In this chapter we will continue to give the Two Seed views of "Old School Baptist" Elder T. P. Dudley, one of the chief defenders of Two Seedism in its beginnings in the nineteenth century among those called "Primitive" or "Old School" or "Hardshell" Baptists. We have been citing from his biography as given by J. Taylor Moore (See here).
Wrote Moore:
"The idea of substituting a part of the generation of Adamic sinners as “the generation of Jesus Christ” is to subvert the whole general tenor of Bible truth. And this is just exactly what the learned John M. Watson did in his “Review of the Circular Letter of Licking Association of Particular Baptist;” namely, “the circular on the warfare,” and all others who war in like manner against the truth of God."
Watson was one of the first "Primitive Baptists" to lead the opposition against Two Seedism, as we have before seen. An Internet search does not locate the work of Watson referenced above, wherein he reviews the Circular letter of Dudley. Perhaps he incorporated his "Review" into his book titled "The Old Baptist Test," which was first published in the late 1850s. In upcoming chapters we will read of others who followed in the steps of Watson and opposed the Two Seed wing of the newly formed "Primitive Baptist Church," such as Elders George Stipp, Lemuel Potter, C.H. Cayce, and Grigg Thompson, etc.
Wrote Moore:
"In a reply to this lengthy review of J.M. Watson, the venerable editor of the SIGNS OF THE TIMES, Elder Gilbert Beebe, says: “It is not our human existence that is born again. ‘That which is born of the flesh, is flesh, and that which is born of the Spirit is spirit.’ Elder Watson falls into the same error in confounding the two births that Nicodemus did, in supposing them both to be applied to us as merely human beings, whereas the new birth is a spiritual birth. But in what language shall we treat the conclusion arrived at by Elder Watson that, ‘if the children of God are born of him as a consequence of a previous existence in and union to him before they are born again, as in the case of Adam, then they must needs be born gods, and not merely saints or new creatures.’ This is a very extraordinary conclusion for a man of Watson’s superior understanding to draw from the premises. We think that it is clearly demonstrated in the Scriptures of truth that Christ is the life of his mystical body, that He has been their dwelling place in all generations, even from everlasting, and that upon this very principal they are his seed that shall serve him, and they shall be accounted to him for a generation."
The burden of proof was on the Two Seeders to prove that the children of God were begotten in Christ before the world began. They have no scripture which asserts such a thing. They have only one argument, which is to say that "as all human souls were created in Adam so were all spiritual souls created in the second Adam before the world began." They argued that "the seed" of Adam (his sperm) contained all the souls of every human being as Levi was in the loins of Abraham. (Heb. 7: 10) Beebe would cite Hebrews 2: 14, as we have seen, as a proof text that affirmed that Christ becoming flesh is the same in all respects as the elect becoming flesh, that as Christ existed before his incarnation, so too did the children of God. But, that is certainly not what the text is affirming.
As we have before suggested, Two Seedism was in part spawned from a belief of some Hyper Calvinists of the 18th century who affirmed that the human soul of Christ was begotten in eternity. It was easy to jump to the conclusion that the bride of Christ (the elect) was also begotten when Christ was begotten. Thus, we have the doctrine of "eternal vital union" and of the preexistence of souls. We will have more to say on this when we give citations from Elder Lemuel Potter's articles against Two Seedism in the latter end of the nineteenth century.
Wrote Moore:
"If they are his seed then that seed was in him as their spiritual progenitor, or seminal head, and so long as he has sustained the relationship of everlasting Father, they have existed in the relationship of children. By virtue of this relationship they are born ‘not of blood, nor of the will of the flesh, nor of the will of man, but of God.’ Does this birth, then, make them gods? By no means. Our pre-existence in, and lineal descent from Adam did not make us all Adams, or public federal heads of all the human family, but it made us manifest as the sons or children of Adam. So our relation to and previous existence in Christ, and our consequent descent from him by regeneration makes us manifest, not as gods, but as the sons or children of God. To charge that, the doctrine of vital relationship and the pre-existence of a spiritual life in Christ, savors very much of Manicheism, falls harmlessly and powerlessly at our feet, so long as we find in support of that soul-cheering, God-honoring, and hell-defying doctrine, that cluster of direct Scripture testimony, which he [Watson] has copied from the Licking Circular immediately preceding this charge.”
