Brother Jeremy Sarber, who recently left the Hardhells, wrote to me saying:
"I'm sure you're familiar with TETH (The Ears To Hear). If so, you know that he's made it his mission to refute Calvinism. In recent months, I've become his target on Twitter.
Long story short, I asked whether he would be willing to participate in an open debate. He agreed. I've attached a screenshot of his exact words.
Maybe you finally have a PB with enough courage to debate you. Maybe."
I wrote this back to him:
"Tell him to send us something to respond to or respond to something we have written."
TETH is an anonymous blogger who can be seen at http://theearstohear.blogspot.com/. Brother Kevin and I visited his site a couple years or so ago and we could not get him to engage us or to answer honest questions from us. If he really wants to debate the tenets of hardshellism in the light of scripture and old Baptist history, then let him come here as did Jason Brown and we will engage him. We only ask that he tell us who he is. I have no desire to debate with a person who will not disclose who he is. If he wants to debate, let him sign a proposition and we will debate him. He can post his replies on his web page and we will post our replies on ours.
Here is what TETH wrote to Jeremy about debating us.
"Send them my way. I'd love to connect. I'm sure we would find a lot to discuss. They can reach me at theearstohear@me.com"
We've done that in the past.
Thursday, May 18, 2017
Sunday, May 14, 2017
On Musical Instruments
The Hardshells are divided on the issue of whether the use of musical instruments is allowed in new testament church worship, as are the Campbellites (aka "church of Christ"). Those who oppose the practice think that those who have them are sinning against God in having them, and cannot be a legitimate church with them. My dear friend, Bob L. Ross of Pilgrim Publications, wrote a book on this in which he completely overthrows the views of the Hardshells and Campbellites. I encourage all to get his book "Campbellites, Cowbells, Rosary Beads, and Snake-Handling." (see here for many segments of the book) He also has had several debates with the Campbellites on this topic, one of which can be seen on Youtube. All speeches are lined up here and I encourage all to listen.
One of the famous books on the topic was between the two segments of the "Church of Christ," and represents a debate that was had on the topic between N.B. Hardeman and Ira Boswell. To read a pdf file for the Hardeman-Boswell debate on the subject see here. To me Bob completely destroys the reasoning of the anti-instrumental music crowd.
One of the famous books on the topic was between the two segments of the "Church of Christ," and represents a debate that was had on the topic between N.B. Hardeman and Ira Boswell. To read a pdf file for the Hardeman-Boswell debate on the subject see here. To me Bob completely destroys the reasoning of the anti-instrumental music crowd.
Friday, May 12, 2017
Some Thoughts On The Faith Of Eph. 2:8
Brother Kevin recently posted a discussion among today's Hardshells that occurred on Facebook regarding Ephesians 2:8. In that discussion there were two points that were focused upon: 1) Is the salvation of the passage eternal or time salvation? 2) What is the faith of the passage? It seems that all agreed that the salvation was eternal salvation. So, the major discussion concerned identifying what the apostle meant by "through faith."
Historically, the old Baptists who put out the London Confessions (1644 and 1689), the Particular and Regular Baptists of the 17th through the 19th century, those who are the forefathers of today's "Primitive Baptists," all taught that the "faith" of the passage was that faith or belief that was produced by the preaching of the gospel. (Romans 10:14-17) The views held to by today's Hardshells are not the historic view of their forefathers, but is new and novel. I challenge any Hardshell today to prove me wrong on this. The fact that none will do so will show that I am right. Further, not only the London Baptists of the 17th and 18th centuries, but the Hardshells of the 19th century, also taught that the "faith" of Eph. 2:8 was that faith in Christ and the gospel that comes by hearing the word preached, per Romans 10. All one has to do is read the old periodicals of the 19th century by the forefathers of the Hardshells to see this. Will any care to do so?
So, what are the two aberrant views being advocated today by the Hardshells?
The older of the two novel views says that the "faith" or belief of the passage is that which is produced apart from gospel preaching or hearing the word of God. This "faith" is supposed to be given in regeneration, even to those regenerated in the womb or who remain heathen in faith. This faith is often equated with a simple faith in a god or gods, such as heathen possess (see Elder Sarrels on this in his "Systematic Theology"), or to a religious mind, and is often called a "seed faith," denoting a faith that is internal, hidden, and dormant. It is contrasted with what is called a "gospel" or "doctrinal" faith.
This view of faith was invented at the end of the nineteenth century at the same time that the "means" doctrine was discarded and "time salvation" was invented. It was the view of my father and most of the elders of the twentieth century. Of course, I have completely refuted this novel idea of what is "faith." There is no scripture that so defines faith as this. Modern Hardshells who retain this view often define this kind of "faith" as "ability." So, when they say God gives faith in regeneration, they mean God gives ability to have faith.
The newer apologetic defense now being offered, and one that is supplanting all previous views on the matter, is one that says that the "faith" that is instrumental in eternal salvation is the faith that God supposedly has in Christ and his work. This I have also refuted, particularly in that series on "The Faith of God," particularly the first couple chapters. (see here, and here)
What both these novel views attempt to do is to find a way of getting around those verses which clearly make faith to be necessary for being eternally saved. This is clearly an example of how cultists and heretics "resist the truth" (II Tim. 3:8), "wrest" or twist "the scriptures" (II Peter 3:16), "corrupt the word of God" (II Cor. 2:17), and "handle the word of God deceitfully" (II Cor. 4:2).
What was wrong with the view of your forefathers? I would ask my Hardshell brethren. Why did they not have any reluctance in seeing gospel faith as what was under consideration in Eph. 2:8 and other similar passages? Was it not because they did not reject gospel means as you do? Why do you think yourself wiser than they? Is it humility on your part to think that you know more than they? Are you not being arrogant and boastful in your special knowledge? Also, if they held this view, and it is a heresy, does that not invalidate your churches and baptisms, seeing you came from them? Did they not organize your churches and baptize you?
What I want to point out regarding this verse is the fact that there is in most Greek texts the definite article "the" before "faith" so that it is "through the faith." Notice what People's Commentary (see here) says on this point (emphasis mine).
Ephesians 2:8 For by grace are ye saved through faith. Lest they might forget the doctrine that he ever preached, he reminds them that works of the law never saved them; that they were saved by God's grace shown in the gospel; that this salvation was obtained through the faith. The definite article is found before faith in the Greek, showing that "the" faith, or the gospel, is meant. [It is] the gift of God. The salvation is not due to ourselves, but is God's gift. The grammatical construction of the Greek does not allow us to make "faith" the subject of the last clause. It is not "faith", but salvation through the faith, which is the gift of God.
Does Ephesians 2:8 say “through faith” or “through the faith”? Some Greek manuscripts have the definite article τῆς (the feminine singular genitive form of the word ‘the’), while some don’t. The majority of the manuscripts do include τῆς in Ephesians 2:8. It is included in the Byzantine Majority Text. For Ephesians 2:8, the Majority Text (or Textus Recepus upon which the KJV is based) reads:
“τῇ γὰρ χάριτί ἐστε σεσῳσμένοι διὰ τῆς πίστεως, καὶ τοῦτο οὐκ ἐξ ὑμῶν θεοῦ τὸ δῶρον.”
This is a hard nut for those Hardshells who, unlike their forefathers, believe that the KJV is without errors in translation! The definite article is present in the Greek but the KJV translators chose not to put it into their translation! Since the text reads "by grace are you saved through the faith," what are we to understand by it?
