Sabellianism. No, the Bible does not teach that the Son is the Father. 

My Hardshell brothers, do you think that Thompson was one of your ablest ministers? Do you deny the Trinity as he did? Would you fellowship him today if he were here?

I have written much on Sabellianism and Modalism through the years. One Baptist group I was once associated with were Modalists. I have also written about Thompson's Sabellianism, and about Samuel Trott's Sabellianism. (See these postings herehereherehereherehere) Also, in my Baptist Gadfly blog I have also written many articles on this heresy. This page (here) gives many of those postings.

Thursday, October 16, 2025

Praying To Mary and Saints in Heaven?

One of the leading arguments against the Catholic practice of praying to Mary or other departed saints is that it is a case of necromancy, which is forbidden in scripture. The Catholic response to this is to say that necromancy was restricted to attempts to contact the dead in order to obtain information from them, and praying to the saints is not for that purpose. However, necromancy involves much more than that, for it condemns all attempts to communicate with the dead. 

The Catholic position says it is good for believers to talk to dead saints who have gone to heaven in order to inform them of requests so that those saints can intercede in heaven for them. So, to speak to dead saints in order to give them information is fine and dandy but to speak to dead saints to get information from them is forbidden? 

Friends, the Bible condemns all attempts to communicate with the dead, either to try and speak to them or try to get them to speak to you or do something for you in heaven.

There are many other reasons why praying to Mary or the saints in heaven is not biblical, but this should suffice.

Early Church or Church Fathers Our Criteria?

I believe in sola scriptura. I don't believe that church tradition or councils or popes are determinants of what is the teaching of the Bible. I have listened to many debates with Catholics over whether the Bible and the Bible alone is the sole authority for Christian belief and I must say that their arguments against sola scriptura are without strength. The reason for denying that the Bible is the only rule of faith and practice is because taking the Bible as such will invalidate many traditional beliefs of the Catholic church. 

Catholics, and some Protestants, sadly to say, will argue that the "church fathers" are a criteria for judging orthodoxy. But, this is no criteria and should be rejected, and that for several reasons. The church fathers were not all agreed on many Bible teachings. 

Many Protestants have also erred when they have said that "the early church is our standard." Yet, even the early church was not perfect in doctrinal understanding. Most of the new testament epistles were written to correct errors among the early church. The letters Christ personally dictated to the apostle John and sent to the seven churches of Asia Minor (Revelation chapters two and three) also show this to be true. Most of those churches had very serious errors, errors which later became incorporated into the Catholic church. 

I listened to a debate today where Catholic apologist Trent Horn asked a Protestant to show him a text of scripture where sola scriptura was advocated. Sad to say, this Protestant did not offer any. Well, let me do so.

"To the law and to the testimony! If they do not speak according to this word, it is because there is no light in them." (Isaiah 8: 7 nkjv)

"Now the Bereans were more noble-minded than the Thessalonians, for they received the message with great eagerness and examined the Scriptures every day to see if these teachings were true." (Acts 17: 11 nkjv)

"If anyone speaks, let him speak as the oracles of God." (I Peter 4: 11 nkjv)

"Now these things, brethren, I have figuratively transferred to myself and Apollos for your sakes, that you may learn in us not to think beyond what is written, that none of you may be puffed up on behalf of one against the other." (I Cor. 4: 6 nkjv)

These verses say that the written word of God is the only rule for faith.

Wednesday, October 15, 2025

Brothers: Beware of the Animals (V)



"...who through faith subdued kingdoms, worked righteousness, obtained promises, 
stopped the mouths of lions..." 
(Heb. 11: 33 nkjv)

In this posting we will continue our look at the various kinds of enemies of the people of God and who are described as certain kinds of animals. In the first chapter we cited Paul's statement that he "fought with beasts at Ephesus." (See these links for the previous chapters; herehereherehere) In those previous chapters we spoke of those who were called "dogs," and "wolves," and "foxes," and generally as "natural brute beasts." Today we look at how these enemies of God and his people are compared to lions who prey on souls. The above text from the apostle Peter speaks of the Devil as being such a lion. He is the chief lion among the pride of lions who oppose God and his people. He is also the chief or alpha dog, the leader of the wolf pack, and the top fox. 

As I have stated previously in regard to lions in the bible, sometimes they are symbols of courage, strength, and royalty. So Christ is called "the lion of the tribe of Judah" (Rev. 5: 5). The prophet Joel also prophesied of the Lord saying "The LORD also will roar from Zion, And utter His voice from Jerusalem; The heavens and earth will shake..." (Joel 3: 16 nkjv) Hosea also similarly says "They shall walk after the LORD: he shall roar like a lion: when he shall roar, then the children shall tremble from the west." (Hosea 11: 10 kjv) That lions are associated with royalty is seen when we say that the lion is "the king of beasts." Naves topical Bible says:

"The lion, often referred to as the "king of beasts," holds a significant place in biblical literature and symbolism. Known for its strength, majesty, and fearsome nature, the lion is frequently mentioned throughout the Scriptures, serving as a powerful metaphor for both divine and earthly authority, as well as a symbol of danger and destruction."

