Two Seed Baptist Ideology (XVIII)

In this chapter we will continue to examine the debate over some of the leading tenets of Two Seedism that occurred in the Two Seed Primitive Baptist periodical "Signs of the Times" for the year 1849. We will begin with what Elder Wilson Thompson wrote in the January 1st, 1849 issue of the "Signs of the Times." (See here for that year's periodical) We have already identified the first leading defenders of Two Seedism among the "Primitive" or "Old School" Baptists, such as Daniel Parker, Gilbert Beebe, Samuel Trott, and T.P. Dudley. We can also add to this list, Elder Wilson Thompson, who was described by Elder Sylvester Hassell, in the late 19th century, in his "history" of the "Primitive Baptist Church," as "regarded as the ablest Primitive Baptist minister that ever lived in the United States." (See my posting on this here). Yet, the same historian also said that Two Seed beliefs "have corrupted Primitive Baptist doctrine more, and rent off more members and churches from our fellowship, than any and all other causes combined." (See my posting here) That citation was taken from Hassell's periodical "The Gospel Messenger" for March, 1894. How could Hassell say that Wilson Thompson was so great since he believed in several of the leading tenets of Two Seedism and since he denied the Trinity? 

Interesting also is the fact that his father, Elder C. B. Hassell, who was a fellow author of "Hassell's History," often wrote to the "Signs of the Times" in the years leading up to 1849, expressing his support for it and for Elder Beebe. He did not write anything in that paper in 1849 that suggested that he disagreed with Beebe's Two Seedism. It also seems that Sylvester Hassell sought to sweep under the rug as much as possible about how extensive Two Seedism was among the founding fathers of his denomination.

It was in the January, 1849 issue that Wilson Thompson wrote the following, wherein he expressed belief in several of the tenets of Two Seedism. Wrote Thompson (emphasis mine):

"The Mediator surely did pre.exist the visible creation, as one brought up with the divine Father. His goings forth were of old, from everlasting, &c. The union of Father and Son, or God and the Mediator, the Man, Christ Jesus; although beyond our weak capacity to dissect or analyze; yet we are plainly taught that there is, and was always two whole and distinct natures essentially belonging to the one lmmanuel, God with us. The whole fulness of the Godhead dwelt in him. He and his Father are one. Such was and is the union existing between the manhood and Godhead in the person of Christ." 

Notice the Two Seed ideas stated by Thompson. He believes in the preexistence of the humanity of Christ, a basic idea of some early 18th century Hyper Calvinists, and which led to the idea that the elect (or church) were also created in him when Christ was created or begotten as a Mediator, which was a third nature of the divine Word, in addition to his human and divine natures. In writings on Thompson I have shown how he was a Sabellian or Modalist, denying the Orthodox ontological Trinity, a fact even "Primitive Baptist" historian and apologist Sylvester Hassell acknowledges, and yet calls him the ablest Hardshell preacher that ever existed up to that time (late 19th century). In his acceptance of Two Seedism he mixes together Modalism with Arianism, which is indeed a strange concoction. He affirms that "the manhood" of Christ is as eternal as his "Godhead," which is similar to what Mormonism also teaches.

Continued Thompson:

"The church or elect seed were of God, a spiritual seed, chosen and set up in Christ before the foundation of the visible material world; and being of God, and in Christ, who of God is made unto them, wisdom, righteousness, sanctification, and redemption, they have, as a seed of God, in Christ, an indissoluble union with both natures of the Mediator, and so, as the seed in Christ, their sonship or filial relationship to God is identified with the sonship of Christ, and they are joint heirs with him; heirs of God, and joint heirs with Christ: and so in their Father's will, which Christ the Elder Brother was appointed to do, or execute, they as the sons of God, which this Mediator or executor was bound to bring to glory, were blessed with all spiritual blessings, in heavenly places, or things, in Christ Jesus, according as they were chosen in him. Being then, of God and in Christ, they were perfectly related to both natures, with their Father, a spiritual relation as his one spiritual seed; and with the Man Christ Jesus, a legal relation by God's appointment and choice. So we see that all the spiritual blessings of the will of God, come directly to them, as gracious bestowments of his will, and all legal blessings come to them by the legal, official acts of Christ, as Mediator or executor of that will. In this sense Christ was legally bound to do, suffer, and fulfill every demand of the law that was against them, and so redeem them from the legal curse, and justify them to a legal life."