Many times in the NT "the faith" is often a term for "the creed" of Christians, or a term used interchangeably with "the gospel" or "the word." Here are two examples:
1) "earnestly contend for the faith which was once delivered to the saints." (Jude 1:3)
2) "shall depart from the faith, giving heed to seducing spirits, and doctrines of devils."(I Tim. 4:1)
If this is what Paul is referring to in Ephesians 2:8, then he is affirming gospel means! He is saying that you are saved by grace through the gospel. Is that not what he says in several other places in the NT? (See for instance I Cor. 4: 15 and Gal. 3:8) The commentary cited above believes that this is the meaning of the apostle and this could very well be the case. The same phrase in Greek – “through the faith” (διὰ τῆς πίστεως) – is found in Colossians 2:12 and in Galatians 3:26.
However, the definite article "the" could be what is called "Anaphoric Article," which is defined as follows (emphasis mine):
An article may be used to indicate that the noun or substantive behind it was referred to in some previous text, or was at least implied in what was written or spoken previously. It is similar to a demonstrative (e.g., "that man, the one I just mentioned"). In Greek, the first mention of a noun or substantive, or its synonym, is traditionally anarthrous (i.e., it has no article in front of it). Then any subsequent references to the same entity — whether through the use of the same noun or a synonym — will normally be articular (with an article in front of it), indicating an anaphoric reference. In this way, it signals the reader to identify any previously mentioned information with the current articular noun or substantive. (SEE HERE)
If this is how Paul is using the definite article, then where is the faith he speaks of previously mentioned by him? It can only be these verses:
"Wherefore I also, after I heard of your faith in the Lord Jesus, and love unto all the saints...And what is the exceeding greatness of his power to us-ward who believe, according to the working of his mighty power..." (Eph. 1:15, 19)
Notice that the "faith" previously mentioned by the apostle is not God the Father's supposed "faith in the Lord Jesus," which it would have to be if the Hardshells are correct in arguing that "the faith" of Eph. 2:8 is such. Rather, he is clear in saying that "the faith" is "your faith in the Lord Jesus" and is related to "us who believe," not to God who believes!
Ephesians 2: 8 says that God eternally saves his people "through the faith," and whether "the faith" is the evangelical faith of his people, or "the faith" that is the gospel, both interpretations are true and overthrow hardshellism!
Historically, the old Baptists who put out the London Confessions (1644 and 1689), the Particular and Regular Baptists of the 17th through the 19th century, those who are the forefathers of today's "Primitive Baptists," all taught that the "faith" of the passage was that faith or belief that was produced by the preaching of the gospel. (Romans 10:14-17) The views held to by today's Hardshells are not the historic view of their forefathers, but is new and novel. I challenge any Hardshell today to prove me wrong on this. The fact that none will do so will show that I am right. Further, not only the London Baptists of the 17th and 18th centuries, but the Hardshells of the 19th century, also taught that the "faith" of Eph. 2:8 was that faith in Christ and the gospel that comes by hearing the word preached, per Romans 10. All one has to do is read the old periodicals of the 19th century by the forefathers of the Hardshells to see this. Will any care to do so?
So, what are the two aberrant views being advocated today by the Hardshells?
The older of the two novel views says that the "faith" or belief of the passage is that which is produced apart from gospel preaching or hearing the word of God. This "faith" is supposed to be given in regeneration, even to those regenerated in the womb or who remain heathen in faith. This faith is often equated with a simple faith in a god or gods, such as heathen possess (see Elder Sarrels on this in his "Systematic Theology"), or to a religious mind, and is often called a "seed faith," denoting a faith that is internal, hidden, and dormant. It is contrasted with what is called a "gospel" or "doctrinal" faith.
This view of faith was invented at the end of the nineteenth century at the same time that the "means" doctrine was discarded and "time salvation" was invented. It was the view of my father and most of the elders of the twentieth century. Of course, I have completely refuted this novel idea of what is "faith." There is no scripture that so defines faith as this. Modern Hardshells who retain this view often define this kind of "faith" as "ability." So, when they say God gives faith in regeneration, they mean God gives ability to have faith.
The newer apologetic defense now being offered, and one that is supplanting all previous views on the matter, is one that says that the "faith" that is instrumental in eternal salvation is the faith that God supposedly has in Christ and his work. This I have also refuted, particularly in that series on "The Faith of God," particularly the first couple chapters. (see here, and here)
What both these novel views attempt to do is to find a way of getting around those verses which clearly make faith to be necessary for being eternally saved. This is clearly an example of how cultists and heretics "resist the truth" (II Tim. 3:8), "wrest" or twist "the scriptures" (II Peter 3:16), "corrupt the word of God" (II Cor. 2:17), and "handle the word of God deceitfully" (II Cor. 4:2).
What was wrong with the view of your forefathers? I would ask my Hardshell brethren. Why did they not have any reluctance in seeing gospel faith as what was under consideration in Eph. 2:8 and other similar passages? Was it not because they did not reject gospel means as you do? Why do you think yourself wiser than they? Is it humility on your part to think that you know more than they? Are you not being arrogant and boastful in your special knowledge? Also, if they held this view, and it is a heresy, does that not invalidate your churches and baptisms, seeing you came from them? Did they not organize your churches and baptize you?
What I want to point out regarding this verse is the fact that there is in most Greek texts the definite article "the" before "faith" so that it is "through the faith." Notice what People's Commentary (see here) says on this point (emphasis mine).
Ephesians 2:8 For by grace are ye saved through faith. Lest they might forget the doctrine that he ever preached, he reminds them that works of the law never saved them; that they were saved by God's grace shown in the gospel; that this salvation was obtained through the faith. The definite article is found before faith in the Greek, showing that "the" faith, or the gospel, is meant. [It is] the gift of God. The salvation is not due to ourselves, but is God's gift. The grammatical construction of the Greek does not allow us to make "faith" the subject of the last clause. It is not "faith", but salvation through the faith, which is the gift of God.
Does Ephesians 2:8 say “through faith” or “through the faith”? Some Greek manuscripts have the definite article τῆς (the feminine singular genitive form of the word ‘the’), while some don’t. The majority of the manuscripts do include τῆς in Ephesians 2:8. It is included in the Byzantine Majority Text. For Ephesians 2:8, the Majority Text (or Textus Recepus upon which the KJV is based) reads:
“τῇ γὰρ χάριτί ἐστε σεσῳσμένοι διὰ τῆς πίστεως, καὶ τοῦτο οὐκ ἐξ ὑμῶν θεοῦ τὸ δῶρον.”
This is a hard nut for those Hardshells who, unlike their forefathers, believe that the KJV is without errors in translation! The definite article is present in the Greek but the KJV translators chose not to put it into their translation! Since the text reads "by grace are you saved through the faith," what are we to understand by it?
Many times in the NT "the faith" is often a term for "the creed" of Christians, or a term used interchangeably with "the gospel" or "the word." Here are two examples:
1) "earnestly contend for the faith which was once delivered to the saints." (Jude 1:3)
2) "shall depart from the faith, giving heed to seducing spirits, and doctrines of devils."(I Tim. 4:1)
If this is what Paul is referring to in Ephesians 2:8, then he is affirming gospel means! He is saying that you are saved by grace through the gospel. Is that not what he says in several other places in the NT? (See for instance I Cor. 4: 15 and Gal. 3:8) The commentary cited above believes that this is the meaning of the apostle and this could very well be the case. The same phrase in Greek – “through the faith” (διὰ τῆς πίστεως) – is found in Colossians 2:12 and in Galatians 3:26.