What "cluster of direct Scripture testimony"? Where do the scriptures affirm the preexistence of the souls of men in either Adam or in Christ before the world began? Is it not built upon taking some scripture hyper literally? Upon unwarranted inferences? Is it not a case of reading Two Seed ideas into certain texts?
If those who are the "children of God" have been such from eternity, then they do not become children of God in time when they are born of God.
Many of the first "Primitive Baptists" believed in dividing the birth experience into conception, gestation in the womb, and final birth from the womb. They believed this to be true in regard to the new birth, where "regeneration" was equated with "conception" or the sowing of the seed (sperm) in the womb, and "conversion" with "deliverance" from the womb, and the time in the womb as a time when the fetus was being developed, corresponding to the time when a soul is under conviction of sin and before he finds hope in Christ. Alexander Campbell also took this paradigm and altered it by saying that the "birth" of a sinner occurs in the act of baptism, though his conception occurred when the sinner believed. Many Two Seeders also adopted this paradigm and said that the children of God were "conceived" (or 'begotten') before the world began when the Son of God was begotten, when Christ's human soul was conceived, but they are "born" when they are "born again" by the Spirit.
When Paul spoke of "casting down imaginations" (II Cor. 10: 5) we cannot help but see Two Seedism as one of those theological "imaginations." It is certainly one of those theological "inventions" that we are warned about in scripture. (Eccl. 7: 29; Rom. 1: 30)
As we will see, such a view not only is opposed to the biblical teaching that one becomes a child of God by being begotten of God when he believes, but also is against the Calvinist belief in "unconditional election." In the above words of Moore, defending Dudley and the Two Seed doctrine, he says that it is because of one's "previous existence in Christ" that they are born again, or God's chosen people. Two Seedism says that Christ was obligated to save his elect because they were his wife, and a husband is obligated to pay the debt of his wife. He chose them because they were in Christ. Many of those who opposed this narrative said that it taught a conditional election and was thus "Arminianism" because the choice was based upon some difference in the ones chosen. Beebe on several occasions argued this view. The reason why God chose anyone, before the world began, is because he was already "in Christ." The choice was not in order to place a person in Christ, but because one was in Christ. Thus, as Potter and others would argue, this denies unconditional election.
Wrote Moore:
"We will now give the extract from Elder Watson’s review: “We should note the qualifying adverb again in the declaration of the Savior that a man must ‘be born again, before he can see the kingdom of God.’ We shall then learn that human beings are born again, those who have already derived by a natural birth personal existence from Adam in such a manner that each one has become a distinct person, an I, me, one’s self. The very I, one’s own self must, says Christ, be ‘born of the Spirit.’ How? In consequence of an actual eternal existence in and union to the spirit? No, verily, for that would be downright Manicehanism. The I, me, or one’s self is brought into an actual union with Christ through the quickening, sanctifying, and transforming power of the Holy Spirit; thus this actual union has a beginning with the creature, and becomes one of life, the soul that is dead in trespasses and sins is quickened into spiritual life … Hence to be born again does not imply a previous actual eternal existence in and union to the spirit.”
In other words, why would the Lord say to Nicodemus "you must be born again" if he was already spiritually born before the world began? Further, is the "you" not the human Nicodemus? The one who had been born physically, i.e. the "Adam man"? It is a gross twisting of scripture to read the text as "you must have your preexistent self enter into you to manifest your prior birth of God"? Watson correctly affirms that actual vital union with Christ occurs when "the soul" or spirit that is spiritually dead is made alive.
Wrote Moore:
"Now I desire to ask in all candor, what better is the position of Modern Old School Baptists who claim that it is “the sinner that is born again” of the Spirit, or from above, for their view of vital union is the same sporadic disease that affects every religious organization known on earth, that profess to believe in the operation of the Spirit? And all classes of Arminians can receive it as a weapon against the chosen generation of Jesus Christ."
Two Seedism is a novelty, and not the Orthodox view of Christians, and they even acknowledge this fact. Yes, it borrowed ideas from other sources, as we have seen, but the particular combination of those ideas is what is new, at least among Baptists. "The sinner" is not the one who is born of God? It is bewildering that a Baptist, or any other Bible believer, could read the bible and come to that conclusion.
