The above picture is of Elder Samuel Trott in his late years and the church building I assume is the old Welsh Tract Baptist Church which was constituted in 1701 in Wales (England) and moved to America and set up church in 1703 in Delaware and became one of the five churches who formed the Philadelphia Association of Baptists, the oldest in America. Trott pastored this church for a while. As we have stated before he was a leading writer for the first Hardshell periodical "The Signs of the Times," and agreed with Beebe on "eternal vital union," though he disagreed with Beebe on the nature and fall of angels and on Beebe's acceptance of the doctrine of "eternal justification," the idea that the elect were justified from sin from eternity. He also agreed with Beebe in saying that Christ had three natures rather than two. With these introductory remarks, I will begin this chapter with what Trott said on the preexistence of the elect in his article titled "Thoughts on Eternal Justification" and published in the Signs of the Times for Nov. 22, 1837 with the ending - Centreville, Fairfax County, Va., July 18, 1849.
Wrote Trott (highlighting mine):
"My first objection to the term "Eternal Justification" as used by my brethren, or to the sentiment that the justification of the elect was an act of God passed in eternity, grows out of that prominent sentiment embraced in our Old School stand, namely: that a "Thus saith the Lord" is requisite to justify us in what we believe as well as in what we practice. I do not mean by this that the doctrine must always be expressed in the Scriptures in so many identical words. The doctrine of the "eternal union" of Christ and His people is not, that I know of, declared in just so many words in the Scriptures, yet I think this doctrine is therein clearly revealed. For instance compare Heb.2:11, "For both He that sanctifieth, and they who are sanctified are all of one for which cause He is not ashamed to call them brethren," with Rom.8:29, "For whom He did foreknow, He also did predestinate to be conformed to the image of His Son that He might be the first-born among many brethren," and they show that the oneness or the union is of as old a date as the predestinating decree of God; and that we know that from Eph.1:4 & 5, to have been from before the foundation of the world. Inference is thus plain, because according to Heb.2:11, Christ recognized His people as brethren on the ground of their oneness with Him; and according to Romans 8:29, the predestinating decree of God recognized them as the many brethren among whom Christ was first-born. This doctrine is also taught by the several figures by which the union is illustrated in the Scriptures. For instance, in the figure of the creation of Adam and Eve. As Eve was of Adam's body, of his flesh, and of his bones, so the church is of Christ. (See Eph.5:25-32) Eve was created in Adam in his original creation. Gen.5:1 & 2. That the figure as used by the Apostle may hold good, we must therefore admit that the church was brought forth and set up in Christ, her head, when He was brought forth from everlasting, when there were no depths, &c. Prov.8:23,24. The same is further confirmed by the general doctrine of the gospel such as that they were chosen in Him, &c. Eph.1:4. I would here remark that the doctrine contained in this text is not that they were chosen into Christ; but chosen in Him."
Most of those Two Seed Baptists who believed in the preexistence of the souls of the elect, and in "eternal vital union," also believed in the doctrine known as "eternal justification." Trott, however, is an exception. He does not believe in the latter but does believe in the former.
Trott also admits that there is no scripture that plainly declares Two Seed ideology. He thinks that it is clearly inferred or implied however in the fact that Adam is a figure of Christ and in the supposition that Eve is a figure of the elect (or the church - Christ' mystical body). That is a weak foundation upon which to build such a fantastic ideology. Two things however disprove the inferences of the Two Seeders on this point. First, Paul wrote:
"Salute Andronicus and Junia, my kinsmen, and my fellow-prisoners, who are of note among the apostles, who also were in Christ before me." (Rom. 16: 7 kjv)
If eternal vital union is true, and if the souls of the elect were already "in Christ" from before the world began, and if they were "created in Christ" when Christ was begotten by the Father (in eternity), then all the elect were "in Christ" at the same time. But, Paul avows the very opposite in the above words. The believers Paul names "were in Christ before me," and not at the same time as he was.
