In this chapter we will continue to focus on what Elder Grigg Thompson wrote in opposition to Two Seedism, especially as promoted by Elder Gilbert Beebe in his paper "The Signs of the Times" and in a pamphlet he wrote in 1843 to promote Two Seed ideology, but will focus on his attack against the Two Seed ideas about "regeneration" or "rebirth" of the Spirit, rather than on their ideas about the Trinity or their being charged as being Arian. We have in previous chapters already had much to say on the Two Seed view on what is regeneration and rebirth. We will still be citing from Thompson's book "The Measuring Rod" published in 1860 or 1861.
Thompson wrote:
"Eld. D. W. Putman, a prominent leader of the Two Seed Arian party in Georgia, says that it is “the spiritual seed of God that is changed in regeneration.” If this is true, I would like to know in what respect it is changed. Is it changed from holiness to unholiness, or is it changed from spiritual to natural, or is it changed from being the seed of God, to be the seed of Adam, or the seed of the devil? The truth is, they use the word “change” to deceive their hearers, for they emphatically deny any change in regeneration, either in soul, body, mind, matter, or spirit." (pg. 71-72)
I am sure that Thompson is correct about why Elder Putnam wanted to affirm that there is some "change" that occurs in regeneration. Most Two Seeders say that there is no change in the human person, and no change in the "new man" or eternal child of God when that person is "regenerated." It would be better for them to have said that the only change is a change of place, for that "new man" was once in heaven and then was removed and deposited in a human body. But, one has to wonder about Thompson himself also watering down the change that occurs to a man when he is regenerated or born again. If he believes like many of his Brethren began to believe in the 19th century that a person could be "regenerated" and yet remain an unbeliever and a worshiper of idols, he too has embraced a view of "regeneration" where there is little to no change. Recall that T.P. Dudley said that those who believed that a man was changed in regeneration believed in a mere "remodeling" or repairing of the old man.
Thompson wrote:
"The Saviour said to Nicodemus, “Except a man be born again, he cannot see the kingdom of God.” This a second birth, experienced by the same individual or person; it would be impossible for a person to be born a second time, before they had been born the first time. Nicodemus had been born of the flesh; that birth had brought him into this world with capacities to enjoy it; but this same Nicodemus must be born a second time to enter the kingdom of God and enjoy it. But those Arians tell us that to be born again does not mean to be born a second time, and that it has no reference to the posterity of Adam, but that it has reference to the spiritual generation in Jesus Christ. And that by the new birth this generation are made manifest. They say that the children of men are made manifest by birth, and the children of God are also made manifest by birth. This is true and Scriptural; for it is by the sinner's being born again that he is made manifest as the child of God. But, if their views are true, it is not a second birth, neither is the sinner the subject of this birth. Eld. Dudley, in commenting upon the passage in Ephesians, “You hath he quickened, who were dead in trespasses and in sins,” says that “This quickening took place before time.” Eld. Beebe says that “The elect were made partakers of the Holy Ghost in eternity.” The new birth, is therefore only a making manifest that which actually existed, and had been actually quickened in eternity. But if we were to admit their argument, the text of itself would expose the error, for it was those who were dead in sin that were quickened. Now, if they were quickened in eternity, or before the world was, then they were dead in sins in eternity, or before the world was, for it was the man dead in sin that was quickened. Their doctrine of the new birth or regeneration, if I can understand them, is just this: That the children of Adam possess the same nature before birth that they do after; that the birth effects no change; that as soon as the child is born, it discloses the nature of its parent. That the elect actually existed in Christ before time a spiritual seed; that in time they descend from him and make manifest his nature; but that there is no change in nature, or the spiritual condition of the child or elect, in this birth or regeneration." (pg. 76-78)
This is why some Two Seeders would argue that "born again" in John chapter three should rather be translated "born from above." That translation fit better with their idea of the spiritual birth occurring in eternity past. However, "born again" is correct. Even Nicodemus understood it that way for he said "how can a man be born again? Can he enter the second time into his mother's womb and be born again?" Further, being born again does not merely manifest that those born again were already actual children before being born of God, for people are not children of God until they are born of God. It is a remnant of Two Seedism to hear today's "Primitive Baptists" use that word "manifest" so many times. Everything manifests that one is a child of God and nothing brings about that birth, except what the Holy Spirit does. Even though Peter said that believers have been "born again of incorruptible seed by the word of God," today's Hardshell Baptists deny that the word of God or faith in it have anything to do with being born again. Even Thompson does not object to saying that being born of God merely "manifests" that one was already a child of God, showing that he himself is in line with those he is opposing.