Thompson affirms that the "church or elect seed" has from eternity been united to "both natures of the Mediator." He also says that these "eternal children" are begotten "sons" of God from the time when Christ was begotten of the Father and became his Son.

Next he teaches another idea that we have previously called attention to in regard to why God chose people to salvation and why Christ came to redeem them. Two Seeders say that Christ, as the Mediator created by God, was obligated to come and save those he came to save because they were already the wife of Christ, and his kinsman, and so he was obligated to save them because of that. This destroys, as the anti Two Seeders would argue (such as Elder Lemuel Potter, as we will see), that election to salvation is by grace and mercy, and how God was not obligated to save anyone. It denies "unconditional election," for God chooses to save only those who meet the condition of already being the wife of Christ or children of God.

Continued Thompson:

"Such are the legal blessings which result to the elect, from the ancient relationship in which they stood to him as man; and all spiritual blessings, which were not in Adam before he sinned, to be forfeited by his offence, are freely given to them in Christ, by the will of God---his, and their Father. These being God's children, and being related to the manhood of the Mediator, became partakers of flesh and blood, and in that state fell under the legal curse of the law, the reign of sin, and the power and sentence of death. The Mediator in whom they were originally, by choice, and in whose nature, as Mediator they were identified, was, in that nature, and in the office of it, legally involved with them: and as the executor or Mediator of his, and his Father's will was legally bound to render legal satisfaction for them all. Their partaking of flesh and blood was no crime, but a legal transaction, resulting from the creative power and express command of God; and was therefore an essential and divinely authorized union of the human nature, or essence of man, with the flesh and blood, or material body of man and now the body, and soul and spirit of this human, visible, corporeal being was but one accountable mass, or frame, or body in all its parts, or many members. Christ was the Head, Life, Firstborn, Elder Brother and King of them all; that in all things he might have the pre-eminence. So when they had legally partaken of flesh and blood, and in that state had sinned, he, as their proper and legal Mediator, legally took part of the same, that through death he might legally destroy death, and him that had the power of death, that is the devil; and so legally deliver all the heirs from the fear of death, in which they were held in perpetual bondage."

Again, Thompson argues that since the church was in Christ from past eternity, Christ as the church's husband and near kinsman was obligated to elect her and redeem her when she became involved in sin by being placed in Adam by God. It seems strange that the Two Seeders don't see how ugly is this idea. In this ideology the elect were in Christ, were spiritual holy beings, without sin, and would have remained so had not God chosen to place them within Adam. Why did God do that? 

This view also denies that election and salvation is by grace and mercy, and that God had no necessity or obligation to save anyone.

Also, it seems that it is incongruous to say that the elect were created first in Christ the second Adam and then later created again in the first Adam. As we have before stated, this makes Christ the first Adam and the first Adam to be the second Adam. Also, how can one be created twice? Not only that, but in Two Seed ideology the "new creation" or "new creature" was created in eternity past and the "old creature" or "old man" was created later, which is another incongruous thing, making the new creature to be the older creature, and the old creature to be the new creature.

Continued Thompson:

"Now, man was not spiritual but natural..."

We have before seen how the Two Seeders are vehemently opposed to the idea that Adam was a spiritual being, yet they say that spiritual beings (eternal children of God) were implanted within Adam. Obviously they believe that spiritual beings can sin and become carnal (no longer spiritual) for that is what happened to those spiritual children of God when implanted in Adam and sinned when he sinned. Also, as we have previously stated, if Adam was not a spiritual being then he did not die spiritually, and thus no one is spiritually dead.

Continued Thompson:

"Either of these would be attended with greater confusion than he supposes brother Beebe to be in when he rejects the notion of new modelling the carnal mind in regeneration, and yet admitting the spiritualizing of the body in the resurrection."