Solomon wrote:

"The wrath of a king is like the roaring of a lion..." (Prov. 20: 2 nkjv)

"The king’s wrath is like the roaring of a lion, But his favor is like dew on the grass." (Prov. 19: 12 nkjv)

That lions are symbols of royalty is seen in the following description of Solomon's throne.

"Moreover the king made a great throne of ivory, and overlaid it with pure gold. The throne had six steps, and the top of the throne was round at the back; there were armrests on either side of the place of the seat, and two lions stood beside the armrestsTwelve lions stood there, one on each side of the six steps; nothing like this had been made for any other kingdom." (I Kings 10: 18-20 nkjv)

One of the four heavenly creatures seen by John and Ezekiel had the face of a lion. (Eze. 1: 10; Rev. 4: 7)

Satan is a king or prince in several Bible passages. So we read of Satan as king over all the demons of the bottomless pit.

"And they had as king over them the angel of the bottomless pit, whose name in Hebrew is Abaddon, but in Greek he has the name Apollyon." (Rev. 9: 11 nkjv)

So, he is a lion, but he is a lion in the bad sense, because he "seeks to devour" the souls of men, especially the souls of the redeemed. This "lion king" is a destroyer, and therefore called Abaddon or Apollyon.

In the above text from the apostle Peter, we are told that Satan is on the prowl and is like a "roaring lion." Why the roaring? A lion roars when he has caught his prey. So we read:

"Will a lion roar in the forest, when he has no prey? Will a young lion cry out of his den, if he has caught nothing?" (Amos 3: 4 nkjv)

"For thus the Lord has spoken to me: “As a lion roars, And a young lion over his prey (When a multitude of shepherds is summoned against him, He will not be afraid of their voice Nor be disturbed by their noise), So the Lord of hosts will come down To fight for Mount Zion and for its hill." (Isa. 31: 4 nkjv; see also 5: 29)

Satan roars when he has caught men. So, he is constantly roaring because he is constantly catching prey.

So too will the Lord roar when he catches Satan himself and all his pride of lions at his return from glory, as the texts cited above foretell. 

While Satan is hunting he does not roar, for that would alert his prey. Before he roars, he hunts by stealth, like tigers and cheetahs, etc. He "lies in wait," and sneaks up on his prey. So too does Satan and evil men. Wrote the prophet Jeremiah:

"For among My people are found wicked men; They lie in wait as one who sets snares; They set a trap; They catch men." (5: 26)

Paul warned of those who teach false doctrine by "cunning craftiness" and who "lie in wait to deceive" (Eph. 4: 14). 

All evil men who murder and destroy others are lions in Satan's pack or pride. So wrote the Psalmist:

"Lord, how long will You look on? Rescue me from their destructions, My precious life from the lions." (Psa. 35: 17 nkjv)

"My soul is among lions; I lie among the sons of men Who are set on fire, Whose teeth are spears and arrows, And their tongue a sharp sword." (Psa. 57: 4 nkjv)

Here the man of God views his enemies, the wicked, as being "lions," men who seek and devour other men. So he prays to God saying "Break their teeth, O God, in their mouth: break out the great teeth of the young lions, O LORD." (Psa. 58: 6 kjv) So we read in Jeremiah:

"Israel is a scattered sheep; the lions have driven him away: first the king of Assyria hath devoured him; and last this Nebuchadrezzar king of Babylon hath broken his bones." (Jer. 50: 17 kjv)

Both the king of Assyria and Babylon were lions who attacked and scattered the sheep of Israel. Ezekiel also writes:

"Moreover take thou up a lamentation for the princes of Israel, And say, What is thy mother? A lioness: she lay down among lions, she nourished her whelps among young lions. And she brought up one of her whelps: it became a young lion, and it learned to catch the prey; it devoured men. The nations also heard of him; he was taken in their pit, and they brought him with chains unto the land of Egypt. Now when she saw that she had waited, and her hope was lost, then she took another of her whelps, and made him a young lion. And he went up and down among the lions, he became a young lion, and learned to catch the prey, and devoured men. And he knew their desolate palaces, and he laid waste their cities; and the land was desolate, and the fulness thereof, by the noise of his roaring." (Eze. 1: 1-7; kjv)

The prophet Zephaniah also writes:

"Her princes within her are roaring lions; her judges are evening wolves; they gnaw not the bones till the morrow. Her prophets are light and treacherous persons: her priests have polluted the sanctuary, they have done violence to the law." (Zeph. 3: 3-4 kjv)

It is sad that many churches have such lions and wolves as their leaders. Every Christian is to be on guard for these prowling lions. Sometimes, by the strength of the Lord, they will need to kill such lions, not necessarily taking their lives, but killing their influence, by breaking their teeth and declawing them, metaphorically speaking.

