John L. Dagg

Yes Dagg is one of my go to guys....

 

Dagg wrote A Treatise on Church Order, is that what you mean? But that's not what the link is to. Please clarify.

 

Dagg Manual of Theology3


Chapter I. The WILL Of God

The term will, which always imports desire, is variously applied, according to the object of that desire.

1. It denotes intention or purpose to act. It is said of Apollos "His will was not at all to come at this time," (1Cor 16:12) I. e., he had not formed the intention or purpose to come. In this sense, the will of God is spoken of: "According to the purpose of him who works all things after the counsel of his own will." (Eph 1:11) Purpose or intention may exist before the time of action arrives. When it has arrived, the mind puts forth an act termed volition, to produce the desired effect. In human beings, purposes may be fickle, and may undergo change before the time for action comes; but God's purpose or intention is never changed; and when the time for producing the purposed effect arrives, we are not to conceive that a new volition arises in the mind of God; but the effect follows, according to the will of God, without any new effort on his part.

2. It denotes a desire to act, restrained by stronger opposing desires, or other counteracting influences. Pilate was "willing" to release Jesus (Lk 23:20); but other considerations, present to his mind, overruled this desire, and determined his action. We are compelled to conceive of the divine mind, from the knowledge which we possess of our own; and the Scriptures adapt their language to our conceptions. In this way, a desire to act is sometimes attributed to God, when opposing considerations prevent his action. "I would scatter them, were it not that I feared the wrath of the enemy." (Dt 32:27) "How often would I have gathered, &e., and you would not." (Mt 23:37)

3. It is used with reference to an external object that is desired, or an action which it is desired that another should perform. "Sacrifice and offering you would not." (Heb 10:5) "Be it unto you as you will." (Mt 15:28) "Ask what you will." (John 15:7) "What will you, that I should do." (Mk 15:12) In this sense, as expressing simply what is in itself desirable to God, will is attributed to him. "Not willing that any should perish, but that all should come to repentance." (2Pet 3:9) "I have no pleasure in the death of the wicked," (Ezek 33:11) "This is the will of God, even your sanctification." (1 Thessalonians 4:3)

4. Closely allied to the last signification, and perhaps included in it, is that use of the term will, in which it denotes command, requirement. When the person, whose desire of pleasure it is that an action should be performed by another, has authority over that other, the desire expressed assumes the character of precept. The expressed will of a suppliant, is petition; and expressed will of a ruler, is command. What we know that it is the pleasure of God we should do, it is our duty to do, and his pleasure made known to us becomes a law.

Will Of Command.

It is specially important to distinguish between the first and last of the significations which have been enumerated. In the first, the will of God refers exclusively to his own action, and imports his fixed determination as to what he will do. It is called his will of purpose, and always takes effect. In the last sense, it refers to the actions of his creatures, and expresses what it would be pleasing to him that they should do. This is called his will of precept, and it always fails to take effect when the actions of his creatures do not please him, that is, when they are in violation of his commands. The will of purpose is intended, when it is said, "According to the purpose of him who works all things after the counsel of his own will," (Eph 1:11) and, "He does according to his will in the army of Heaven, and among the inhabitants of the earth." (Dan 4:35) The will of precept is intended, when it is said, "Your will be done in earth, as it is in Heaven." (Mt 6:10) Let it be noted that, in the former case, God only is the agent, and the effect is certain; in the latter, his creatures are the agents, and the effect is not an object of certain expectation, but of petition.

GOD'S WILL OF COMMAND, HOWEVER MADE KNOWN TO US, IS OUR RULE OF DUTY (Ps 40:8; Psalm 143:10; Mt 6:10; Rom 2:18; Ex 20; Rom 2:12-15; Eccl 12:13).

The Scriptures make the will of God the rule of duty, both to those who have the means of clear knowledge, and those who have not. The disobedience of the former will be punished with many stripes, that of the latter with few. No man will be held accountable, except for the means of knowledge that are within his reach; but these, even in the case of the benighted heathen, are sufficient to render them inexcusable. We have no right to dictate to God in what manner he shall make his will known to us; but we are bound to avail ourselves of all possible means for obtaining the knowledge of it; and, when known, we are bound to obey it perfectly, and from the heart.

