What is the Primitive Baptist Church?

Bro Weaver:

The United's style of worship varies from old fashion to moderate. I grew up with family that came out of the Old Regulars (which came out of United), so I am accustom to that style of worship and prefer it.

As for the atonement issue, I believe it varies from association to association, also. I believe our articles have a hint of particular atonement, but that's my opinion.

Speaking of PBs, I know of one in the area and it split off of one of the UBCs back in the 1880s. I believe that they still hold services once a month.

In case anyone is interested and would like to add their information, I've posted my United Baptist research on: http://newprovidence.8m.com/research.htm

Thanks for the discussion. I've enjoyed it.

 

Really?

The book, Systematic Theology by R.V. Sarrels is currently available from Sovereign Grace Publications <http://www.sovgrace.net/>.

I recommend three other good books by Primitive Baptists available from them: Be Ready to Answer by Michael L. Gowens, Let Us Reason Together by Mike Strevel, and Glory to Come by Michael L. Gowens.

These three books and several other Primitive Baptist titles are also available from Baptist Bible Hour <http://www.baptistbiblehour.org/> along with some good preaching if you can receive their broadcasts.

 

Yes, really. Would you like copies?

 

Yes, really. Would you like copies? </font>[/QUOTE]No thanks, I already have them! I guess you forgot that I did that for the Church a couple of years ago and sent the copies to you!

 

I just read the Black Rock document. Just goes to show that we can oftentimes find ourselves hotly debating things we think are scriptural doctrine that have to do with methods and culture, and not with scripture at all.

In this case, time provides the 20/20 hindsight. These folks were against Sunday School (unless it was to teach "poor children" to read), para-church organizations such as tract and Bible societies and mission boards, revival meetings, and Bible colleges. Yet today we all see the value of pooling our resources and working together for the Kingdom.

If writing today, folks with this type of mindset would be writing about modern translations, contemporary Christian music, films and TV,.....oh, wait a minute, they are.....

 

Huh? That's not true. The 2nd Revision of the Articles of Faith is what we currently use. They were typed into Microsoft Word, BY ME, on January 7, 2001, fully 1 year BEFORE you had even joined the church.

You may very well have typed the Rules of Decorum into Word on your computer, I really don't recall, but even if you had done so there would have been no reason to send them to me as I have had the Rules of Decorum in Microsoft Word since January 7, 2001, when I typed them up as well. That was the 2nd Revision, which are now obsolete, as we use the 4th Revision, which were passed after you left, btw.

I do not now, nor have I ever had the Church Covenant typed into Word on the computer. We still use the 1st Revision of October 7, 1981, and it's still the original paper used at that time. I know you didn't do those.

If you ever did any of what you said, it was never sent to me, for I would have had no use for them. As I said, of the things that have been put on my computer, I have typed myself.

I think I will now type up the Church Covenant anew, as the paper is becoming discolored.

 

Actually, we still believe these issues to be matters of doctrine, and we still hold the same beliefs our forefathers on the church held. We still stand firmly against those things that you named, and we still will not fellowship with those who practice such things. Is it culture? That's definitely a cause. Sometimes things from our culture are allowed to creep into the church, which is why our brethren 200 years ago had to take a stand against those unscriptural practices that many churches had allowed to creep in, such as Sunday School, Bible Colleges, Mission Boards, etc.

Frankly, I am so very glad that the Primitive Baptist church has stayed true to the old paths and practice of worship.

 

Huh? That's not true. The 2nd Revision of the Articles of Faith is what we currently use. They were typed into Microsoft Word, BY ME, on January 7, 2001, fully 1 year BEFORE you had even joined the church.

You may very well have typed the Rules of Decorum into Word on your computer, I really don't recall, but even if you had done so there would have been no reason to send them to me as I have had the Rules of Decorum in Microsoft Word since January 7, 2001, when I typed them up as well. That was the 2nd Revision, which are now obsolete, as we use the 4th Revision, which were passed after you left, btw.

I do not now, nor have I ever had the Church Covenant typed into Word on the computer. We still use the 1st Revision of October 7, 1981, and it's still the original paper used at that time. I know you didn't do those.

If you ever did any of what you said, it was never sent to me, for I would have had no use for them. As I said, of the things that have been put on my computer, I have typed myself.

I think I will now type up the Church Covenant anew, as the paper is becoming discolored. </font>[/QUOTE]I'll privately forward to you the e-mails originally transmitted to you on 6/29/2002 which include all the documents in JPG and DOC format prepared from scanned images, OCR processing, and follow-up transcription in Word from the original paper copies. The documents are the same ones I also hand delivered to you on diskette back then.

This way you'll have everything for the church records and won't need to input anything new. I suggest you keep copies some place separate from the originals should they become lost.

 

Not all Primitive Baptist churches fully agree with your understanding of the Black Rock Address. There are actually very few verses of scripture referenced in the address because many of the conclusions are interpretive in nature. It was largely an expression of the conclusions of those present on how they did or didn't want to do certain things. There purpose was sound in that they wanted to keep the Church pure and free of those things that detract from it. I respect that and find good in it! However, some people have used the address to advocate and support their own agenda which is often condemnation of the actions of other Christians including fellow Primitive Baptists. In that respect I completely disagree. I do not find inherent fault with Sunday school, Bible study, Bible college, or mission programs. I know some good Primitive Baptists who are involved in some of these activities. I know many Christians who have these things in their church and I don't consider them any more or less favored by the Lord for what they practice. I do believe these things are sometimes not properly handled and that leads to concerns such as those expressed in the address. The extreme seems to be a Church that operates like an entertainment center concerned with "marketing its products" based on the appeal to "consumers". That kind of thing really troubles me! However, I have the same concerns about other activities such as social meetings, singing camps, multi-church gatherings, etc. all of which are well intentioned and can serve the Lord but can just as likely be mishandled. In fact, plain old preaching can be just as bad if not truly from the word of God.