Next, Moore begins to give us some other writings of Dudley and from these we now wish to cite.
SELECT WRITINGS OF T. P. DUDLEY. THE ADAMIC STATE. Near Lexington, Ky., Feb.16, 1841.
"MY DEAR BROTHER BEEBE: - Although a controversy has been going on between the Old and New School Baptists in the west, for some years, in relation to what Adam was antecedently to his transgressing the divine command, yet I was not aware of a discrepancy in the views of “Old School” Baptists, on that point, until I read your editorial remarks in number 20, vol.8, of the SIGNS, in which your readers are informed that “a part of the Redstone Baptist Association, Pennsylvania,” take exception to the views contained in the circular of the Licking Association of 1839. I had hitherto supposed that association to be “built upon the foundation of the Apostles and prophets, Jesus Christ himself being the Chief Corner Stone,” and consequently that she recognized the Bible as the only infallible standard of faith and practice. I am very sure that no evidence can be had thence to sustain the opinion that he was spiritual; and I confess I was surprised to learn that such an idea was entertained even by a part of that body. The New School party in this country assume that he was a spiritual being; hence he was obliged to the performance of spiritual duties, such as evangelical faith and repentance, and liable to condemnation for non-compliance. I say assume, because it is assumption without proof; indeed the proof is altogether on the other side, and we have abundant cause of adoration to God that it is so – were it otherwise, the christian’s hope would be entirely prostrated."
The Two Seed idea that Adam was unfit for heaven and enjoyment of God even before his fall is totally untenable. In my years with the Hardshells I often heard them saying that Adam was not in any sense a spiritual being, and as such could do nothing spiritual, nothing holy, nothing pleasing to God. However, if Adam became spiritually dead when he sinned, then he must have been spiritually alive. Yet, many Hardshells would say that Adam did not die spiritually. I used to reject that idea when I heard it. So too did father, probably because he came to the "Primitive Baptist Church" from the Missionary Baptists and did not cease believing in some truths held to by the Missionaries. One of those beliefs, as we have seen, was father retaining the view that Satan and other angels fell from heaven, a view that got him into hot water with many Hardshells. He would often argue with other Hardshells who wanted to say that Adam did not die spiritually when he sinned.
It is absurd for the Two Seeders to say that Adam, prior to his sin, had no duty to believe God or obey him, for according to them he had no ability to do anything spiritual.
Wrote Dudley:
"If, as is contended by some, the object of the second Adam was to restore the ruins of the first, why is the curse not removed from the ground? Why does it yet produce “thorns and thistles?” And why has man yet in the sweat of his face to eat his bread?"
This is fallacious reasoning by Dudley. Does he not know that salvation occurs in stages? That redemption is not yet complete? Restoration will be fully realized when Christ returns, and then there will be no more curse, no more thorns and thistles, etc. So we read where Peter said:
"whom heaven must receive until the times of restoration of all things, which God has spoken by the mouth of all His holy prophets since the world began." (Acts 3: 21 nkjv)
Initial restoration occurs when a person is united to Christ by faith and is converted. It is then that "the image and likeness of God" is recreated. Adam was originally made in the image and likeness of God. But, sin and death altered or defaced that image. Restoration of that image begins when a soul is born of God. Yet it is not complete, for that restoration or transformation is continuous and progressive throughout the life of the believer. He is being "conformed to the image" of the Son of God, which is a restoration of the image that was lost by sin.
Wrote Dudley:
"But to return; All the perceptions and powers bestowed upon man in his creation were purely of the natural kind; hence his feelings, his enjoyments and happiness are all earthly. “But the natural man receiveth not the things of the Spirit of God, for they are foolishness unto him; neither can he know them, because they are spiritually discerned.”
That is false. Adam was a spiritual man. If he was not, then he could not die spiritually. But, he did die spiritually. Ergo, he was previously alive spiritually.
"The natural man" that Paul mentions in First Corinthians 2: 14 is not Adam as originally made, but of a sinful fallen man. Yes, he does refer to Adam's body as being natural in First Corinthians chapter fifteen, but he does not affirm that Adam was not spiritual in his soul, mind, heart, or spirit.