It is true that a child exists in the womb before it is born from the womb. But, when the scriptures speak of being born, or born again, focus is on birth from the womb. This is when a person "comes into the world" (John 1: 9). When a person is "born of God" he then becomes a child of God. Contrary to what most "Primitive Baptists" taught in Thompson's day, the new birth is not divided up into stages where being conceived precedes birth by nine months as in natural birth of the flesh. When we ask a person "how old are you" the person responds by dating his age from the time he was born from the womb.
Thompson wrote:
"When the Saviour taught Nicodemus that a man must be born again, he could not understand how this could be; and this seems to be the difficulty with these Arians, hence they deny that the man who has been once born can be born again, and tell us that the new birth has no reference to the Adam man, or fallen sinner, but to the spiritual man, the holy man, the man who never did sin." (pg. 78-79)
In the midst of the intense debate over these things in the mid 19th century, it became necessary to ask each minister - "do you believe that the Adam man is the subject of the new birth?" If you said yes, you were not a Two Seeder. If you said no, you were a Two Seeder. Elder T.P. Dudley in his Dec. 19, 1854 article titled "ONE MEDIATOR" wrote:
"The conclusion is, then, that instead of any part of the Adamic man being “born of the Spirit,” “a new man created in righteousness and true holiness,” is developed."
So, we see how Two Seeders denied that "any part of the Adamic man" was born of the Spirit.
In an article titled "Two-Seedism" (April 30, 1912 by C.H. Cayce in "The Primitive Baptist"; See here), we read these words:
"The Saviour says, in (John 3:3), "Verily, verily, I say unto thee, Except a man be born again, he cannot see the kingdom of God." The word man is translated from a word which means anyone. Hence, "Except anyone be born again, he cannot see the kingdom of God." The word again is translated from a word which means from above. Hence, "Except anyone be born from above, he cannot see the kingdom of God." The word man, or the word anyone, simply refers to the race-except anyone of the race of Adam be born again, he cannot see the kingdom of God. One must be born from above in order to that end. It is the sinner of Adam's race that is the subject of the new birth."
Notice how Cayce, like the Two Seeders, says that "born again" means "born from above." But, as we have seen, the text does mean "born again" for this is how Nicodemus understood it. Further, Peter says "being born again" (I Peter 1: 23) and the Greek word does mean "born again" or "born anew." Yet, he says "it is the sinner of Adam's race that is the subject of the new birth."
The "whole man doctrine" said that the entire Adam man, body, soul, and spirit, were born of the Spirit, which was one extreme, and the "hollow log doctrine" went to the other extreme and affirmed that there was no change at all to the Adam man. In previous chapters we have explained what is meant by the "hollow log doctrine."
Thompson wrote:
"The Bible represents the new birth, or regeneration, as producing a great change in the sinner; but it does not only prove the change, but it proves that the sinner is the subject of that birth or regeneration. It is the sinner's heart that is circumcised to love the Lord; it is the sinner that is purged from an evil conscience to serve the Lord; and it is the dead sinner that is to hear the voice of the Son of God, and live. In the work of regeneration, the stranger is made a citizen, the enemy is made a friend, and those who know not God, are made to know him and love him. The debtor receives forgiveness, the criminal receives pardon, the captive receives liberty, and the guilty receive justification. The change is great, and all this change is wrought in the sinner, the son or daughter of Adam. The change was so great in Saul, the vile persecutor, that he became the humble follower of the Lord Jesus Christ, and labored to build up what he had tried to tear down. If Paul was here, and was to hear Dudley, Beebe, or any of this Arian school, affirm that there is no change effected in the sinner, of Adam's race, in regeneration, he would reprove their heresy by telling his own experience, how he was once the servant of sin; how a light shone around above the light of the sun; how God called him by his grace, revealed his Son in him, and made him a minister and a witness to the Gentiles. When Paul wrote to the Ephesians, he believed that in regeneration the sinner experienced a change, for he says, “Ye were once darkness, but now are ye light in the Lord.” In his letter to the Romans, he says, “But God be thanked, that ye were the servants of sin; but ye have obeyed from the heart that form of doctrine which was delivered you. Being then made free from sin, ye became the servants of righteousness.” Again: “For when ye were the servants of sin, ye were free from righteousness. What fruit had ye then in those things whereof ye are now ashamed? for the end of those things is death. But now, being made free from sin, and become servants to God, ye have your fruit unto holiness, and the end everlasting life.”" (pg. 79-81)
It seems clear that in fighting Two Seedism Thompson did not go to an opposite extreme as did Cayce and others. Thompson explains the experience of being "born again" in terms of being converted to faith in Christ and involved repentance. He says being born again made Saul a "humble follower of the Lord Jesus Christ" and made him a "servant to God," but this was not the view of C.H. Cayce nor of "Primitive Baptists" generally of the late 19th century and today. I wrote about this in years past, and showed how Cayce and Albert Oliphant disagreed on the condition of the Athenian idolaters to whom Paul preached in Acts chapter 17. (See here) Cayce first cites the words of Oliphant and then gives his counter views (all emphasis mine).