About vital union with God and Christ, the bible shows that this occurs in conjunction with being "begotten" of the Father, with being regenerated or born again, with having faith in Christ. Wrote Paul:
"Do you not know that your bodies are members of Christ? Shall I then take the members of Christ and make them members of a harlot? Certainly not! Or do you not know that he who is joined to a harlot is one body with her? For “the two,” He says, “shall become one flesh.” But he who is joined to the Lord is one spirit with Him." (I Cor. 6: 15-17 nkjv)
The above text speaks of a believer's union with Christ under the figure of a marital union. This is one of the several figures used to describe the union of a believer with God, Father, Son, and Spirit. Other texts that also speak of the marital union that the elect have with Christ are Romans 7: 1-4 and Ephesians 5: 25-33. In the former passage Paul speaks of believers being "married to" Christ. The latter says that it is in being married to Christ that a believer becomes "one with Christ." Union follows being married to Christ. That union occurs when the believer says "I do" in his vows to the Lord. There can be no marriage union where there is not an agreement between man and woman to be one in marriage. The idea of the Two Seeders and other Hyper Calvinists that the marriage union occurs before faith, before the sinner has agreed to be the spouse of the Lord, yea from even before the foundation of the world, is ludicrous.
In the above text a person is "joined to" a harlot in fornication by that person's choice. So, likewise, when a person is "joined to" his betrothed wife it is also by his or her choice. That is why many saints, including the Hardshells, sing "Oh happy day that fixed my choice on thee, my Savior and my God," being the day when "he washed my sins away."
Paul also wrote: "That Christ may dwell in your hearts by faith" (Eph. 3: 17 kjv).
Union with Christ begins when Christ is received and when Christ enters the heart and makes it his temple, and this is "by faith," by agreeing with Christ. Many marriage vows speak of giving "trust" to a spouse, along with vows and promises. In a spouse's vows to her husband, she promises to love, serve, and obey her husband. So too do believers vow when they are converted to Christ. Recall that Paul said the following to the believers in Corinth:
"For I am jealous over you with godly jealousy: for I have espoused you to one husband, that I may present you as a chaste virgin to Christ." (II Cor. 11: 2 kjv)
How could Paul espouse (betroth, or promise, or help get engaged) them to Christ if they were united to Christ in marriage from before the world began?
Trott wrote the following under the title "REPLY TO BRETHREN: SONSHIP & UNION" (See here; page 303 and written by him July 18th, 1849):
"In my communication, in the 10th number, present volume of the SIGNS, in replying to brother Barton’s query concerning the churches being created in Christ Jesus before the foundation of the world, I took the ground, that the expressions “created in Christ Jesus,” naturally involved the idea that his church was created in his creation, as the Head of his church, and of course, as far back as he stood as her Head. I referred to I Cor.15:45, as sustaining the same idea, and also to Rev.3:14 & Col.1:15 as further justifying the application of the idea of creatureship to our Lord in reference to his headship. It used to be that in the mouth of two or three witnesses every word should be established; but it seems it is not so now. These brethren in replying to that communication, do not notice the text, Eph.2:10 {“For we are his workmanship, created in Christ Jesus, &c.,”} although I founded my main arguments on it. The other three scripture passages above named they notice, and how they dispose of them shall now occupy our attention." (pg. 303-304)
What an absurd proposition it is to affirm that believers were "created in Christ Jesus before the foundation of the world"! When the scriptures speak of being "created in Christ" it refers to what occurs in the life of persons when they believe and repent, when they are converted, when they are regenerated and born again, and not something that that occurred before the world began or before a person exists. Notice these two leading texts on being newly created in Christ.
"Therefore, if anyone is in Christ, he is a new creation; old things have passed away; behold, all things have become new." (II Cor. 5: 17 nkjv)
"For we are His workmanship, created in Christ Jesus for good works, which God prepared beforehand that we should walk in them." (Eph. 2: 10 nkjv)
This passage is senseless if it refers to an event that happened in past eternity. Two Seeders believe, like Arians, that when Paul speaks of Christ being "the firstborn over all creation" (Col. 1: 15 nkjv) and when John records Christ saying - "These things says the Amen, the Faithful and True Witness, the Beginning of the creation of God" (Rev. 3: 14 nkjv) that this refers to Christ being begotten by the Father before the world began, when he was made a mediator and redeemer. When Christ was thus made or begotten so too were all the elect created in him. But, this is certainly not what Paul is referring to by that experience called a "new creation" (Gal. 6: 15).
What "old things" did Paul say have "passed away" for the believer? When did this occur? If it occurred from past eternity, old things passing away becomes an absurdity. How did things become new? Paul says that the good works that believers are to do were "prepared beforehand" but did not say that believers themselves were prepared before they were born into the world.