This reflects the views of T. P. Dudley who was so opposed to the idea that salvation (regeneration or rebirth) remodeled or restored what had become defective in man because of sin. He accepts the idea that nothing of the sinner or old man is changed by being saved, regenerated, or born again.

Thompson also wrote the following in 1821, long before Beebe began the periodical "Signs of the Times" and which shows that he was a Two Seeder even then, and before Daniel Parker wrote his books on Two Seedism. Wrote Thompson, a close friend of Daniel Parker: 

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

In all these citations we see how Thompson promoted several of the foundational ideas in Two Seedism. He believed 1) in the preexistence of the humanity of Christ, and 2) in the preexistence of the souls of the elect or church, and 3) that being "born again" or "regenerated" was not the beginning of new life in Christ but simply the time when the eternal child of God entered into a human body, and 4) that being "created in Christ" is what took place in past eternity, and 5) that nothing in the human or old man is changed by being regenerated or born again. Additionally, like Beebe and Trott, he incorporated Arian views into this scheme, denying that Christ being begotten of the Father before creation was an affirmation of his underived deity. 

In the next chapter we will return to the discussion that was occurring in the "Signs of the Times" in 1849, involving Beebe, Trott, Williams, Dudley, etc. This chapter shows clearly that Wilson Thompson was a Two Seeder. I have not been able to find where he wrote on the origin of Satan or agreed with Parker on that point.

Hardshell "Silence Speaks Loud"

I have been writing against Hardshellism for about fifteen years, although I made, about thirty two years ago, a set of three videos in Pasadena, Texas on the history and heresies of Hardshellism along with Bob L. Ross (owner of Pilgrim Publications, and author of several able books, and apologist debater). They are available on YouTube (via Larry Wessels who directed the videos and runs "CAnswersTV", and who also has many more educational videos on YouTube; See here, here, here). 

During the past fifteen years I have had little interaction with today's "Primitive Baptists" or "Hardshells" on this blog or on two other of my blogs, "The Baptist Gadfly" and "The Hardshell Baptist Cult" (see links on this page). Most of the comments have been simply denunciations and anathemas, with little to no discussion, "hit and run tactics" and "pot shots" or "cheap shots" I have called them. Only one Hardshell Baptist has ventured to have an ongoing written discussion with me or Kevin, and that was when I first began this blog (devoted to help "Primitive Baptists" or Hardshells see their errors), shortly after writing for a year or so in the Baptist Gadfly blog. You can find this back and forth discussion in the archives of this blog for the first year, and is with Jason Brown.

So, after thinking about this fact, a saying entered into my mind, one that said "silence sometimes speaks loud (or loudly)." That is so true. An interesting oxymoron too. It is what I put in the heading of this post. Think about when your spouse is not speaking to you much, giving you the "silent treatment," don't you think that such silence speaks loudly? When someone is silent, when at a time and situation where silence is not at all expected, people are curious as to why (what that may mean). We could give many more instances where silence was loud. There are numerous web pages that give lists of examples where silence is striking, curious, and revealing.

Think of the time when Christ was silent as he was led as a dumb (silent) lamb to the slaughter. Is that not highly unusual? Would not everyone be loud rather than silent? With few exceptions, as Christ was? What does it say to us when we see the silence of Christ at the time of his trial, torturing, and crucifixion? Think of this time when Christ was emphatically said to be silent. The record says:

"But He kept silent and did not offer any answer. Again the high priest was questioning Him, and said to Him, “Are You the Christ, the Son of the Blessed One?” (Mark 14: 61 (nasb); See also Matt. 23: 63)

This was in fulfillment of the prophecy of Christ by Isaiah, who wrote:

"He was oppressed and He was afflicted, Yet He opened not His mouth; He was led as a lamb to the slaughter, And as a sheep before its shearers is silent, So He opened not His mouth." (Isa. 53: 7 nkjv)

Another example of loud silence is seen in the instance when a woman was brought to Christ by the Pharisees who had been caught in adultery and the Pharisees put Christ on the spot about what to do with her. The record says:

"Then the scribes and Pharisees brought to Him a woman caught in adultery. And when they had set her in the midst, they said to Him, “Teacher, this woman was caught in adultery, in the very act. Now Moses, in the law, commanded us that such should be stoned. But what do You say?” This they said, testing Him, that they might have something of which to accuse Him. But Jesus stooped down and wrote on the ground with His finger, as though He did not hear." (John 8: 3-6 nkjv)

He stopped down and wrote on the ground as if he were ignoring them, being not quick to answer, remaining silent for awhile. His initial silence spoke loudly.