Various terms are used to denote the will of God, as made known in the Holy Scriptures, statutes, judgments, laws, precepts, ordinances, etc. The two great precepts, which lie at the foundation of all the laws, are you shall love the Lord your God with all your heart, and you shall love they neighbor as yourself. The first of these is expanded into the four commandments, which constitute the first table of the decalogue; the second into the six commandments, which constitute the second table. The decalogue was given for a law to the children of Israel, as is apparent from its introduction. "I am the Lord your God, which have brought you out of the land of Egypt, out of the house of bondage." (Ex 20:2) It was, however, distinguished from the other laws given to that nation, by being pronounced audibly from Sinai with the voice of God, and by being engraved with the finger of God on the tables of stone. When we examine its precepts, we discover that they respect the relations of men, as men, to God and to one another; and we find, in the New Testament, that their obligation is regarded as extending to Gentiles under the gospel dispensation (Rom 13:8, 9; Eph 6:2). We infer, therefore, that the decalogue, though given to the Israelites, respected them as men, and not as a peculiar people, and is equally obligatory on all men.

The ceremonial law respected the children of Israel as a worshiping congregation, called "the Congregation of the Lord." It commenced with the institution of the Passover, and ended when Christ our Passover was sacrificed for us, and when the handwriting of ordinances was nailed to the cross. Then its obligation ceased. Baptism and the Lord's Supper are ceremonies of the Christian dispensation, obligatory on the disciples of Christ, to the end of the world.

The judicial law was given to the Israelites as a nation, and is not obligatory on any other people. The principles of justice on which it was based, are universal, and should be incorporated into every civil code.

 

Will Of Purpose.

GOD WILLS WHATEVER HE DOES (Job 23:13; Dan 4:35; Eph 1:11).

God is a voluntary agent. There are many powers in nature which operate without volition. Fire consumes the fuel, steam moves the engine, and poison takes away life; but these have no will. Even beings that possess will, sometimes act involuntarily, and sometimes against their will, or by compulsion from a superior power. God acts voluntarily in everything that he does;-- not by physical necessity; not by compulsion from any superior power; not by mistake, or oversight, or power unintentionally exerted. Men may plead in apology for their acts, that they were done in thoughtlessness, or through inadvertence; but God has never any such apology to make. Known unto him are all his works from the beginning of the world (Acts 15:18), and therefore they have been duly considered.

GOD DOES WHATEVER HE WILLS TO DO (Job 23:13; Dan 4:35; Eph 1:11; Isa 46:10; Dan 11:36).

God is not omnipotent, if he absolutely wills or desires to do anything, and fails to accomplish it.

WHATEVER GOD DOES IS ACCORDING TO A PURPOSE THAT IS ETERNAL, UNCHANGEABLE, PERFECTLY FREE, AND INFINITELY WISE (Job 23:13; Isa 40:14; Isa 46:10; Jer 51:29; Rom 8:28; Eph 1:11; Eph 3:11; 2Tim 1:9).

That God has a purpose, none can deny, who attribute wisdom to him. To act without purpose is the part of a child, or an idiot. A wise man does not act without purpose, much less can the only wise God. Besides, the Scriptures speak so expressly of his purpose, that no one, who admits the authority of revelation, can reject the doctrine, however much he may misinterpret or abuse it. The term implies that God has an end in view in whatever he does, and that he has a plan according to which he acts.

The purpose of God is eternal and unchangeable. A wise man, in executing a purpose, may have many separate volitions, which are momentary actings of his mind; but his purpose is more durable, continuing from its first formation in the mind to its complete execution. The term will, as applied to the act of the divine mind, does not, in itself, imply duration; but the purpose of God, from the very import of the phrase, must have duration. God must have had a purpose when he created the world; and the Scriptures speak of his purpose before the world began. But the duration of it is still more explicitly declared in the phrase, "the eternal purpose." (Eph 3:11) The term is never used in the plural number by the inspired writers; as if God had many plans, or a succession of plans. It is one entire, glorious scheme; and the date of it is from everlasting. Its eternity implies its unchangeableness; and its unchangeableness implies its eternity; and its oneness accords with both these properties.

The purpose of God is perfectly free. It is not forced upon him from without; for nothing existed to restrict the infinite mind of him who was before all. It is the purpose which he has "purposed in himself" (Eph 1:9). It is his will; and must, therefore, be voluntary. The term purpose and will apply to the same thing in different aspects of it, or according to different modes of conceiving it. If purpose more naturally suggests the idea of duration, will suggests its freeness. It is not the fate believed in by the ancient heathens, by which they considered the gods to be bound, as truly as men.

The purpose of God is infinitely wise. We have argued, that God must have a purpose because he is wise; and, therefore, his wisdom must be concerned in his purpose. It is not an arbitrary or capricious scheme; but one devised by infinite wisdom, having the best possible end to accomplish, and adopting the best possible means for its accomplishment.

Writers on theology have employed the term Decrees, to denote the purpose of God. It is an objection to this term, that there is no inspired authority for its use in this sense. When the Scriptures use the term decree, they signify by it a command published, to be observed by those under authority. It is the will of precept, rather than the will of purpose. And further, its use in the plural number does not accord so well with the oneness of the divine plan.

