Two Seed Baptist Ideology (XIII)

Elder Thomas P. Dudley

1792 - 1886

The above elder was, along with Gilbert Beebe and Samuel Trott, one of the chief defenders of Two Seedism. He was a frequent writer to the "Signs of the Times" periodical edited by Beebe. Dudley wrote much on Two Seed ideas and we will begin in this chapter a look at those writings. Following this we will study what the leading opposers of Two Seedism wrote in their attacks upon Two Seedism. We have already mentioned Elder (Dr.) John M. Watson of middle Tennessee and will look at what Elder Grigg Thompson, son of Elder Wilson Thompson, wrote in his opposition to Two Seedism, and also at what Elder Lemuel Potter wrote against it, and of the dialogue the latter carried on with Beebe. 

From the "Baptist History Homepage" we learn the following about Thomas Dudley, a founding father of the "Primitive Baptist Church" (emphasis mine), citing William Cathcart, editor of the The Baptist Encyclopedia, 1881; reprint, 1988, pp. 345-6:

"Rev. Thomas Parker Dudley, son of Rev. Ambrose Dudley, is the most distinguished preacher among the Baptists of Kentucky. He was born in Fayette Co., Ky., May 31, 1792. In 1812 he entered the army, was made commissary of the Northwestern troops, participating in the battles of Frenchtown and the River Raisin; in the latter was wounded in the shoulder; taken prisoner by the Indians and carried to Detroit. In the fall of 1814 he was made quartermaster of a detachment which reinforced Gen. Jackson at the battle of New Orleans, and the same year was appointed quartermaster-general of Kentucky. From 1816 until 1824 he was a cashier of a branch of the old Bank of Kentucky, located at Winchester, and for several years afterwards was engaged in settling up the business of these branch banks. He succeeded his father in the pastorate of Bryant's church in 1825. Of this church he has now (1880) been pastor fifty-five years, and of the three other churches almost as long, and he has also been moderator of Licking Association forty-seven years. He resides in Lexington." (See here)

I have read tidbits of history about both Ambrose Dudley and his son Thomas. The father was more sound in doctrine than the son, for the former was no hyper Calvinist nor a Two Seeder, while his son was all this and more, including being antinomian, and a denial of means in regeneration and eternal salvation. During the time of Thomas Dudley he did much to bring division to the churches in the Elkhorn and Licking associations over his Two Seed ideas, including his "Two Souls" view and his book called "The Christian Warfare." 

In "Twin Creek Baptist Association" in "A History of Kentucky Baptists," Baptist historian John H. Spencer (1885) wrote the following about this Baptist Association (See here):

"This small community of Antimissionary Baptists originated from a division of Licking Association, caused by a circular letter, written by Elder Thomas P. Dudley, in 1846. This letter was not presented to the Association, as was originally intended; but some of the members were permitted to read it, and, in 1847, it was read before the body. The style of the writing was obscure, and it was not clearly understood by the members. However, it caused considerable dissatisfaction and disputation. To avoid being further misrepresented, as he averred, Mr. Dudley, in 1848, caused 1,000 copies of the letter to be printed and circulated. A deliberate reading of the document increased the discontent. With the hope of restoring harmony, James Dudley, a brother of the author of the letter, sent a circular to all the churches of the Association, requesting them to send messengers to Bryants Station, in Fayette county, on the last Wednesday in March, 1850. In this meeting, about half the churches were represented, and the writer of the letter was acquitted of heresy. This further increased the discontent of the churches which dissented from the decision of the conference. Stony Point and Friendship churches issued a "Joint Manifesto" in which it was averred that Mr. Dudley taught the "Eternal Creation System." It was also claimed that he denied the doctrine of the "Regeneration of the soul."

In upcoming chapters we will look at some peculiar things taught by Dudley in the document referred to, and which later became a booklet called "The Origin, Nature, and Effects of the Christian Warfare." In this writing Dudley defended the leading ideas of Two Seedism, namely the belief that the souls of the elect were brought into existence when Christ, as the God-Man mediator, was begotten sometime in eternity past. He vehemently defended the doctrine of "eternal vital union." We must also remember that T.P. Dudley became one of the most important figures in the history of Kentucky Baptists, especially of those who were known as "Primitive," "Regular," or "Old School" Baptists, or as Hardshell or anti mission Baptists. In the above citation Spencer gives the name of Dudley's home church as "Bryant" but others say it is "Bryan." It is one of the oldest Baptist churches in Kentucky.