However, the definite article "the" could be what is called "Anaphoric Article," which is defined as follows (emphasis mine):
An article may be used to indicate that the noun or substantive behind it was referred to in some previous text, or was at least implied in what was written or spoken previously. It is similar to a demonstrative (e.g., "that man, the one I just mentioned"). In Greek, the first mention of a noun or substantive, or its synonym, is traditionally anarthrous (i.e., it has no article in front of it). Then any subsequent references to the same entity — whether through the use of the same noun or a synonym — will normally be articular (with an article in front of it), indicating an anaphoric reference. In this way, it signals the reader to identify any previously mentioned information with the current articular noun or substantive. (SEE HERE)
If this is how Paul is using the definite article, then where is the faith he speaks of previously mentioned by him? It can only be these verses:
"Wherefore I also, after I heard of your faith in the Lord Jesus, and love unto all the saints...And what is the exceeding greatness of his power to us-ward who believe, according to the working of his mighty power..." (Eph. 1:15, 19)
Notice that the "faith" previously mentioned by the apostle is not God the Father's supposed "faith in the Lord Jesus," which it would have to be if the Hardshells are correct in arguing that "the faith" of Eph. 2:8 is such. Rather, he is clear in saying that "the faith" is "your faith in the Lord Jesus" and is related to "us who believe," not to God who believes!
Ephesians 2: 8 says that God eternally saves his people "through the faith," and whether "the faith" is the evangelical faith of his people, or "the faith" that is the gospel, both interpretations are true and overthrow hardshellism!
Hardshells Lose Another
Over the years since I started this blog, and the Baptist Gadfly Blog, I have had numerous conversations, by phone and e-mail, from several "Primitive Baptist" elders. This is how Elder Fralick and I first became friends and colleagues. Two such elders are here in North Carolina, being Elders Brad Whitley and Jeremy Sarber. Both of these elders have seen the errors of the Hardshells and have "come out from among them." I would like to share what brother Jeremy wrote to me recently about his leaving the Hardshells.
Elder Jeremy Sarber wrote to me:
Hey, brother. I’m thrilled to see you writing and publishing to the blog again. I missed you during your brief hiatus. I hope all is well. I can’t remember whether we discussed it, but I officially left the Primitive Baptists at the end of last year. It’s been liberating. I owe a lot to you. If not for your website, I suspect my conversion to sound Bible doctrine would have taken years longer. So thank you. I mean that. In case you’re interested, I’ve been transcribing an extended conversation with a “Hardshell” preacher and releasing one part per week. The entire series so far can be found here: http://jeremysarber.com/honest-with-me/
This came as good news to me as I often get discouraged over the efforts I have expended to try to reclaim my Hardshell brethren. Seeing men like Kevin, Brad, and Jeremy, and others, come to see the errors of the Hardshells and the truth more perfectly, is truly encouraging. I hope others will also be helped by our writings, not only here in the USA, but in the Philippines, Russia, and other parts of the world where the Hardshells are proselyting. One of the things I wrote to brother Jeremy was this:
I have prayed for you over the years and am glad God had mercy on you to open your eyes and deliver you from a cult. Make no mistake about it, the Hardshell church today is a cult. Enjoy your freedom in Christ. Come to visit when you can.
Again, that is the whole purpose of this blog and my writings against the Hardshells. It is to help them see the way of truth more clearly and be delivered from the Hardshell cult. I am hopeful that some day there will be whole churches converted back to the faith of our old Baptist forefathers.
I have invited brother Jeremy to write on this blog and I hope he will do so. Please encourage him to do so by reading his web page and corresponding with him.
If the Hardshells are really concerned about men like Kevin, Brad, and Jeremy, why don't they come out in the open and dialogue with us on this blog? Jason Brown at least had the courage to do so until he realized he was losing the debate. By the way, anyone know what has become of Jason?
Elder Jeremy Sarber wrote to me:
Hey, brother. I’m thrilled to see you writing and publishing to the blog again. I missed you during your brief hiatus. I hope all is well. I can’t remember whether we discussed it, but I officially left the Primitive Baptists at the end of last year. It’s been liberating. I owe a lot to you. If not for your website, I suspect my conversion to sound Bible doctrine would have taken years longer. So thank you. I mean that. In case you’re interested, I’ve been transcribing an extended conversation with a “Hardshell” preacher and releasing one part per week. The entire series so far can be found here: http://jeremysarber.com/honest-with-me/
This came as good news to me as I often get discouraged over the efforts I have expended to try to reclaim my Hardshell brethren. Seeing men like Kevin, Brad, and Jeremy, and others, come to see the errors of the Hardshells and the truth more perfectly, is truly encouraging. I hope others will also be helped by our writings, not only here in the USA, but in the Philippines, Russia, and other parts of the world where the Hardshells are proselyting. One of the things I wrote to brother Jeremy was this:
I have prayed for you over the years and am glad God had mercy on you to open your eyes and deliver you from a cult. Make no mistake about it, the Hardshell church today is a cult. Enjoy your freedom in Christ. Come to visit when you can.
Again, that is the whole purpose of this blog and my writings against the Hardshells. It is to help them see the way of truth more clearly and be delivered from the Hardshell cult. I am hopeful that some day there will be whole churches converted back to the faith of our old Baptist forefathers.
I have invited brother Jeremy to write on this blog and I hope he will do so. Please encourage him to do so by reading his web page and corresponding with him.
If the Hardshells are really concerned about men like Kevin, Brad, and Jeremy, why don't they come out in the open and dialogue with us on this blog? Jason Brown at least had the courage to do so until he realized he was losing the debate. By the way, anyone know what has become of Jason?
Wednesday, May 10, 2017
Modern Hardshell Proselyting
Sometime back I made a posting regarding the fact that we had been getting lots of readers from Russia due to some Hardshells doing "mission work" there. ("Interest From Russia?" - see here) We continue to get huge amounts of hits on this and my BaptistGadfly blog from Russia. I believe it is because many Baptists in Russia are investigating the Hardshells. The same thing has occurred in the past by some in the Philippines. Just recently this was posted on the Cincinnati Primitive Baptist church web page:
"Pastor Justin will be traveling to Russia this March in order to train indigenous pastors in the churches there." (see here)
Others have also made such trips. For instance, Elder Herb Hatfield wrote about his trip in "Pray for My Upcoming Ukraine and Russia Trip" - Aberdeen Primitive Baptist Church (see here).
Not only is Cincinnati and Aberdeen churches involved in such work but Elder David Pyles and others have also been involved in such work.
In a "Letter from David Pyles" (see here) we find this information from Pyles:
"In March 2006, several Baptist churches in Russia requested dialogue with Primitive Baptists of America. They initially made contact with me, but later contacted several other Primitive Baptists after finding information about them on Internet. These churches had formerly been members of the Russian Baptist Union, but because of sharp and growing differences over doctrine and practice, they made a break with the union, with some churches leaving late in 2005 and others leaving only weeks prior to their contact of me."
Thankfully many of these brethren in Russia are also finding information on the Internet about the Hardshells in reading our blogs. Interesting is the fact that the Hardshells continue to do proselyting work rather than true mission work.
Pyles writes further:
"I have continued correspondence with the Russians since initial contact, and made a trip there along with other ministers in July 2006. In all of this we have found them to be remarkably sound. They firmly adhere to the doctrines of grace. They reject Fullerism -- a corrupted variation of these doctrines that has lately become prevalent in this country. Our greatest surprises concerning them were that they reject gospel regeneration, affirming rather that regeneration is by the direct and unaided work of the Holy Spirit, and they reject the idea that the preached word is a cause or means in rendering the elect righteous before God. With respect to the latter, they affirm that the elect were rendered righteous by the death of Christ alone -- and as of the time He died -- and that the role of faith is to declare and certify this fact in the experience of the elect. These are of course points where other believers in the doctrines of grace almost invariably differ from Primitive Baptists, and for this reason, we were not expecting the Russians to agree with us either. After persistently querying them (even to the point of annoying them), we became satisfied there was in fact agreement. As far as I know, nothing like this has ever happened in the evangelical efforts of Primitive Baptists, and I would be pleasantly surprised were it to ever happen again."