Wrote Trott:
"They ask, “Do the Scriptures give any information of anything being created before the beginning?” If they mean by beginning the beginning of the creation of God; I answer no, for Christ is that beginning. But, if they mean by it, the beginning of time, as in Gen.1:1, I say yes; for in that beginning God created the heavens and the earth, but Christ, being the Beginning of the creation of God, and the First born of every creature, must in this sense have been created or brought into existence before these, and therefore before time. As no other reading has been attempted to be given to these texts, Rev.3:14 & Col.1:15, I still think them good authority as they read. But as they do not satisfy these brethren, I will produce other corresponding texts." (pg. 304)
The words highlighted above are based upon a misinterpretation of the two texts referred to and is the same interpretation that the Arians give of them. Those texts do not say that the Son of God was ever created, but that he is the Creator and all was created by him. We do not want to go into detail on these texts because it would require much space and would be drifting too far from our main focus, which is to define the leading tenets of Two Seed ideology. In short, these texts are designed to show the superiority of Christ over all, the thesis being "that in all things Christ must have the preeminence." (Col. 1: 18)
Wrote Trott:
"I next pass to their notice of the two texts, Rev.3:14 & Col.1:15. They say in reference to them, “We desire to give the fairest construction we can, according to the tenor of truth.” Why not according to the reading of the texts?" (pg. 305)
I cannot speak to the strength of the arguments that non Two Seed Hardshells offered to Trott and the Parkerites, but he thinks they do not give "the fairest construction" or plain reading of the texts. However, it is actually the Two Seed Arian interpretation of those texts that perverts their meaning.
Wrote Trott:
"To return to our subject, we will now notice how this tenor of truth works in reference to those texts. First. In reference to Rev. 3:14, “The beginning of the creation of God.” They quote the text, and without attempting to show that there is any mistake in the reading, or that the word beginning does not properly mean beginning, but beginner, they try to show that the text does not mean what it says. Their modus operandi it is not necessary for me to notice. They next come to Col. 1:15, “The First-born of every creature.” By quoting the following verses, in which in connection with the 15th verse, Paul is giving such a representation of the Son of God and Redeemer as to show that in his complex person, He in all things has the pre-eminence. But they would thereby make the impression that he is not the first-born of every creature, and of course that in this particular he has not the preeminence over his brethren, and is not like them, though verse 18 says, “That in all things he might have the pre-eminence,” and Heb.2:17, reads, “In all things it behooved him to be made like his brethren,” in that they are born of God, and he not according to these brethren, for if born of God he has a derived existence, and therein is a creature in distinction from the self-existent Godhead." (pg. 306)
Again, no Arian could have stated Arian belief any better. They affirm that the two texts above (Rev. 3: 14 & Col. 1: 15) teach that Jesus Christ as the Son of God is not uncreated or without a beginning. However, Trott, Beebe, and one group of Two Seeders do not deny that Christ is God, but simply say that his being the Son of God, or the firstborn, or the beginning of the creation of God, has to do with him becoming a mediator and the life of his chosen people. Some of them said that this involved Christ being given a human soul when he was begotten some time in past eternity. Others even affirmed that his human body also was created when his human soul was created and when he was begotten as a mediator and redeemer.
Christ being the firstborn has several aspects. One of those has to do with his being from eternity the Son of the Father, or second person of the Trinity. Christ' sonship is unique and is why he is called "the only" begotten of the Father, and who is always in the bosom of the Father. It has to do with his rank, and his being begotten is not to be interpreted as being in every way the same as humans are begotten.
When Revelation says that Christ is "the beginning of the creation of God" he means the same thing when he says "I am Alpha and Omega, the beginning and the end." (Rev. 21: 6; 22: 13) The Son of God says this several times in the Apocalypse.
“I am the Alpha and the Omega, the Beginning and the End,” says the Lord, “who is and who was and who is to come, the Almighty.” (Rev. 1: 8 nkjv)
"And when I saw Him, I fell at His feet as dead. But He laid His right hand on me, saying to me, “Do not be afraid; I am the First and the Last." (Rev. 1: 17 nkjv)
In Isaiah God says more than once - "I am the first and the last" (Isa. 44: 6-8; 48: 12). Therefore, being "the first," or "the beginning," does not mean being the first thing created. Both the Father and the Son confess that they are "the first and the last" or "the Alpha." Both therefore are God. Further, in Rev. 1: 8 Jesus says that he is "the Almighty." Ergo, being "the beginning" of all things does not mean that he who is such is a created being.