Surely condemned men will be silenced in the day of judgment. They will be left speechless when their guilt has been proven. Even now such is often the case when men of God confront false teachers, whom they by powerful argument from scripture stop their mouths. (See Titus 1: 11 nkjv) At that time they will do as Job did when being tried by Lord God. Job says: “Behold, I am vile; What shall I answer You? I lay my hand over my mouth." (Job 40: 4 nkjv) Said the apostle Paul:

"Now we know that whatever the law says, it says to those who are under the law, that every mouth may be stopped, and all the world may become guilty before God. " (Rom. 3: 19 nkjv)

So, what does the silence of the Hardshells tell us? Father said to me once, in regard to when your opponents in debate ignore many of your arguments, remaining silent, that such reveals that they cannot answer them. If Hardshells really cared for my soul, or the souls of those who they think are being led astray by our writings against them, why do they keep silent? If their arguments for their peculiar beliefs are so clearly seen in scripture, why not come here and instruct us? 

In conclusion we say that the silence of the Hardshells speaks loudly. It ironically says a lot. I recall a time years ago when I met Elder Charles Smith in our local Walmart store. He was a "Primitive Baptist" elder who I was once a close friend to when I was an ordained minister in the Bear Creek Association. I wrote about our short discussion (here). I asked Charles whether Muslims were born again and saved? He did not answer, and his silence spoke loudly. 

Through the years I have asked many rhetorical questions of the Hardshells and very few have been given a reply. For instance, two posts or chapters in "The Hardshell Baptist Cult" are titled "Hardshell Busters" and have 355 questions. (See here and here) In many other postings I have asked many other questions of my Hardshell brothers and have received almost total silence. 

This phenomenon we may also call the "sound of silence" as in the famous song of Simon and Garfunkle.

What think ye?

“But the Lord is in his holy temple;

let all the earth keep silence before him!”

(Habakkuk 2:20)

Elder John Leland on Means In Regeneration

The following is from one of the several posts I have made on this elder through the years. I bought his book years ago "The Writings of John Leland" which can be read (here). Many "Primitive Baptist" have claimed that he was of their ilk because he opposed some of the methods used by some missionaries and against some of the ways to educate ministers. The "Primitive Baptist Library" in Carthage, Illinois writes the following:

"Elder John Leland was not only a Baptist minister, but a Primitive Baptist minister of the old stripe, who vigorously opposed the modern missionary system, and fellowshiped, stood with, and supported those who stood against it." (See here)

However, he was no Hardshell as respects the leading tenets of that sect. He believed that faith and repentance were necessary for eternal salvation, that it was the duty of all to believe the word of God and the Gospel, and that sinners ought to be pleaded with and invited to receive Jesus as Lord and Savior. The following citations and the other citations in the links provided below show this to be true.

Elder John Leland (1754-1841) wrote:

"Philemon was the disciple of Paul, and owed himself to him as the instrument of his salvation...Paul begat the fugitive servant by the word of truth to a lively hope." "A Little Good Thing," in "Religion in America," being "The Writings of John Leland," pg. 350)

"Christ delivers by power, as well as by price. There is no intrinsic merit in the gospel, in and of itself, to convert sinners, but by the power of the Spirit accompanying the word...The power of the gospel consists in the authority with which its author is invested...So he sends the Holy Spirit with his word to convince of sin, to discover the glories and fulness of Christ, to apply the blood of sprinkling to the wounded conscience, to lead the soul to Christ, and to his precious promises...So, when the gospel is preached in its purity, sinners are converted, and turn to the Lord. Great things have been achieved by the gospel, through the power of Christ. Witness the effects on the day of Pentecost, and during the apostolic age, and in subsequent periods, down to the present time. There is still the same promise and the same power, and Christ is riding forth majestically in the gospel chariot, from conquering to conquer. I have been endeavoring to recommend this gospel for nearly forty years, and have not grown weary in the service; and I have witnessed the truth of God's word, in the conversion of many precious souls to the obedience of faith--to God be all the glory. Amen." (Leland's "sketch of the discourse" which he had delivered, pg. 378, 379)