How true this is to the facts only the Russian brethren can tell us. I could perhaps say more but will forego doing so at this time.
Pyles wrote further:
"The greatest point in need of correction is baptism. I and all other Primitive Baptists dealing with the Russians would strongly prefer to see them rebaptized, and we have attempted to cast our influence in that direction. However, we can offer no assurance that such an objective will ever be achieved. This movement is large and growing, both in terms of churches and members, and it covers a large geographic region. Persuading the Russians to rebaptize all these people could be a formidable task. It could also be a very delicate task, because some of the older Russians were baptized by ministers who were executed for their convictions. In the event we fall short of attaining official fellowship, our hopes are to achieve conformity on all else, and as already indicated, this evidently will involve very little, and should be an easily-achievable objective given the blessings of God. Even on the point of baptism there seems to be a great deal of agreement. As of our visit in 2006, they were still receiving the baptisms of churches in the Baptist union, but seemed to agree with our contention that a change in policy had to be made. My understanding is that at least one of their churches has implemented a policy of rebaptism in the last year."
I just have to laugh at all this! The whole idea of "rebaptism" is a difficult issue for the Hardshells. They cannot defend this practice and it is one of the things that shows them to be a cult. The old Baptists who published the first London confession of 1644 would not agree with them on this issue and if the Russian brethren are imitators of those old London brethren, then they will resist the idea that their baptisms are not valid. Perhaps in the future I can write further on this but we have already written much on it in our series titled "Hardshell Landmarkism" (see August, 2008 archives at the hardshellism blog - see here, and here and here).
Pyles wrote:
"The Russians seem to be elated over the discovery of Primitive Baptists in America, and I have seen nothing from them but utmost respect for our people."
That may be so with some of them, but I suspect that there are many of them not so elated.
I suspect that some of the foreign interests in Hardshells may be due to some hoping for pecuniary support from the Hardshells, who have begun to send money oversees to poor preachers in Africa, India, and in Russia.
Why don't the Hardshells send preachers to places where there are no Christians?
"Pastor Justin will be traveling to Russia this March in order to train indigenous pastors in the churches there." (see here)
Others have also made such trips. For instance, Elder Herb Hatfield wrote about his trip in "Pray for My Upcoming Ukraine and Russia Trip" - Aberdeen Primitive Baptist Church (see here).
Not only is Cincinnati and Aberdeen churches involved in such work but Elder David Pyles and others have also been involved in such work.
In a "Letter from David Pyles" (see here) we find this information from Pyles:
"In March 2006, several Baptist churches in Russia requested dialogue with Primitive Baptists of America. They initially made contact with me, but later contacted several other Primitive Baptists after finding information about them on Internet. These churches had formerly been members of the Russian Baptist Union, but because of sharp and growing differences over doctrine and practice, they made a break with the union, with some churches leaving late in 2005 and others leaving only weeks prior to their contact of me."
Thankfully many of these brethren in Russia are also finding information on the Internet about the Hardshells in reading our blogs. Interesting is the fact that the Hardshells continue to do proselyting work rather than true mission work.
Pyles writes further:
"I have continued correspondence with the Russians since initial contact, and made a trip there along with other ministers in July 2006. In all of this we have found them to be remarkably sound. They firmly adhere to the doctrines of grace. They reject Fullerism -- a corrupted variation of these doctrines that has lately become prevalent in this country. Our greatest surprises concerning them were that they reject gospel regeneration, affirming rather that regeneration is by the direct and unaided work of the Holy Spirit, and they reject the idea that the preached word is a cause or means in rendering the elect righteous before God. With respect to the latter, they affirm that the elect were rendered righteous by the death of Christ alone -- and as of the time He died -- and that the role of faith is to declare and certify this fact in the experience of the elect. These are of course points where other believers in the doctrines of grace almost invariably differ from Primitive Baptists, and for this reason, we were not expecting the Russians to agree with us either. After persistently querying them (even to the point of annoying them), we became satisfied there was in fact agreement. As far as I know, nothing like this has ever happened in the evangelical efforts of Primitive Baptists, and I would be pleasantly surprised were it to ever happen again."
How true this is to the facts only the Russian brethren can tell us. I could perhaps say more but will forego doing so at this time.
Pyles wrote further:
"The greatest point in need of correction is baptism. I and all other Primitive Baptists dealing with the Russians would strongly prefer to see them rebaptized, and we have attempted to cast our influence in that direction. However, we can offer no assurance that such an objective will ever be achieved. This movement is large and growing, both in terms of churches and members, and it covers a large geographic region. Persuading the Russians to rebaptize all these people could be a formidable task. It could also be a very delicate task, because some of the older Russians were baptized by ministers who were executed for their convictions. In the event we fall short of attaining official fellowship, our hopes are to achieve conformity on all else, and as already indicated, this evidently will involve very little, and should be an easily-achievable objective given the blessings of God. Even on the point of baptism there seems to be a great deal of agreement. As of our visit in 2006, they were still receiving the baptisms of churches in the Baptist union, but seemed to agree with our contention that a change in policy had to be made. My understanding is that at least one of their churches has implemented a policy of rebaptism in the last year."
I just have to laugh at all this! The whole idea of "rebaptism" is a difficult issue for the Hardshells. They cannot defend this practice and it is one of the things that shows them to be a cult. The old Baptists who published the first London confession of 1644 would not agree with them on this issue and if the Russian brethren are imitators of those old London brethren, then they will resist the idea that their baptisms are not valid. Perhaps in the future I can write further on this but we have already written much on it in our series titled "Hardshell Landmarkism" (see August, 2008 archives at the hardshellism blog - see here, and here and here).
Pyles wrote:
"The Russians seem to be elated over the discovery of Primitive Baptists in America, and I have seen nothing from them but utmost respect for our people."
That may be so with some of them, but I suspect that there are many of them not so elated.
I suspect that some of the foreign interests in Hardshells may be due to some hoping for pecuniary support from the Hardshells, who have begun to send money oversees to poor preachers in Africa, India, and in Russia.
Why don't the Hardshells send preachers to places where there are no Christians?
Monday, May 8, 2017
Hardshells and Eschatology
I have over the years stated the fact that most Hardshells, both today and in the past, have been grossly ignorant of eschatology and the doctrine of the second coming. I repeat that truth at this time. I do it because my time is getting shorter and I may not have much time left in which to reiterate the fact. I also do it because I am convinced that their ignorance makes them vulnerable to the things that are coming on the earth.
The fact that they are generally anti Premillenial and allegorizers of second coming prophecy, and totally ignorant of the Book of Revelation, and of the career of the Antichrist, ill prepares them for what is coming on the earth.
I believe that the world is now in the condition foretold by the prophets of old, and of the Lord Jesus Christ and his apostles. Antichrist could appear at any time, the days of whose career will bring tribulation such as has not been since the world began. Are you ready for it, my Hardshell brethren? Are you helping your brethren to prepare for it? What will you do when the four horsemen of the Apocalypse are set loose? What will you do when the seven apocalyptic angels blow their trumpets of woe and judgment? What will you do when pestilence, plague, and devastation are wreaking havoc upon population masses? Will you continue to put your head in the sand? Will you continue to refuse fellowship with other Christians?
You can go on telling yourself that the things in the Book of Revelation have already been fulfilled in the destruction of Jerusalem in A.D. 70 and that you have nothing to worry about. But, be warned that this is your naivete.
"And now, little children, abide in him; that, when he shall appear, we may have confidence, and not be ashamed before him at his coming." (I John 2:28)
"And take heed to yourselves, lest at any time your hearts be overcharged with surfeiting, and drunkenness, and cares of this life, and so that day come upon you unawares." (Luke 21:34)
My Hardshell brethren, if you do not change your views and attitude about eschatology, you will likely find yourself ill prepared for that awful day when the Lord comes to judge all who are living upon the earth.