If Christ being the "beginning of the creation of God" or the Alpha of creation, means that he was, in his divinity, created, then by the same rule we must say that his being "the ending" or "the last" must mean that he ceased to be God and to exist.
Wrote Trott:
"And it is evident that the dispute about these texts, is no longer between me and them, but between them and the Holy Ghost. The Holy Ghost says that Christ, is the beginning of the creation of God, and the Firstborn of every creature, and that his people were created in him, &c.; they, in effect, say it is not so. Hundreds of other texts might be named on which the same dispute would arise; but I will forbear." (pg. 307)
Notice the Two Seedism and the error of the preexistence of the souls of the elect. Though, as we will see in upcoming chapters, Beebe wants to backtrack and say that he has never taught the idea of "eternal children," which is not the case. The view of Trott as stated above is also the view of Beebe as we have seen from the several citations I have given from him on the same theme. "His people were created in him" affirms that the children were created some time in eternity past when Christ was made a mediator and when he was begotten. Further, the two texts in dispute do not say that the children of God were created when Christ was created. That is read into the passage. Also, as we have seen, those two texts do not teach that Christ is a created deity.
Wrote Trott:
"The life with which we believe the soul is quickened is Christ – Christ in you the hope of glory. Col.1:27 & 3:3,4. Christ who is the Son of God, the only begotten of the Father, full of grace and truth; begotten or created in the Word, and his people in him, and thus ever existing in personal union with the Godhead, both from eternity, and as he is manifested in the new birth in the believer, as he says, “As thou Father art in me, and I in thee, that they also may be one in us.” Again, “I in them, and thou in me, that they may be made perfect in one.” John 17:21,23. Thus Christ our life existed as the Head and Husband of his church, before the heavens were planted, or the foundations of the earth laid, in the secret place of the Most High, in the shadow of God’s hand, and as one with God, and therefore as God whilst he is the Son of God. Hence when persons are born again, born of the Quickening Spirit, they are manifested as members of Christ’s body, as his seed, and through him – the only begotten of the Father, they are born of God, and are the sons of God." (pg. 308)
Here is another error in interpretation by the Two Seeders. Both Beebe and Trott will argue that "the life" or the "eternal life" is Christ, but that is not what the several texts in the new testament mean when they speak of believers being given eternal life. Yes, Christ is said to be our life, and Christ said that he was the Way, the Truth, and the Life, but being given life ordinarily means simply the opposite of being dead. Notice also the further Two Seed declarations. Notice also how this Christological view of the Arian Two Seeders has led them to believe in the heathen doctrine of the preexistence of souls and to drastically alter what occurs when a person is born of the Spirit. We have already in preceding chapters spoken of some of these alterations. Notice the word "manifested." This is a favorite word with the Two Seeders. Being born again did not make a person a child of the Father but only manifests that he was a child of God, having been such from eternity. Union with Christ is not by faith but only manifests a prior vital union. These are the results of the slippery slope of Two Seedism.
Wrote Trott:
"Another wrong representation of my views, and the views of others, is found in their having throughout their communication, spoken of our views, as though we held that Christ as the Head of his church existed personally distinct from God and therefore distinctly as a creature. Where as we have never admitted that as a person he is a creature, but on the contrary, whilst we say that as man he was a creature, and that as Son, or as the Head of his church, or as Mediator, and Christ he is a creature; that is, that the existence in him which constituted him these, was not self-existent, but was brought into existence of God, yet that he took both of these existences into union with himself as God, the latter in eternity, the former in time, thus existing as God, as the Son of God, and the son of man, in one complex person. He thus exists as a distinct person, having distinct personal qualities from the Father and the Holy Ghost, but one with them in the Godhead, thus constituting him a fit and adequate person to be the one Mediator between the one God, and men." (pg. 309)
This is why I do not call Beebe's and Trott's views on being created or made "the Son" Arianism but semi Arianism. Arians deny that Christ is in any sense the uncreated God. Two Seeders, however, retained a belief in the divinity of Christ, that as God he is uncreated. But, they do believe that Christ as "the Head of his church, or as Mediator," is "a creature." As stated in previous chapters Beebe and Trott believe that Christ has three natures, a divine, a human, and a mediatorial nature.
No comments:
Post a Comment