"First, let me cite from brother Oliphant's letter."The gospel also makes it the duty of 'all nations of men' that 'dwell on all the face of the earth' to seek the Lord. Acts 17: 26: 'And hath made of one blood (Adam) all nations of men (all human creatures), for to dwell on all the face of the earth; and hath determined the times before appointed (when they shoulud each exist), and the bounds of their habitation' (where they should each exist). Verse 27: 'That they (relative pronoun, which has for its antecedent all nations of men) should (duty) seek the Lord, if haply they might feel after Him, and find Him, though He be not far from every one of us.' Verse 28; 'For in Him we live, move, and have our being' (existence). Here is accountability in its full force, declared by the Lord in His gospel, or counsel. Since all the human specie is commanded to repent, and seek the Lord, it is each and every one's duty, and God by His gospel requires all duty to be performed; and whatever God requires of His creatures is His 'counsel' to them; and He hath commanded His ministry 'shun not to declare the whole counsel of God." ("The Spirituality Of The Gospel," Editorial Writings, Vol. 1, July 24, 1906, pages 98, 99)"
Cayce responded, saying:
"He does not quote all of the 28th verse. That verse, in full, and the 29th and 30th verses read, 'For in Him we live, and move, and have our being; as certain also of your own poets have said, For we are also His offspring. Forasmuch then as we are the offspring of God, we ought not to think that the Godhead is like unto gold, or silver, or stone, graven by art and man's device. And the times of this ignorance God winked at; but now commandeth all men everywhere to repent.' Paul is here preaching to a people who are the offspring of God--born of God--a people who have been worshipping God ignorantly, having an altar erected to the unknown God. They are commanded to turn away from their ignorant or idolatrous worship, and all those who are born of God, the offspring of God everywhere, who are engaged in such worship are commanded to repent. There is nothing in this text for the unregenerate. It is to the children of God who are engaging in false worship, and it is the duty of the ministry to admonish all such persons to repent, turn away from it and worship the Lord as directed in His word." (Ibid)
So, Cayce's view of "regeneration" or rebirth is that there is no change in the sinner's belief about God and the way of salvation through Christ. That was not the view of Thompson nor of most of the first generation of Hardshell ministers. When it is said that the Athenians were "the offspring of God" it does not mean that they were born of the Spirit, but simply that they were God's natural children through being his creation. Cayce's view became the predominant view of the "Primitive Baptist Church" and the view of Thompson and Oliphant receded. Cayce believed the Athenians were regenerated even before they knew of the one true God and before believing in Christ. That does not seem to be the view of Thompson and Oliphant, and was not the general view of most "Primitive" or "Old School" Baptists at the beginning. What changed in the Athenians when they were "regenerated" or "born again" while in their polytheism? Here again we see where even Cayce, though opposing the Two Seed "no change" view of regeneration, nevertheless believes the same, for the Athenians were not made knowledgeable of God or Christ and did not change from being polytheists to being monotheists.
In the next chapter we will continue to look at Grigg Thompson's attack upon Two Seedism and of the no change view of regeneration or rebirth.
No comments:
Post a Comment