The fact that they are generally anti Premillenial and allegorizers of second coming prophecy, and totally ignorant of the Book of Revelation, and of the career of the Antichrist, ill prepares them for what is coming on the earth.
I believe that the world is now in the condition foretold by the prophets of old, and of the Lord Jesus Christ and his apostles. Antichrist could appear at any time, the days of whose career will bring tribulation such as has not been since the world began. Are you ready for it, my Hardshell brethren? Are you helping your brethren to prepare for it? What will you do when the four horsemen of the Apocalypse are set loose? What will you do when the seven apocalyptic angels blow their trumpets of woe and judgment? What will you do when pestilence, plague, and devastation are wreaking havoc upon population masses? Will you continue to put your head in the sand? Will you continue to refuse fellowship with other Christians?
You can go on telling yourself that the things in the Book of Revelation have already been fulfilled in the destruction of Jerusalem in A.D. 70 and that you have nothing to worry about. But, be warned that this is your naivete.
"And now, little children, abide in him; that, when he shall appear, we may have confidence, and not be ashamed before him at his coming." (I John 2:28)
"And take heed to yourselves, lest at any time your hearts be overcharged with surfeiting, and drunkenness, and cares of this life, and so that day come upon you unawares." (Luke 21:34)
My Hardshell brethren, if you do not change your views and attitude about eschatology, you will likely find yourself ill prepared for that awful day when the Lord comes to judge all who are living upon the earth.
Friday, May 5, 2017
Hardshell Uriah Heep Humility III
Anyone familiar with Hardshell literature and language, as well as Hardshell behavior and social psychology, will agree that they place a high value on being humble. Members, especially preachers, are judged by how humble they appear to be; And, the Hardshells consider themselves expert judges on the matter, having the gift of "discernment of spirits" in this area. They work hard at giving the appearance of being humble and many converts to their cult often confess that Hardshell humility was one of the things that attracted them to the group. One can say that they, like the Colossian cult, "delight in humility." They even advertise themselves in this matter. For instance, on the Internet web page of one leading Hardshell church this is what is written:
"Come join us in worshipping our Lord in a humble traditional atmosphere of singing, preaching and praying as taught in the scriptures." ("Welcome to the website of "Beulah Primitive Baptist Church" known as "Midland Primitive Baptist Church"- see here)
What do they mean by a "humble traditional atmosphere"? Humble buildings? Humble language? Humble behavior?
In a section titled "Proud Preaching to Proud Preachers" Elder Jeff Winfrey, Pastor of Dawson Springs (Ky.) Primitive Baptist Church, wrote the following in "Confronting Our Culture Without Confrontation," a lesson he prepared to deliver to the "preacher's school" at the Cincinnati Primitive Baptist church (see here - emphasis mine):
"As I begin, I hope that this section is not my attempt to prove to you how proud I am of my humility. I realize that in our Primitive Baptist culture the right words to begin any message with are the presumed-proper words of self-expressed humbleness. I am sure that at times these words have come from the heart. And I am equally sure that at other times they are as shallow as the superficial humility they attempt to exalt. I fear that we sometimes attempt to flaunt before others the greatness of our humbleness. And when all is said and done, we proudly wear our self-proclaimed, self-proven, self-given and self-received humble badges with all the false and hypocritical honors connected therewith."
Many Hardshells will dismiss anything I say on this subject as they have judged that I am not humble and that I have an ax to grind against them. But, they can hardly reject it when I give substantiating evidence from Hardshells themselves. Such is the case with what Elder Winfrey has written. The words highlighted in the above citation help prove what I have said in this polemic on Hardshell humility. Some of those who read this blog may recall how Hardshell apologist Jason Brown attempted to justify my ill treatment by the Hardshells, when I was a young Hardshell preacher, by judging that I was not "humble."
Winfrey says that Hardshells are, like he was, "proud I am of my humility" and says "in our Primitive Baptist culture the right words to begin any message with are the presumed-proper words of self-expressed humbleness." How true! He also refers to "the superficial humility they attempt to exalt." That makes them Uriah Heep types. He says "we sometimes attempt to flaunt before others the greatness of our humbleness" and "we proudly wear our self-proclaimed, self-proven, self-given and self-received humble badges with all the false and hypocritical honors connected therewith."
I could rest my polemical case now, but let me add to the evidence by citing Winfrey further. He wrote (and preached to the preachers):
"So after that hypocritical attempt to prove to you that I know the difference between false and true humility, let me now state that my intended purpose for this initial section of the booklet is hopefully not to prove to you how great my humility is. Instead my hope is that this section will serve the purpose of allowing you to see that we all need to deal with the besetting sin of pride. Some need to deal with it more than others do. But even in the best of us, self seems to be the forefront of our concerns. And as you proceed to the next paragraphs where you find that I claim to be overwhelmed by preaching to preachers and preaching before God, be reminded that my pride has proved to be a far greater problem in my life than my self-declared humbleness. I have sinned many times by being too proud. I doubt very much that I have sinned nearly as often by being too humble. And perhaps it is the same with you."
This is all good. Confession is good for the soul. But, what he needs to do is to discover what it is in the Hardshell group that promotes this kind of fake humility. He writes further:
"And I say with much regret that I do believe that I am not the only Primitive Baptist preacher who has a problem with pride. Regretfully I fear that a spirit of pride and arrogance is generally found among many Primitive Baptist preachers in our land. As a matter of observation it seems to me that Primitive Baptist preachers have a strong tendency to be a group of proud men. I shamefully admit that I am among the chief of sinners in this category. But I regretfully observe that I am not alone in possessing too much self-worth."
What an honest confession! Remember that I got my undergraduate degree in sociology, which is a study of group behavior. I can testify to the truth of what Winfrey has written. But, again, why are many of the cults guilty of such? Is it not because they have the "we be the only ones" mentality? Is it not because they have exalted opinions of their own little group?
Winfrey said: "I fear that a spirit of pride and arrogance is generally found among many Primitive Baptist preachers in our land." And, "Primitive Baptist preachers have a strong tendency to be a group of proud men." Now, if I say this, or brother Kevin, we are dismissed. But, here we have one who is still in the group confessing all! How can Hardshells ignore this? He writes further:
"So as we attempt to honestly examine ourselves, we might ask if there is something about us as a group that accounts for this tendency toward pride. And the answer to such an honest quest for right and wrong always lies in the scriptures. The scriptures clearly declare that knowledge puffs up. (1 Corinthians 8:1) Do we have particular and unusual knowledge? I fear that most of us would quickly (and I fear arrogantly) answer that we do have special knowledge above the crowd."
Bingo! Cults cannot have real humility as long as they pride themselves in being the elite among Christians! If we do as Winfrey asks, and "ask if there is something about us as a group that accounts for this tendency toward pride," then what answer would the typical Hardshell give? Winfrey seemed to get it, for he said - "I fear that most of us would quickly (and I fear arrogantly) answer that we do have special knowledge above the crowd." Again, bingo! All cults claim to have "special knowledge" in which they pride themselves. It is a shame, however, that Winfrey does not rid himself of that "special knowledge"! For that is not really "special knowledge" but a heresy.
He writes further:
"According to God’s word man surely has a strong tendency to be proud of his knowledge. And I fear that we as a people are proof of the tendency. But regretfully pride in knowledge is not our only problem. Further observation seems to show that we as a people are very proud of being the people we are. It is the same problem that Jesus encountered in many of the Jews of His day. (John 8:39) They claimed to have a special status due to heritage and lineage. I fear that in addition to pride in our knowledge we as a people seem to have an inordinate pride in our heritage and lineage. The list could go on and further illustrations given, but perhaps this is sufficient to make the point."