 

Well, now, Debby in Philly, you took a look at the Black Rock Address, saw that PB's then, as now, are opposed to those things, and conclude how silly for them then to oppose what is proven now to be wisdom.

But, I think it will do better if you try to look up what PB's believe that leads to such opposition.

No disrespect intended.

 

Firstly, it's not my understanding of what the authors of the Black Rock Address wrote...it is what they wrote.

Secondly, I know of no sound Primitive church that adheres to these practices.

I don't know what to tell you other than Primitive Baptists have always stood against these things as they are not mentioned in scripture.

Bible study, I don't think, should be lumped into this same group, however. If done with the appropriate leader and outside of regular worship services, then studying our bible together is very good indeed.

As for singing schools, if they, or any other form of a church camp, are not sanctioned by a church, then there is absolutely nothing wrong with them.

Social gatherings...I have yet to see anyone come out against fellow churchmembers fellowshipping together. We are a church family, so there is no reason that we can't meet outside of church as well as in church.

The Black Rock Address is the founding document that set our modern-day churches apart from the world. Anyone who is a Primitive Baptist today has to trace their church's lineage back to those who supported this document. When that support is gone, then the church ceases to be Primitive Baptist.

It would be like saying, "I'm a Christian, but I don't believe in Christ."

(BTW, Bro. Dragoon, please check your email. I sent you a reply, but it said you have to add me to the list...or something like that.)

 

Dear Brethren,
Above is quoted from the link to the Black Rock Address. From Elder David Pyles. Could you point me to sources prior to this address?

I am not trying to be contentious, just wanting to read further. The 'split' occurred openly in 1832, if I am not mistaken. What I am asking, then is for evidence of Baptist churches prior to 1832 which departed from the received doctrines.

The address also is written to:

To the Particular Baptist Churches of the "Old School" in the United States:

Would this then be carried back to John Gill? If so, to what degree would John Gill be accepted as a 'Primitive Baptist'?

Please, note that I am not seeking argument, but I do have these questions and some others to be taken directly from the Black Rock Address, I will ask later. Thanks in advance for your discussion with me.

God Bless
Bro. Dallas Eaton

[ March 25, 2004, 08:54 AM: Message edited by: Frogman ]

 

Can we continue this discussion of the Black Rock Address here in this forum, or should I move it to Baptist History?

Let me know if it should be moved, I have some more questions coming from that particular document and don't want to put them where they don't belong.

Bro. Dallas Eaton

 

Bro.Dallas

I am not sure I understand the first part of the inquiry. Could you clarify?

As to whether or not Dr. Gill would be accepted as a "Primitive Baptist." Strictly speaking he was a Particular Baptist, and Primitive Baptists and Particular Baptists for the most part are very close in theology, however, there are minor points of practice at variance. We have had ministers from the "Strict and Particular" Baptists in England preach for us in America in years past.

Most Primitive Baptists would be, largely, in agreement with most of what Dr. Gill penned centuries ago. If he were alive, I think most of us would like to hear him preach and offer him communion.

The major differences most of us have with Gill are his end-times views.

 

Thanks Brother Jeff. I mean to ask for sources prior to the 1832 split, resulting in the need for the Black Rock Address, which would show the departures among some Baptists.

Then, continuing to run my mouth as I often do I wondered out loud if John Gill would be considered a 'Primitive Baptist'.

I too have some disagreement with his view of end times. But, I think if we sit down and talk to most folks we would find that is difficult to pin down under any specific heading, at least imho it is.

I understand Gill's position on the end times to be in favor of a general resurrection, is that a misunderstanding on my part?

I figured generally speaking Gill's beliefs would be practically accepted by many Primitives.

Thanks.

Bro. Dallas

 

Sorry, running my mouth again

 

(oops)

 

How, then, are the lost to be reached? How are children to be given the opportunity to learn? I teach children in Sunday School who come on their own, and their parents are glad to be rid of them on Sunday morning. Yet they are being reached for Christ. None of these would sit in the church service and get anything out of a sermon.

How are scriptures to be produced and given out? Would you rather pay top dollar for copies from a commercial publisher, or get copies for a reasonable price to give away from the American Bible Society? I think the latter is a better use of the Lord's money.

 

Hello Debby, how are things in Philly?

The key word I think is 'money'.

An honest study of alot of 'endeavors' will reveal money to be the root of all evil.

Christ said to give unto caesar, that which is caesar's. He also threw the money changers out of his Father's house.

anyway, you don't need a sermon, but I do think by a close study of history will show the issue was with money.

Here is a link that I believe may be found through

Primitive Baptist Online

but I couldn't find it, so I pasted and copied it at the following link so you could read it if you wanted to.

John Taylor "Thoughts on Missions"

I too am in a church with Sunday Schools. I am studying these writings to determine for myself whether the historical position of the PB is anti-gospel regeneration. (Please don't attack fellows)

I think the primary misunderstanding is that the Primitive Baptists have historically been 'anti-missions'. Reading their writings, I don't think they were ever of that sentiment.

Either way.

God Bless
Bro. Dallas

btw, excuse the format, I didn't take time to add the html. but I will later.

[ March 25, 2004, 05:09 PM: Message edited by: Frogman ]