"The human family are ruined by sin, all have sinned, all are included in unbelief. There is none that doeth good, they are all out of the way. They are at enmity with God, in alliance with Satan, under the dominion of sin. These are the characters, my brother, to whom you are sent. And, thou, O son of man, cause them to know their abominations. Labor to convince them of the error of their way. Point out their sins, not merely as misfortunes, but as acts of wilful rebellion against the God of love. Discover to them the danger they are in, of dying in their sins, and never going where Christ is. Tell them, that God calls men every where to repent. Justify repentance towards God, and assure them that unless they repent, they will all perish."

"But when you find any who are pricked in the heart, crying out "I am undone," and asking the important question, "what shall I do to be saved," then fly like the prophetic seraphim, with the living coal of gospel promise, saying to the self-condemned, heart-sick sinner, "Believe on the Lord Jesus Christ, and thou shalt be saved." Represent Christianity as the religion for sinners. Hold forth the Saviour as able, and willing to save all that come unto him." (From "Form Of A Charge To A Candidate At His Ordination," pg. 509)

"So the death of Christ gives eternal life to those who look to him." (pg. 595, ibid)

So, obviously Leland was no Hardshell on their leading tenets.

Here are some of my previous posts on the beliefs of John Leland:

"Leland No Hardshell" (here)

"John Leland Not Hardshell" (here)

"John Leland Was Not A Hardshell" (here)

"John Leland and Duty Faith" (here)

"John Leland On Means In Rebirth" (here)

"Excerpts from Leland" (here)

"Hardshells & Gospel Invitations" (here)

"Chapter 49 - Elder Leland's Preaching" (here)

Wilson Thompson on Regeneration and Birth

The following is from Wilson Thompson's book "Simple Truth" published in 1821. It can be downloaded and read (here or read here). It is a composite of several of his sermons. His book "Triumph of Truth" was published in 1825. 

DISCOURSE #6 On the Work of the Spirit after Justification.

"This change wrought by the spirit, is called regeneration because it is begetting them unto a divine nature. The first work of the spirit on the heart is regeneration, or the implanting of that incorruptible seed with cleaves to holiness, and so it is sometimes called quickened, because this is a living seed, that causes the motions of life to appear, and this is always followed by the new birth which is effected when the soul is enabled to view Christ by faith, and lay hold of the comfort contained in the gospel, and so they are said to be born again, not of corruptible seed, but of an incorruptible seed, by the word of God."

This is a concise statement that shows that Wilson Thompson, "the ablest Primitive Baptist minister" of the 19th century, according to Sylvester Hassell, believed that regeneration and the new birth were not the same. He taught, as did others, that "regeneration" was the "implanting" of the male seed, and corresponds to when conception occurs in the womb, and that this occurs apart from the means of the Gospel. But, he also taught that the birth occurred when one was later "delivered" from the womb and "born again," and that this corresponded to the time when the regenerated soul came to believe in Christ and receive assurance of salvation, and that this occurred by means of the Gospel.

I had a sister write to me years ago and said that she read where Thompson said that one is "regenerated" apart from means. I had to say to her "yes sister, that is true, but he believed that the regenerated soul had to be born again later by the Gospel." The first Primitive Baptists did not believe that the birth by the Gospel was optional, but was as certain as regeneration.

Elder William Conrad of Kentucky, an associate of Thompson, wrote:

"There is also a begetting and being born, but our being born does not give us life; we are born because we have life; but there is a begetting, and previous to this begetting there is no vital or actual existence; but there is eternal decreed, purposed or treasured in Christ before it is given, and in due time we are said to receive it according to the election of grace; and therefore we are said to be the Temple of God, which is holy, which temple ye are." (Life and Travels of Elder William Conrad; chapter 25 and cited by me in this posting here)

Notice also Conrad's denial of the Two Seedism of his fellow minister Elder T.P. Dudley. Dudley denies that there was any actual existence of the children of God before they are born again.