What Winfrey has here been saying is what I have been saying for many years. And, not I alone, but many others before me. I ask my Hardshell brothers to simply take a good look at themselves. I could comment further on Winfrey's words, but will let them speak for themselves. His testimony is:
1. "And I fear that we as a people are proof of the tendency. But regretfully pride in knowledge is not our only problem."
2. "we as a people are very proud of being the people we are...claimed to have a special status"
3. "we as a people seem to have an inordinate pride in our heritage and lineage"
Now, my Hardshell brethren can ignore such words if they like, but I hope they will rather seriously consider them.
Winfrey said further:
"And if perhaps you do not believe that we have a problem with pride, I again go to the scriptures for answers. The proof of our pride seems to lie in the words of the scriptures, “Only by pride cometh contention…” (Proverbs 13:10) Is pride a significant problem among our people? In answer to the question concerning our pride let us first look at our state of contention. It seems that we live in a time that we can easily observe many contentions among our people. Across our land you can find heated discussions concerning our contentions. Our contentions are often the topic of conversation as we gather for worship. They are time and again the subjects of discussion at the lunch table after worship. And worst of all, our sermons are sometimes filled with slurs and innuendos about our brethren along with a so-called message of Christ and Him crucified."
In many of my writings I have called attention to the fact that the Hardshells, more than almost any other aberrant Christian group, are schismatic and that such is a sign of their cult and heretical status and of this Winfrey says: "concerning our pride let us first look at our state of contention" and "we live in a time that we can easily observe many contentions among our people."
Coming from me or Kevin, these words would be easily dismissed. However, as they come from one still inside the group, they cannot be so easily dismissed.
Hardshell Humble Jargon
Here are some of the words that one will hear often from the lips of the Hardshells, and which give the pretense of humility.
"If I be not deceived"
"If I know my heart"
"I hope"
"I am so full of sin"
"I am just a poor sinner"
"I am not worthy"
"Your humble servant"
"God's humble people"
"I am not educated"
"I am not a trained seminary preacher"
Humble Practices
washing feet
congregational singing
kneeling in prayer
meeting houses
An Example
Elder T. L. Webb, Sr. in his book "Little Things" (born 1874 - son of preacher J. G. Webb), published from Marshville, NC in 1941, wrote the following under "Biographical" on pages six and seven (emphasis mine):
"But, even in this, I seem to know very little that I can claim as evidence in my behalf. I wonder sometimes, after all these years of service, sacrifices and toils, if indeed I have ever been taught of God; and were I not allowed to supply the word hope, it seems that I would have nothing to offer, for when I sum it all up, about all I can say is that "Wherein I was once blind I can now see." But one thing encourages me to write, and that is, I think I might reach some poor, little one who, like myself, has such little assurance of these things that he has to go in doubts and fears...Yet I am not sure that I can recall the moment, the hour, the day or even the year, when I first became conscious of my depraved nature or when I was changed from nature to grace, if indeed I ever was."
This is typical of the way Hardshells talk. And, if you do not talk like this, you will be judged as being proud, and being judged as such, you will be shunned.
He wrote again:
"I have wondered if a consciousness of one's sinful condition, which causes him to mourn and beg for mercy, is evidence of a gracious state with the Lord, and if so, if it could be possible that I was changed at some early moment in life when I did not know what it meant? How I wish sometimes that I knew more about what it means to be born again. I can recall occasions in early life when it seemed that I trusted in Jesus with unaccountable joy, but did I not love Him and confidingly beg Him for mercy before this?" (page seven)
"So, after all, about all I know about a call to the work of the ministry is an impression of mind, over which I had no control, that has lingered with me all these years, and unless I have at some time really preached I do not suppose I have ever made my calling sure with anyone." (page seven)
"If I am not mistaken, I love the doctrine and order of God's house too well to sacrifice them..." (page 45)
"Precious brethren, may I, the poorest of the flock, if one at all, "beseech you by the meekness and gentleness of Christ" to pray for me that I may be more kind and gentle." (page 230)
"If not deceived, I still love the precious cause so ably represented by Elder Cayce and the paper..." (page 258)
Another Hardshell preacher, now living, corresponded with me a little over a year ago and he said to me - "I know I don't preach well, but maybe one day I'll do good."
Well, to my mind, these are evidences that the Hardshells, like the Colossian cult, "delight in humility and self deprecation" under a mask, but are really very proud and think more highly of themselves than their language at times seems to say. What say ye?
"Come join us in worshipping our Lord in a humble traditional atmosphere of singing, preaching and praying as taught in the scriptures." ("Welcome to the website of "Beulah Primitive Baptist Church" known as "Midland Primitive Baptist Church"- see here)
What do they mean by a "humble traditional atmosphere"? Humble buildings? Humble language? Humble behavior?
In a section titled "Proud Preaching to Proud Preachers" Elder Jeff Winfrey, Pastor of Dawson Springs (Ky.) Primitive Baptist Church, wrote the following in "Confronting Our Culture Without Confrontation," a lesson he prepared to deliver to the "preacher's school" at the Cincinnati Primitive Baptist church (see here - emphasis mine):
"As I begin, I hope that this section is not my attempt to prove to you how proud I am of my humility. I realize that in our Primitive Baptist culture the right words to begin any message with are the presumed-proper words of self-expressed humbleness. I am sure that at times these words have come from the heart. And I am equally sure that at other times they are as shallow as the superficial humility they attempt to exalt. I fear that we sometimes attempt to flaunt before others the greatness of our humbleness. And when all is said and done, we proudly wear our self-proclaimed, self-proven, self-given and self-received humble badges with all the false and hypocritical honors connected therewith."
Many Hardshells will dismiss anything I say on this subject as they have judged that I am not humble and that I have an ax to grind against them. But, they can hardly reject it when I give substantiating evidence from Hardshells themselves. Such is the case with what Elder Winfrey has written. The words highlighted in the above citation help prove what I have said in this polemic on Hardshell humility. Some of those who read this blog may recall how Hardshell apologist Jason Brown attempted to justify my ill treatment by the Hardshells, when I was a young Hardshell preacher, by judging that I was not "humble."
Winfrey says that Hardshells are, like he was, "proud I am of my humility" and says "in our Primitive Baptist culture the right words to begin any message with are the presumed-proper words of self-expressed humbleness." How true! He also refers to "the superficial humility they attempt to exalt." That makes them Uriah Heep types. He says "we sometimes attempt to flaunt before others the greatness of our humbleness" and "we proudly wear our self-proclaimed, self-proven, self-given and self-received humble badges with all the false and hypocritical honors connected therewith."
I could rest my polemical case now, but let me add to the evidence by citing Winfrey further. He wrote (and preached to the preachers):
"So after that hypocritical attempt to prove to you that I know the difference between false and true humility, let me now state that my intended purpose for this initial section of the booklet is hopefully not to prove to you how great my humility is. Instead my hope is that this section will serve the purpose of allowing you to see that we all need to deal with the besetting sin of pride. Some need to deal with it more than others do. But even in the best of us, self seems to be the forefront of our concerns. And as you proceed to the next paragraphs where you find that I claim to be overwhelmed by preaching to preachers and preaching before God, be reminded that my pride has proved to be a far greater problem in my life than my self-declared humbleness. I have sinned many times by being too proud. I doubt very much that I have sinned nearly as often by being too humble. And perhaps it is the same with you."
This is all good. Confession is good for the soul. But, what he needs to do is to discover what it is in the Hardshell group that promotes this kind of fake humility. He writes further:
"And I say with much regret that I do believe that I am not the only Primitive Baptist preacher who has a problem with pride. Regretfully I fear that a spirit of pride and arrogance is generally found among many Primitive Baptist preachers in our land. As a matter of observation it seems to me that Primitive Baptist preachers have a strong tendency to be a group of proud men. I shamefully admit that I am among the chief of sinners in this category. But I regretfully observe that I am not alone in possessing too much self-worth."