Overcoming the Evil Lions

"Saul and Jonathan were lovely and pleasant in their lives, and in their death they were not divided: they were swifter than eagles, they were stronger than lions." (II Sam. 1: 23 kjv)

Believers need God's strength and wisdom in fighting the evil lions. They need to be "stronger than lions." They need the courage of the lion, and God's spiritual weapons, in order to defeat them. (See II Cor. 10: 3-6) The text at the head of this posting says that old testament believers "stopped the mouths of lions" by their "faith." King David, the man after God's own heart, and Samson, were also by faith lion slayers.

"And Saul said to David, “You are not able to go against this Philistine to fight with him; for you are a youth, and he a man of war from his youth.” But David said to Saul, “Your servant used to keep his father’s sheep, and when a lion or a bear came and took a lamb out of the flock, I went out after it and struck it, and delivered the lamb from its mouth; and when it arose against me, I caught it by its beard, and struck and killed it. Your servant has killed both lion and bear; and this uncircumcised Philistine will be like one of them, seeing he has defied the armies of the living God.” Moreover David said, “The Lord, who delivered me from the paw of the lion and from the paw of the bear, He will deliver me from the hand of this Philistine.” (I Sam. 17: 33-37 nkjv)

"So Samson went down to Timnah with his father and mother, and came to the vineyards of Timnah. Now to his surprise, a young lion came roaring against him. And the Spirit of the Lord came mightily upon him, and he tore the lion apart as one would have torn apart a young goat, though he had nothing in his hand. But he did not tell his father or his mother what he had done." (Judges 14: 5-6 nkjv)

These texts tell us that it takes the strength, wisdom, and Spirit of the Lord to fight off the lions who attack men and the Lord's flock. Paul warned of professing Christians about behaving as lions and wolves, saying "But if you bite and devour one another, beware lest you be consumed by one another!" (Gal. 5: 15 nkjv) Oh the harm such lions have done when they have come among the churches!

"Therefore submit to God. Resist the devil and he will flee from you." 
(James 4: 7 nkjv)

Thursday, October 9, 2025

Which Bible Book Contains The Most Oracles?

By "oracles" I mean words directly spoken by God and recorded by the writer of the Bible book. Many Bible books say "thus says the Lord" and then gives us what he said. These are the oracles. So, which book of the Bible has more of these direct utterances of Lord God? The answer will no doubt surprise you. Suppose I told you that it was one of the least, if not the least, read book in the Bible? Would that surprise you? Well, brothers and sisters, it is the Book of Leviticus!

The best commentary or book on the divinely inspired book of Leviticus was written by a famous Lutheran theologian of the 19th century, one who authored many excellent books, including his great commentary on the Book of Revelation, titled "The Apocalypse." That book is called --

"The Gospel in Leviticus; Or, An Exposition of The Hebrew Ritual", also known as 

"Holy Types: The Gospel in Leviticus" or "Holy Types" or 

"The Gospel in Leviticus: A Series of Lectures on the Hebrew Ritual"

I have this book in my library, though I have not read in it in many years. It is thankfully available for free online (See here) and I encourage all those who want to know more about this inspired book to let Dr. Seiss walk you through it. He shows how it has much "gospel" in it. It is therefore fitting that Seiss would call his commentary on Leviticus "The Gospel in Leviticus." Not many Christians would think of the Book of Leviticus as containing much gospel messaging. But, ironically it does in fact. He shows how the fundamentals of the Gospel are taught in the numerous feasts of Israel, and in the numerous laws and work of the priests, etc. 

Dr. Seiss is also the author of another famous work I recommend and that is his "Gospel in the Stars" book. This is an excellent book and shows how the Gospel message is told pictorially in the naming of the stars and constellations or Zodiac (called "Mazzaroth" in Job 38: 32; God in the Book of Job mentioning many of the constellations). You can read this book online (here). I have cited from this book much in writing upon how the Gospel message is taught in Mazzaroth. 

Wednesday, October 8, 2025

Two Seed Baptist Ideology (XVII)




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

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

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

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

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

Trott wrote further:

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Trott wrote further:

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Wrote Williams:

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

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

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

It was in the 1840s and 1850s that Two Seedism became the main topic of discussion among the "Old Schoolers." Some of those who became fervent opponents of Two Seedism nevertheless wrote brotherly remarks to the "Signs of the Times" and to other Two Seed Primitive Baptist periodicals, such as to the "The Southern Baptist Messenger," begun in 1850 by Gilbert Beebe's son, Elder William L. Beebe, and published out of Covington, Georgia. The "Herald of Truth," mentioned by Elder Watson in "The Old Baptist Test," begun by Watson's fellow minister, R. W. Fain, and later taken over by Elder T. S. Dalton, seems also to have been a leading paper opposing Two Seeders. 

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Wrote Beebe:

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

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

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

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

Wrote Beebe:

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

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

Wrote Beebe:

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

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

Wrote Beebe:

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Monday, October 6, 2025

Discerning God's Presence With You



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

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

God In Your Thoughts?

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

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

God In Your Praises

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

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

God In Your Humble Spirit

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

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

Notice these words of the Lord Jesus:

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

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

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

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

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

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

Thursday, October 2, 2025

Campbell On Baptism When He Was Baptist




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

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

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

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

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

The debate can be read (here)

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

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

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

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

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

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