Said Spencer in his description of the Two Seed views of Dudley:

"The "Eternal Creation System" taught that God, in the Eternal Past, created two distinct families: one in Adam, and the other in Jesus Christ; that all the members of each of these families were created simultaneously, and, that, of course, they [p. 605] are, in fact, of the same age. According to this teaching, the child born today is, in reality, as old as Adam: The recent birth is only a development of an "eternal creation." So of the spiritual family, "created in, and simultaneously with Jesus Christ." Abel, the first Christian, is no older than the last one that shall be "born from above." The descendant of Adam is the natural man, a simple being wholly corrupt, and unchangeable in the present life. A descendant from Jesus Christ, whether born (developed) in the days of Abel, or in the present age, is wholly pure and incorruptible." (Ibid)

It is stretching things beyond measure to say that I existed as a person in Adam just because I have come from his seed. To use a pun, that is "going to seed" on what it means to be the seed of another person. My person, my "self," my soul or spirit, did not exist in Adam but was brought into existence when I was formed in the womb of my mother and from the seed of my father. The kind of union that human beings have with Adam and Eve is twofold, seminally and representatively. The scriptures emphasize the latter, however, and not the former. It is because of my connection with Adam that I am born with a human nature, with a human soul. It is because of my connection with Christ, the second Adam, that I am born with a divine nature. (II Peter 1: 4) There is no vital union with Christ until Christ is received by faith. 

Just because the divine nature or divine seed ("incorruptible seed" - I Peter 1: 23) has eternally existed does not mean that the one who partakes of the divine nature when converted to Christ has eternally existed with a divine nature. It is not deducible to affirm that since all the children of God are "begotten" of God that they therefore eternally existed in God. 

The Two Seed view expressed above by Dudley is ridiculous. If what he says is true, then my father and I are the same age. The scriptures however do not speak this way, but often speak of one person being either younger or older than another. If what he says is true, then when Paul says that Andronicus and Junia "were in Christ before me" (Rom. 16: 7) is incorrect. 

Said the same source:

"A Christian, according to this theory, is not a child of Adam, regenerated, nor yet a descendant of Christ, born from above, but a coalescence of both, and consequently, a "compound being." As both of the component parts are unchangeable, and are antagonistic in their nature, there must be a perpetual strife between them until the stronger destroys the weaker. This Mr. Dudley denominates the "Christian Warfare." While the subject was agitated, the theory was sometimes called the "Two Souls doctrine." The denial of the regeneration of the human soul was a necessary sequence of this theory." (Ibid)

One can see how this idea of the preexistence of souls, either in Adam or in the pre-incarnate Son of God, has far reaching effects on the doctrine of regeneration or birth of the Spirit and of the resurrection of the dead. In the Two Seed view of being regenerated or born again, an eternal divine child of God who is spirit enters into the physical body of a person (much like a demon spirit). That child of God is not essentially changed in regeneration nor is the "Adam man." The entrance of that eternal spirit into the human merely causes a warfare. 

Dudley's treatise "The Origin, Nature, and Effects of the Christian Warfare" was at first the title to the circular letter. Spencer in his "A History of Kentucky Baptists," writes (See here):

"In 1845 [1844], Thomas P. Dudley was appointed to write the circular letter for the ensuing year. He wrote on the subject of the "Christian Warfare, including the Eternal Spiritual Oneness of Christ and the church." Showing the paper to some of the brethren, it was privately discussed, before the Association was organized. Learning that some objection would be made to the letter, Mr. Dudley declined presenting it, and it was not published, for the time. But its contents were discussed among the brethren, and, as Mr. Dudley averred, its teachings were misrepresented. In order to correct the erroneous impressions, made on the public mind, Mr. Dudley, in 1849, printed and circulated a thousand copies of the letter, in pamphlet form. The style of the treatise is labored and obscure, but the substance of the doctrine contained in it was understood to be as follows:

1. God created two distinct families of men. The first was created in Adam, and was denominated the natural man. As the great oak, with its innumerable branches, leaves and acorns, was contained in the acorn from whence it sprang: so the whole human family, comprising the countless millions of all its generations, was contained in Adam, at his creation.

2. The other family was created in, and simultaneously with Jesus Christ, and was called the spiritual man. As every soul of the natural family was comprised in Adam: so every member of the spiritual family was embraced in Jesus Christ, at his creation. 