What an honest confession! Remember that I got my undergraduate degree in sociology, which is a study of group behavior. I can testify to the truth of what Winfrey has written. But, again, why are many of the cults guilty of such? Is it not because they have the "we be the only ones" mentality? Is it not because they have exalted opinions of their own little group?
Winfrey said: "I fear that a spirit of pride and arrogance is generally found among many Primitive Baptist preachers in our land." And, "Primitive Baptist preachers have a strong tendency to be a group of proud men." Now, if I say this, or brother Kevin, we are dismissed. But, here we have one who is still in the group confessing all! How can Hardshells ignore this? He writes further:
"So as we attempt to honestly examine ourselves, we might ask if there is something about us as a group that accounts for this tendency toward pride. And the answer to such an honest quest for right and wrong always lies in the scriptures. The scriptures clearly declare that knowledge puffs up. (1 Corinthians 8:1) Do we have particular and unusual knowledge? I fear that most of us would quickly (and I fear arrogantly) answer that we do have special knowledge above the crowd."
Bingo! Cults cannot have real humility as long as they pride themselves in being the elite among Christians! If we do as Winfrey asks, and "ask if there is something about us as a group that accounts for this tendency toward pride," then what answer would the typical Hardshell give? Winfrey seemed to get it, for he said - "I fear that most of us would quickly (and I fear arrogantly) answer that we do have special knowledge above the crowd." Again, bingo! All cults claim to have "special knowledge" in which they pride themselves. It is a shame, however, that Winfrey does not rid himself of that "special knowledge"! For that is not really "special knowledge" but a heresy.
He writes further:
"According to God’s word man surely has a strong tendency to be proud of his knowledge. And I fear that we as a people are proof of the tendency. But regretfully pride in knowledge is not our only problem. Further observation seems to show that we as a people are very proud of being the people we are. It is the same problem that Jesus encountered in many of the Jews of His day. (John 8:39) They claimed to have a special status due to heritage and lineage. I fear that in addition to pride in our knowledge we as a people seem to have an inordinate pride in our heritage and lineage. The list could go on and further illustrations given, but perhaps this is sufficient to make the point."
What Winfrey has here been saying is what I have been saying for many years. And, not I alone, but many others before me. I ask my Hardshell brothers to simply take a good look at themselves. I could comment further on Winfrey's words, but will let them speak for themselves. His testimony is:
1. "And I fear that we as a people are proof of the tendency. But regretfully pride in knowledge is not our only problem."
2. "we as a people are very proud of being the people we are...claimed to have a special status"
3. "we as a people seem to have an inordinate pride in our heritage and lineage"
Now, my Hardshell brethren can ignore such words if they like, but I hope they will rather seriously consider them.
Winfrey said further:
"And if perhaps you do not believe that we have a problem with pride, I again go to the scriptures for answers. The proof of our pride seems to lie in the words of the scriptures, “Only by pride cometh contention…” (Proverbs 13:10) Is pride a significant problem among our people? In answer to the question concerning our pride let us first look at our state of contention. It seems that we live in a time that we can easily observe many contentions among our people. Across our land you can find heated discussions concerning our contentions. Our contentions are often the topic of conversation as we gather for worship. They are time and again the subjects of discussion at the lunch table after worship. And worst of all, our sermons are sometimes filled with slurs and innuendos about our brethren along with a so-called message of Christ and Him crucified."
In many of my writings I have called attention to the fact that the Hardshells, more than almost any other aberrant Christian group, are schismatic and that such is a sign of their cult and heretical status and of this Winfrey says: "concerning our pride let us first look at our state of contention" and "we live in a time that we can easily observe many contentions among our people."
Coming from me or Kevin, these words would be easily dismissed. However, as they come from one still inside the group, they cannot be so easily dismissed.
Hardshell Humble Jargon
Here are some of the words that one will hear often from the lips of the Hardshells, and which give the pretense of humility.
"If I be not deceived"
"If I know my heart"
"I hope"
"I am so full of sin"
"I am just a poor sinner"
"I am not worthy"
"Your humble servant"
"God's humble people"
"I am not educated"
"I am not a trained seminary preacher"
Humble Practices
washing feet
congregational singing
kneeling in prayer
meeting houses
An Example
Elder T. L. Webb, Sr. in his book "Little Things" (born 1874 - son of preacher J. G. Webb), published from Marshville, NC in 1941, wrote the following under "Biographical" on pages six and seven (emphasis mine):
"But, even in this, I seem to know very little that I can claim as evidence in my behalf. I wonder sometimes, after all these years of service, sacrifices and toils, if indeed I have ever been taught of God; and were I not allowed to supply the word hope, it seems that I would have nothing to offer, for when I sum it all up, about all I can say is that "Wherein I was once blind I can now see." But one thing encourages me to write, and that is, I think I might reach some poor, little one who, like myself, has such little assurance of these things that he has to go in doubts and fears...Yet I am not sure that I can recall the moment, the hour, the day or even the year, when I first became conscious of my depraved nature or when I was changed from nature to grace, if indeed I ever was."
This is typical of the way Hardshells talk. And, if you do not talk like this, you will be judged as being proud, and being judged as such, you will be shunned.
He wrote again:
"I have wondered if a consciousness of one's sinful condition, which causes him to mourn and beg for mercy, is evidence of a gracious state with the Lord, and if so, if it could be possible that I was changed at some early moment in life when I did not know what it meant? How I wish sometimes that I knew more about what it means to be born again. I can recall occasions in early life when it seemed that I trusted in Jesus with unaccountable joy, but did I not love Him and confidingly beg Him for mercy before this?" (page seven)
"So, after all, about all I know about a call to the work of the ministry is an impression of mind, over which I had no control, that has lingered with me all these years, and unless I have at some time really preached I do not suppose I have ever made my calling sure with anyone." (page seven)
"If I am not mistaken, I love the doctrine and order of God's house too well to sacrifice them..." (page 45)
"Precious brethren, may I, the poorest of the flock, if one at all, "beseech you by the meekness and gentleness of Christ" to pray for me that I may be more kind and gentle." (page 230)
"If not deceived, I still love the precious cause so ably represented by Elder Cayce and the paper..." (page 258)
Another Hardshell preacher, now living, corresponded with me a little over a year ago and he said to me - "I know I don't preach well, but maybe one day I'll do good."
Well, to my mind, these are evidences that the Hardshells, like the Colossian cult, "delight in humility and self deprecation" under a mask, but are really very proud and think more highly of themselves than their language at times seems to say. What say ye?
Sunday, April 30, 2017
Hardshell Uriah Heep Humility II
"Let no one keep defrauding you of your prize by delighting in self-abasement and the worship of the angels, taking his stand on visions he has seen, inflated without cause by his fleshly mind, and not holding fast to the head, from whom the entire body, being supplied and held together by the joints and ligaments, grows with a growth which is from God...These are matters which have, to be sure, the appearance of wisdom in self-made religion and self-abasement and severe treatment of the body, but are of no value against fleshly indulgence." (Colossians 2: 18-19, 23 NASB)
These verses have two instances where Paul speaks of "humility" or "lowliness of mind," yet not in a positive way, but in a negative way. In these words the apostle Paul alludes to an early Christian cult and one of the descriptions given of it is that it θέλων ἐν ταπεινοφροσύνῃ or is "delighting in humility." But, why would delighting in humility and lowliness of mind be viewed negatively, as a cult characteristic? Would not "delighting in humility" rather be characteristic of real Christians who are not cultic, aberrant, or heretical?