In "Was Adam Made Spiritual?" Sylvester Hassell, "Primitive Baptist" historian and apologist, we find the following comments made by him (Posted by Marchtozion.com on August 21, 2020 - See here):
"Question. Was Adam made a spiritual man, and did he die a spiritual death when he ate the forbidden fruit?"
"The truly humble soul does not desire to indulge in such speculations, or to hear or read such speculations from other (Psa. cxxxi.; Isa. viii 20.; Acts xvii. 11; 1 Tim. Vi. 3-5; 2 Tim. Iii. 15-17). We know from the scriptures that Adam was made with a body and a soul (Gen.ii 7; Ecc. Xii. 7), and yet that he was made a natural man (1 Cor. Xv. 45-49). Though he had a human spirit, he was not spiritual in the sense in which God’s children are who are born of the Divine Spirit. And we know, from the Scriptures, that, when he ate the for bidden fruit, he died to the pleasant communion that he had before with God, became dead in trespasses and sins (Gen ii. 17; Eph. ii 1), and that he became subject to Divine wrath and to physical and eternal death unless saved by Divine mercy. Gen iii. 17, 19; Rom. V. 12, 21. Some call the death in trespasses and sin spiritual death; if by the phrase “spiritual death” they mean death in trespasses and sins, let us bear with them, and not make our brother an offender for a mere word or expression, when he means only what that Scriptures declare (Is. xxix. 21).” (From Gospel Messenger of Oct., 1902) (emphasis mine)
Though Hassell was an opponent of Two Seedism, nevertheless, as we have seen, he, like many of today's "Primitive Baptists," often showed remnants of Two Seedism in various ways. The above is another example of this fact, just as was Hassell's and others of his brethren's reluctance to say that Satan and the angels fell from the third heaven. How can he deny that sinners are spiritually dead? The text from First Corinthians chapter fifteen that says that Adam, when created, was a "natural man," refers to his physical body. It is not till the resurrection that the natural body will be made spiritual. If Adam had "pleasant communion with God" as Hassell says, then that is the essence of spirituality.
When I was a young Hardshell Baptist I traveled with my father, Elder Eddie K. Garrett Sr., as he went on preaching tours among the "Primitive Baptists." Often father would have Bible discussions with various elders and I remember many of them not wanting to admit that Adam died spiritually. Father believed that Adam did die spiritually. Father came to the Hardshells from the Missionary Baptists and that kept him from embracing certain Two Seed ideas that would come up in those discussions, because he continued to believe that Satan and other angels fell from the third heaven, that the story of the rich man and Lazarus taught what happens to the saved and unsaved when they die, and that Adam died spiritually.
In the "SELECT WRITINGS OF T. P. DUDLEY" as given by Moore, we have Dudley's article titled "THE ADAMIC STATE" written from Lexington, Ky., Feb.16, 1841. His article was published in the "Signs of the Times." He wrote to the editor, fellow Two Seed Primitive Baptist leader, Gilbert Beebe as follows:
"MY DEAR BROTHER BEEBE:
Although a controversy has been going on between the Old and New School Baptists in the west, for some years, in relation to what Adam was antecedently to his transgressing the divine command, yet I was not aware of a discrepancy in the views of “Old School” Baptists, on that point, until I read your editorial remarks in number 20, vol.8, of the SIGNS, in which your readers are informed that “a part of the Redstone Baptist Association, Pennsylvania,” take exception to the views contained in the circular of the Licking Association of 1839. I had hitherto supposed that association to be “built upon the foundation of the Apostles and prophets, Jesus Christ himself being the Chief Corner Stone,” and consequently that she recognized the Bible as the only infallible standard of faith and practice. I am very sure that no evidence can be had thence to sustain the opinion that he was spiritual; and I confess I was surprised to learn that such an idea was entertained even by a part of that body. The New School party in this country assume that he was a spiritual being; hence he was obliged to the performance of spiritual duties, such as evangelical faith and repentance, and liable to condemnation for non-compliance. I say assume, because it is assumption without proof; indeed the proof is altogether on the other side, and we have abundant cause of adoration to God that it is so – were it otherwise, the christian’s hope would be entirely prostrated."