3. What men call a multiplication of these families, is only a development, or manifestation, to human perception, of what God created instantaneously, in the beginning.

4. The nature of each of these families, is uniform and unchangeable. That of the natural man is wholly corrupt, and remains so perpetually, in every member of that family: That of the spiritual man is wholly pure, and can never be, in any degree, corrupted or tarnished.

5. A christian is a compound being, composed of one natural man and one spiritual man, mysteriously combined by the power of the Holy Spirit, while the original nature of each remains unchanged, and unchangeable.

6. The christian's warfare consists in a life-long struggle between the two men of which he is composed, often called, in the sacred Scriptures, the "old man" and the "new man." In the end, the spiritual man triumphs over, and utterly destroys his antagonist, and then returns to God, who sent him to be developed in this warfare.

As we have pointed out previously, this is similar to Mormon belief. As we will see later, one of the arguments that Dudley and the Two Seeders used to prove their thesis was Paul's "new man" and "old man" teaching. The "new man" is the eternally begotten child of God and the "old man" is the begotten child of Adam.

Wrote Spencer further:

"This teaching was popularly called the "Two-Souls doctrine," and was regarded heretical by some of the churches and all the correspondents of Licking Association. Such was the influence of Mr. Dudley, however, that a majority of the churches acquiesced in his interpretation of his pamphlet. But much disturbance followed its publication. Salem Association of Predestinarian Baptists withheld correspondence from Licking, in 1850. Foreseeing the storm that was gathering, James Dudley, a brother to the author of the "Christian Warfare," sent a circular to all the churches in Licking Association, inviting them to send messengers to meet at Bryants, in March, 1850, for the purpose of endeavoring to allay the confusion. Most of the churches responded to the call. But Friendship and Stony Point issued a joint manifesto, denouncing the teaching of Mr. Dudley's pamphlet, and declaring non-fellowship for three churches which had received it, and for all who believed as they did. This resulted in a speedy division of the Association. Friendship, Stony Point, Twin Creek, Williamsburg, Rays Fork, and Fork Lick churches withdrew, and constituted a new fraternity, under the style of "Twin Creek Old Regular Baptist Association." This occurred, in 1850. The next year, all the Associations in Kentucky withheld correspondence from Licking. The body still exchanged minutes with two or three distant fraternities, but, in 1853, even this shadow of a correspondence was dropped. But Mr. Dudley, who has been the leading spirit of the Association, for more than fifty years, was a man of great energy and excellent address, and, by visiting the various Associations, preaching among them, and conciliating them, wisely and prudently, he succeeded in re-establishing correspondence with most of those fraternities from which his Association had become alienated. - Volume II, 1881, pp. 245-246."

I have tried to find that "joint manifesto" against Dudley and his Two Seed (or Two Souls) view that was issued by Friendship and Stony Point churches. Now let us look at some of the things Dudley wrote in that pamphlet. He begins by saying (emphasis mine): "To the Churches composing the Licking Association of Particular Baptist; their Messengers wish grace, mercy and peace multiplied." (See here) The following citations are from chapter four of the biography of T.P. Dudley, as written to Elder Smoot by J. Taylor Moore. 

Dudley writes:

"DEARLY BELOVED; It occurs to us that we could not select a more appropriate subject, because none possesses more intrinsic merit, for our present annual address, that the ORIGIN, NATURE, and EFFECTS of that warfare which so painfully disturbs the peace and quiet of the Children of the Regeneration."

Wrote Dudley:

"That the warfare, invariably follows being “born again,” is not, we believe, controverted by any experimental Christian. But whilst some of us maintain, that the warfare results from a conflict of elements within; others, and perhaps the larger number contend, that in the new birth, the man is changed from the love of sin to the love of holiness."

Notice that Dudley affirms that being born again does not change a man from the love of sin to the love of holiness. Such an affirmation caused many Old School or Primitive Baptists to react with fervent censure. There was intense debate among the Hardshells over this very question. What change, if any, occurs in a sinner when he is regenerated and converted? The Two Seed view came to be called "the no change view of regeneration" or "hollow log" doctrine. But, more on that later. 