In order to convey the seeming negativity of "delighting in humility," translators have sought the need to add some additional word to "humility." So, the kjv translates verse 18 as "Let no man beguile you of your reward in a voluntary humility" (vs. 18 kjv). However, the word "voluntary" is not in the Greek text. Further, the translation omits the word "thelon" meaning "delighting." To the kjv translators, "delighting in humility" connotes "voluntary humility." But, this is an interpretation, not a literal translation. It may indeed connote such a humility, but it does not denote it. A literal translation is "delighting in humility." Interesting is the fact that the kjv translators do not translate ταπεινοφροσύνῃ as "voluntary humility" in verse 23, but as "a shew of wisdom in will worship, and humility."
Other translators do the same as the kjv, adding adjectives to the word "humility" to convey the idea that the humility is not the good kind that the scriptures elsewhere promote. So Barclay's translation gives "walking in ostentatious humility" as the translation of "delighting in humility." In Lightfoot's translation - we have "an officious humility." In Wuest's translation we have "taking delight in a self-imposed humility." In this translation we at least still retain the Greek word "thelon" or "delight." Yet, it also adds the adjective "self-imposed" to the word "humility." In Young's translation, which seeks to keep to the literal and leave the interpreting to the Bible teacher, we have "delighting in humble-mindedness."
As noted, the word "humility" (kjv) or "self-abasement" (nasb) is from the Greek word tapeinophrosynē and is translated as follows in the kjv:
humility (3x), humbleness of mind (1x), humility of mind (1x), lowliness (1x), lowliness of mind (1x).
In the two passages in Colossians the word has a negative connotation and is unique in that respect. It is because "humility" in these verses is viewed negatively by the apostle, as a characteristic of a cult, that many translators translate the Greek word here as denoting "false humility." However, the word itself does not "denote" false humility, but humility, which is a positive thing. Here is an example where the denotation of a word is different from its connotation.
So, what is it, in the context of the Colossian verses, that makes us view the kind of humility promoted by the cult (that Paul is condemning) to be a false humility? Is it not in the fact that it is delighted in? If one stops and thinks about the matter, why would any one delight in humility and self abasement and self deprecation? Obviously, when one delights in humility it then ceases to be genuine humility and becomes pride instead. It is pride cloaked in humility.
As many Bible commentaries note, the Greek word for "humility" is literally, "lowliness of mind," and is set against the parallel words "puffed up by his fleshly mind."
Eadie says (emphasis mine):
We give thelo its common meaning. Let no man beguile you—wishing to do it by his humility...The preposition en ("in" self-abasement) denotes the means of deception, or the sphere in which the deceiver moves. The humility referred to, as may be seen from the last verse of the chapter, is a spurious humility (see Col 2:23-note). Fanatical pride is often associated with this humility, as when, for show, the beggar's feet are washed; and the friar in his coarse rags walks barefooted and begs. And men become proud of their humility—glory in the feeling of "self-annihilation". The spirit of the false teacher, with all its professed lowliness, would not bend to the Divine revelation, but nursed its fallacies with a haughty tenacity, and preached them with an impious daring, for he was “vainly puffed up by his fleshly mind.” (A Commentary on the Greek Text)
When one delights in humility it ceases to be genuine humility and becomes pride. "The idea in context seems to be that the individual in question loves to talk on and on about his spiritual experiences, but in reality they are only coming out of his own sinful flesh..." (ibid)
"Humility is not thinking less of yourself, it is thinking of yourself less" - C S Lewis
If you’re working hard at acting humble, you’re not actually humble. Putting humility on display is not true humility.
In the next concluding article I will show how the Hardshell cult, like the Colossian cult, possesses a false humility.
These verses have two instances where Paul speaks of "humility" or "lowliness of mind," yet not in a positive way, but in a negative way. In these words the apostle Paul alludes to an early Christian cult and one of the descriptions given of it is that it θέλων ἐν ταπεινοφροσύνῃ or is "delighting in humility." But, why would delighting in humility and lowliness of mind be viewed negatively, as a cult characteristic? Would not "delighting in humility" rather be characteristic of real Christians who are not cultic, aberrant, or heretical?
In order to convey the seeming negativity of "delighting in humility," translators have sought the need to add some additional word to "humility." So, the kjv translates verse 18 as "Let no man beguile you of your reward in a voluntary humility" (vs. 18 kjv). However, the word "voluntary" is not in the Greek text. Further, the translation omits the word "thelon" meaning "delighting." To the kjv translators, "delighting in humility" connotes "voluntary humility." But, this is an interpretation, not a literal translation. It may indeed connote such a humility, but it does not denote it. A literal translation is "delighting in humility." Interesting is the fact that the kjv translators do not translate ταπεινοφροσύνῃ as "voluntary humility" in verse 23, but as "a shew of wisdom in will worship, and humility."
Other translators do the same as the kjv, adding adjectives to the word "humility" to convey the idea that the humility is not the good kind that the scriptures elsewhere promote. So Barclay's translation gives "walking in ostentatious humility" as the translation of "delighting in humility." In Lightfoot's translation - we have "an officious humility." In Wuest's translation we have "taking delight in a self-imposed humility." In this translation we at least still retain the Greek word "thelon" or "delight." Yet, it also adds the adjective "self-imposed" to the word "humility." In Young's translation, which seeks to keep to the literal and leave the interpreting to the Bible teacher, we have "delighting in humble-mindedness."
As noted, the word "humility" (kjv) or "self-abasement" (nasb) is from the Greek word tapeinophrosynē and is translated as follows in the kjv:
humility (3x), humbleness of mind (1x), humility of mind (1x), lowliness (1x), lowliness of mind (1x).
In the two passages in Colossians the word has a negative connotation and is unique in that respect. It is because "humility" in these verses is viewed negatively by the apostle, as a characteristic of a cult, that many translators translate the Greek word here as denoting "false humility." However, the word itself does not "denote" false humility, but humility, which is a positive thing. Here is an example where the denotation of a word is different from its connotation.
So, what is it, in the context of the Colossian verses, that makes us view the kind of humility promoted by the cult (that Paul is condemning) to be a false humility? Is it not in the fact that it is delighted in? If one stops and thinks about the matter, why would any one delight in humility and self abasement and self deprecation? Obviously, when one delights in humility it then ceases to be genuine humility and becomes pride instead. It is pride cloaked in humility.
As many Bible commentaries note, the Greek word for "humility" is literally, "lowliness of mind," and is set against the parallel words "puffed up by his fleshly mind."
Eadie says (emphasis mine):
We give thelo its common meaning. Let no man beguile you—wishing to do it by his humility...The preposition en ("in" self-abasement) denotes the means of deception, or the sphere in which the deceiver moves. The humility referred to, as may be seen from the last verse of the chapter, is a spurious humility (see Col 2:23-note). Fanatical pride is often associated with this humility, as when, for show, the beggar's feet are washed; and the friar in his coarse rags walks barefooted and begs. And men become proud of their humility—glory in the feeling of "self-annihilation". The spirit of the false teacher, with all its professed lowliness, would not bend to the Divine revelation, but nursed its fallacies with a haughty tenacity, and preached them with an impious daring, for he was “vainly puffed up by his fleshly mind.” (A Commentary on the Greek Text)
When one delights in humility it ceases to be genuine humility and becomes pride. "The idea in context seems to be that the individual in question loves to talk on and on about his spiritual experiences, but in reality they are only coming out of his own sinful flesh..." (ibid)
"Humility is not thinking less of yourself, it is thinking of yourself less" - C S Lewis
If you’re working hard at acting humble, you’re not actually humble. Putting humility on display is not true humility.
In the next concluding article I will show how the Hardshell cult, like the Colossian cult, possesses a false humility.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)