Dudley uses a fallacious argument when he infers that those who are called "Old School" Baptists cannot believe that Adam died spiritually because this was believed by "the New School party." This argument is built upon the premise that the "New School" or "Missionary" Baptists cannot possibly be right on anything. Further, even as Hassell admits, the Hardshells of the nineteenth century differed on the question, some affirming that Adam died spiritually. Hassell stated that the issue should not be a test of fellowship if those who say Adam died spiritually simply meant that he became "dead in trespasses and sins." This statement reveals that the question was often a bone of contention among the Hardshells, and this is because the denial that Adam died spiritually is another instance of the remnants of Two Seedism among them.
Wrote Dudley further:
"But to return; All the perceptions and powers bestowed upon man in his creation were purely of the natural kind; hence his feelings, his enjoyments and happiness are all earthly. “But the natural man receiveth not the things of the Spirit of God, for they are foolishness unto him; neither can he know them, because they are spiritually discerned.”
Here Dudley presents what is called a false dichotomy by assuming that the "natural man" of First Corinthians 2: 14 and First Corinthians 15: 44, 46 are the same. They are not. In the former passage "the natural man" is the man in his fallen state and who is either without the biblical revelation and Holy Spirit or one who rejects both. The "natural man" of the latter refers to what Adam was before the fall in his physical being, in his body.
To be spiritually dead is to be "cut off" from God. So the prophet said "your iniquities have separated you from your God, and your sins have hidden his face from you." (Isa. 59: 2) Adam, when first created, was without sin, and enjoyed God's presence, and seeing God face to face. Therefore he was spiritually alive. Further, being created in the image and likeness of God implies having spiritual life. Further, if sin "separated" or "cut off" Adam from God, then he must have been previously joined or united to God.
Thankfully some "Primitive Baptists" do affirm that Adam died spiritually, and that all are born spiritually dead as a result, except for Christ. In "The Fall of Man" by Elder Jeremiah Bass (See here), pastor of Cincinnati Primitive Baptist Church, we see the truth affirmed which says that Adam died spiritually when he sinned. Wrote Bass (emphasis mine):
"The curse that fell upon Adam and all his offspring was death, according to the terms of God’s covenant with Adam: “And the Lord God commanded the man, saying, Of every tree of the garden thou mayest freely eat: but of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil, thou shalt not eat of it: for in the day that thou eatest thereof thou shalt surely die” (Gen. 2:16-17). Now certainly physical death is partly to be understood here. But Adam and Eve did not immediately die in that sense. Rather, we are on surer footing if we understand death as the curse accompanying disobedience to the Divine command in its fuller sense as encompassing spiritual, physical, and eternal death. Thus, Adam and Eve were not only going to die physically (which they did, see Gen. 5:5), but also they immediately died spiritually, and were exposed to die eternally."
This was father's position and would argue it with other fellow Hardshells who were against that idea.
Wrote Bass:
"What does it mean to die spiritually? The apostle Paul again comes to our aid with his words to the Ephesian church: “And you hath he quickened, who were dead in trespasses and sins; wherein in time past ye walked according to the course of this world, according to the prince of the power of the air, the spirit that now worketh in the children of disobedience: among whom also we all had our conversation in times past in the lusts of our flesh, fulfilling the desires of the flesh and of the mind; and were by nature the children of wrath, even as others” (Eph. 2:1-3). Here we learn that spiritual death is characterized by bondage to the world, to the Devil, and to the lusts of the flesh."
Adam walked with God before he sinned. Therefore, he was spiritually alive. He also was under law, and Paul says that "the law is spiritual" (Rom. 7: 14), and so Adam was obligated to be spiritual in obeying it. He had a duty to be, and actually was, when originally made in the image and likeness of God, "spiritually minded" (Rom. 8: 6), and so was "spiritually alive," for Paul says "to be spiritually minded is life and peace." The logical conclusion of Dudley and the Two Seeders on this point leads them to deny that any man is spiritually dead, and if not spiritually dead, then being "quickened" by the Spirit does not give spiritual life to the spiritually dead.
No comments:
Post a Comment