Wrote Dudley:

"Now we ask, if indeed, in the new birth, the man is changed from the love of sin to the love of holiness, and this change is perfect, does it not necessarily follow, that he will be as wholly and entirely devoted to holiness subsequently, as he had been to sin antecedently to the new birth? If, as is contended by many, the enmity of the heart is slain in regeneration, whence arises opposition to the dispensations of God’s providence? Irreconciliation to his will? And whence the exclamation, “O wretched man that I am! Who shall deliver me from the body of this death?” Rom.7:24. That the Christian is a compound being, is a truth so fully taught in his history; as given in the holy Scriptures, that we wonder it should be controverted by any who have tasted that “the LORD is gracious.”

There again we see Dudley denying that a man is changed in being born of God. The "new man" does not need to be changed, for it was perfect when first begotten in eternity past, and the "old man" is not changed at all when the "new man" takes possession of the "old man." The only change is in the activities of either, each beginning a war with the other. 

Notice also in the citations above that Dudley admits that his view was a minority view, admitting that it is the view of the majority that the new birth slew the natural enmity of the heart against the Lord. About the Christian being "a compound being" we will have more to say later perhaps. In some sense we can agree with this affirmation, but not in the sense given by Dudley and Two Seed Baptists. 

Wrote Dudley:

"Whence these various distinctions between the old and new man, if indeed there are not two men? If man is only changed in the new birth? If the language that “man is changed” were appropriate, there would be but one man; his feelings and affections having been changed; there would be no conflict and hence no warfare! We presume that none will contend that the old is the new man, or the new is the old man. This would be to confound language and make it unintelligible." 

The terms "new man" and "old man" as used by Paul are not to be taken literally but figuratively. It is used by Paul in the same way people use it in common speech, as when they say "he is not the same man as he once was." This is said in instances where a person has changed dramatically in either physical appearance or psychological ways, as in a change of beliefs, values, behavior, attitude, etc. The "old man" is a metaphor for the kind of person a believer was before he was converted and the "new man" is a metaphor for the man after conversion. Some bible commentaries say that the "old man" represents the old depraved nature that a person receives from Adam when he is born into the world, and the "new man" represents the new divine nature that a person receives from Christ, the second Adam, when born of the Spirit. 

This led to a debate on whether any part of the "Adam man," or "the natural man," is changed in regeneration. The Orthodox view said that it is the soul or spirit of a man that is what is changed. 

Wrote Dudley:

"The Bible furnishes the following history of the natural family. “So God created man in his own image, in the image of God created he him; male and female created he them.” Gen.1:27. “And the Lord God formed man of the dust of the ground, and breathed into his nostrils the breath of life; and man became a living soul.” Gen.2:7. “Man and female created he them, and blessed them, and called their name Adam, in the day when they were created.” Gen.5:2. Hence we learn that all “living souls,” were created in, and simultaneously with their natural progenitor." 

Here Dudley begs the question when he says that every living soul was created in Adam. He then makes a giant inferential leap when he affirms that likewise all the souls or spirits of God's children were created in Christ before the world began. 

Wrote Dudley:

"They all descend from him by ordinary or natural generation. They necessarily partake of his nature, and subsist upon the same elements upon which he subsisted. The breath of life communicated to man, whence he became a “living soul,” constituted him a rational, intelligent, responsible being, the subject of law and of earthly enjoyments, capable of subsisting upon the products of the earth; but incapable of other and higher enjoyments." 

Dudley argues as do other Two Seeders that Adam, even before his fall, was not in any sense a "spiritual" being, but was wholly a "natural man" (I Cor. 2: 14). Being natural meant that he could not have anything spiritual about him, no communion with God as such. Of course, that is not true. Adam walked with God in the Garden and conversed with God. There was nothing in the original constitution of man that hindered him from enjoying anything spiritual. After Adam's fall he became morally and spiritually unable to please God and to enjoy him, not a physical inability. 

Wrote Dudley:

"The characteristics of this family are strikingly marked in the Scriptures – “And Adam lived a hundred and thirty years, and begat a son in his own likeness, after his own image; and called his name Seth.” Gen.5:3. “Behold, I was shapen in iniquity; and in sin did my mother conceive me.” Ps.51:5. “The wicked are estranged from the womb; they go astray as soon as they be born, speaking lies.” Ps.58:3. “Wherefore, as by one man sin entered into the world, and death by sin; and so death passed upon all men, for that all have sinned.” Rom.5:12." 