In chapter 52 of "The Hardshell Baptist Cult" I gave extensive citations from Elder Gilbert Beebe, Elder Samuel Trott, and others who taught the same thing. (See here) In another post titled "The 'Reformed' Paradigm?" I gave many other citations showing that many of the first Hardshells believed the same. In that posting I wrote:

"The First Hardshell Birth Model" 

1. "Regeneration" was without means, by "direct speaking," while "conversion" was often by use of means.

2. "Regeneration" was the initial "implanting" of the "seed" or "principle of life," and "conviction" represented the state of a newly "begotten" soul in the "womb" of darkness, longing to be freed and delivered from the "womb," to see the light, and finally, the actual "delivery" or "birth" of the soul represented "evangelic conversion."

3. The "new birth" had three distinct stages to it. The first stage is "regeneration," the second stage is "conviction of sin," and the final stage is "conversion."

In that post I also quoted from Samuel Richardson, signer of the first London Baptist Confession of Faith in 1644 who also believed the same. He said "Thou may be begotten, but not borne." 

In chapter 56 ("On Conviction III") of "The Hardshell Baptist Cult" I cited extensively from Wilson Thompson to show that he also believed in this three stage model, making "regeneration" to be distinct from being "born again." (See here) In those citations, taken from his first writings in the 1820s, he also taught that God uses means, the Gospel and word of God, in bringing regenerated sinners to the birth. 

Another posting titled "First PBs On Rebirth" (See here) also gives other citations from others and also has links to other posts where I do the same.

In a post titled "Elder J.H. Purifoy on Being Born Again" (See here) I cited this elder's words from "Zion's Advocate" for the year 1879 where he said "Nothing is born before it is begotten, or has a previous existence."

So, if Thompson is your founding father and ablest minister, will you at least affirm as he did, that you must be born again by the Gospel to be saved?

Elder Hosea Preslar (Primitive Baptist)

Elder Hosea Preslar

1814 - 1877

This elder wrote a book titled:

"Thoughts on Divine Providence: Or a Sketch of God's Care Over and Dealings with His People, Together with a Concise View of the Causes and Effects of the Late War in the United States"

I have this book in my library. I bought my copy of it about 1977 in the book store of Cincinnati Primitive Baptist Church. I have cited from his book in several postings through the years. (See here, here, here). He lived at first in Anson County, North Carolina, the county adjourning my own (Union county), although at the time of his birth Anson County covered most of North Carolina, and as time went on new counties were formed out of it. He immigrated with his large family to middle Tennessee and was aided by Elder John Watson, a learned medical doctor of the time, specializing in obstetrics. Elder Watson published his final revision to his book "The Old Baptist Test" right before his death in 1866, with the help of his fellow minister and doctor, Elder R.W. Fain. Preslar's book was published in 1867. 

After the death of Watson, Hosea moved back to North Carolina and became part of Lawyer's Spring Primitive Baptist church which he had previously been a part of, and which was in the Bear Creek Association that was formed in 1832. However, he wrote to the North Carolina periodical "The Primitive Baptist" and said that he had observed how that Association held to Two Seed views. The postings I reference above give citations from him on this fact. I first visited Lawyer's Spring church when my father filled appointments in the churches in the Bear Creek Association. Later, when I moved to North Carolina, I also had occasions when my wife and I visited this church. This church, at the start of the 20th century, had an intense fight over the status of Elder J.R. Wilson, and over the doctrine of the absolute predestination of all things. 

Preslar, like Watson, was a strong opponent of Two Seedism and wrote much against it, and in doing so listed many of their errors. I have shown how the Bear Creek Association, which I was once a part of, still holds to several errors of Two Seedism. (See these postings: here, here, here)

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 here, here, here, here, here, here) Also, in my Baptist Gadfly blog I have also written many articles on this heresy. This page (here) gives many of those postings.

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.