This family of man, however, contrary to the views of many Two Seeders, had both elect and non elect, wheat and tares, children of God and children of the Devil. Many Two Seeders denied that the seed of the Devil fell in Adam.

Wrote Dudley:

"From the preceding verses and arguments it is manifest that the family of the “first Adam” is not capable of rendering acceptable service to God, but the antagonist nature and principle of the two families [the natural and the spiritual,] out of which grows the warfare, are made still more manifest by the contrast introduced by an Apostle. And so it is written: “The first man Adam was made a living soul; the last Adam was made a quickening spirit. Howbeit that was not first which is spiritual, but that which is natural; and afterwards that which is spiritual. The first man is of the earth, earthy; the second man is the Lord from heaven. As is the earthy, such are they also that are earthy; and as is the heavenly, such are they also that are heavenly. And as we have borne the image of the earthy, we shall also bear the image of the heavenly. Now this I say, brethren, that flesh and blood cannot inherit the kingdom of God; neither doth corruption inherit incorruption.” I Cor.15:45-50"

When Paul speaks of "the natural man" in First Corinthians (2: 14) he is not referring to how man was created originally by God. Rather, he is referring to a "soulish" man, the Greek word psychikos denoting such. Such a natural man who follows his own ideas and rejects divine revelation. When Adam was first made he did not have an "antagonistic nature" towards God. He was created holy, righteous, spiritual, godly, etc. This is because he was created in the image of God. It was not till he sinned that he lost that original state and likeness. 

When in the above words of Paul he says that Adam was natural, earthly, and not spiritual, he is speaking of his human body, not of his soul or spirit. First Corinthians chapter fifteenth is talking about the resurrection of the body. The flesh and blood of Adam, before his sin, was not spiritual.

Wrote Dudley:

"Is it not evident then, that all “living souls” were created in and simultaneously with the “first man Adam,” that they all, being born of him, necessarily partake of his nature, “and he called their name Adam?” And that all “quickened spirits” were created in and simultaneously with the “last Adam” – that they all, being born of him, “born of God,” as necessarily partake of his nature? That all living souls no more necessarily descend from the first Adam than all quickened spirits necessarily descend from the last Adam; that the seed of the “first Adam” disclose his nature, and the seed of the “last Adam” make manifest his nature."

No, it is not evident that all the souls of the elect were "created in and simultaneously with" Christ the last Adam. Being "in Christ" and being created or born anew occurs when the soul is joined to Christ by faith in the work of conversion, and not in eternity past. The Son of God has always existed as such but the man Christ Jesus, composed of human soul and spirit, was created and begotten in time, when he was conceived by the Spirit in the womb of Mary his mother. 

In the above citation Dudley admits that it is when a man is born that he then partakes of the fallen nature of his father Adam. This would deny that the elect or non-elect partake of either the divine or human nature in past eternity. If a person becomes a "partaker of the divine nature" when he is born again, then he did not have a divine or spiritual nature before, and thus Two Seedism is overthrown.

Wrote Dudley:

"The children of the “first Adam” are born of the flesh and are earthly in all their feelings and affections; the children of the “last Adam” are born of the Spirit and are necessarily heavenly or spiritual in their feelings and affections. The children of the first are born for earth; of the last Adam, are born for heaven. Those of the “first” are born of corruptible; those of the “last Adam” are of incorruptible seed. The first necessarily partake of human; the last, of the divine nature. The antagonistic principles attached to the two men necessarily result in the warfare. If all living souls were not vitally united to the first Adam, how could they be so directly and fatally effected by the first transgression? How could the original act of transgression be considered their act? “And so death passed upon all men, for that all have sinned.” “There is none righteous, no not one.” Rom.3:10."

Much of what Dudley here says is orthodox. The question however is - "when and how does a person partake of either Adam's fallen nature or the divine nature?" If Two Seedism is correct, he cannot say that the divine nature is given to people when they are born again of the Spirit, for they were eternally begotten as such. Dudley has already affirmed that all the souls of Adam's seed were in Adam and so partook of his corrupt nature all at once when he sinned. If that is so, then it is wrong to say that an individual of the race obtains his fallen nature when he is humanly conceived. Likewise, if all of the souls of the Lord's seed were in Christ since eternity, and all received his nature at the same time, then it is wrong to say that an individual of the race obtains the divine nature when born anew.

In the next chapter we will continue giving the Two Seed views of Dudley from his book on the Christian Warfare and other writings.