Scarcely any doctrine of religion has given so much occasion for cavil and stumbling as that of God's decrees. As if men would be wiser than God, they refuse to let him form a plan, or they find fault with it when formed; and very few have so much humility and simplicity of faith, as to escape wholly from the embarrassment which the objections to this doctrine have produced. They, therefore, need a careful examination.

 

Objection 1. The purpose of God is inconsistent with the free-agency of man.

It is a full answer to this objection, that a mere purpose cannot interfere with the freedom of any one. When a tyrant designs to imprison one of his subjects, until the design is carried into execution, the liberty of the subject is not invaded. He roams as free as ever, untouched by the premeditated evil. The infringement of his liberty commences when the purpose begins to be executed, and not before. So, in the divine government, the purpose of the Supreme Ruler interferes not at all with the liberty of his subjects, so long as it remains a mere purpose. The objection which we are considering, is wholly inapplicable to the doctrine of God's purpose. Its proper place, if it has any, is against the doctrine of God's providence; and, under that head, it will be proper to meet it. It was God's purpose to create man a free-agent; and he did so create him. Thus far, neither the purpose, not the execution of it, can be charged with infringing man's moral freedom; but they unite to establish it. It was God's purpose to govern man as a free-agent; and has he not done so? If every man feels that the providence of God, while it presides in the affairs of men, leaves him perfectly free to act from choice in everything that he does, what ground is there for the complaint, that the purpose of God interferes with man's fee-agency? If the evil complained of is not in the execution of the purpose, it is certainly not in the purpose itself.

This objection often comes before us practically. When we are called upon for action to which we are averse, the argument presents itself; if God has fore-ordained whatever comes to pass, the event is certain; and what is to be, will be, without our effort. It is worthy of remark, that this argument never induces us to deviate from a course to which we are inclined. If some pleasure invites, we never excuse ourselves from the indulgence, on the plea, that, if we are to enjoy it, we shall enjoy it. The fact is sufficient to teach us the insincerity of the plea, when admitted in other cases. It prevails with us only through the deceitfulness of sin; and, however specious the argument may appear, when it coincides with our inclinations, we never trust it in any other case. No man in his senses remains at ease in a burning dwelling, on the plea, that, if he is to escape from the flames, he will escape. The providence of God establishes the relation between cause and effect, and gives full scope for the influence of the human will. To argue that effects will be produced without their appropriate causes, is to deny the known arrangement of Providence. He who expects from the purpose of God, that which the providence of God denies him, expects the purpose to be inconsistent with its own development. He charges the plan of the Most Wise, with inconsistency and folly, that he may find a subterfuge for criminal indulgence.

Objection 2. If God purposed the fall of angels or men, he is the author of their sin.

Before we proceed to answer this objection, it is necessary to examine the terms in which it is expressed. In what sense did God purpose the fall of angels or men, or any sinful action: There is a sense, familiar to the pious, in which any event that takes place, under the overruling providence of God, is attributed to him, whatever subordinate agents may have been concerned in effecting it. The wind, the lightning, the Chaldeans, the Sabeans, were all concerned in the afflictions that fell on the patriarch Job; but he recognized the overruling hand of God in every event, and piously exclaimed; "The Lord gave, and the Lord has taken away; blessed be the name of the Lord." (Job 1:21) So Joseph, when sold by his brethren in Egypt, saw the hand of God in the event, and explained the design of his providence: "For God did send me before you to preserve life." (Gen 45:5) In precisely the same sense in which God's providence is concerned with such events, his purpose is concerned with them; and in no other.

With this explanation, let us proceed to consider the objection. Did Joseph design to charge on God the authorship of his brethren's sin? Nothing was further from his mind. They had been truly guilty of their brother's blood; and their own consciences charged them with it. They felt that they were responsible for the sin, and Joseph knew the same; and nothing that he said was designed to transfer the responsibility from them to God. Yet he saw and delighted to contemplate the purpose of God in the event. That purpose was, "to save much people alive." This purpose was executed; and God was the author, both of the purpose and the beneficial result. So, in every case, the good which he educes out of moral evil, and not the moral evil itself, is the proper object of his purpose. It should ever be remembered, that his purpose is his intention to act; and that, strictly speaking, it relates to his own action exclusively. It does, indeed, extend to everything that is done under the sun, just as the omnipresence of God extends to everything; but it extends to everything, no otherwise than as he is concerned with everything; and what God does, and nothing else, is the proper object of his purpose. "HE WORKS all thing after the counsel of his own will." (Eph 1:11) "I WILL DO all my pleasure." (Isa 46:10) "HE DOES according to his will in the army of Heaven, and among the inhabitants of the earth." (Dan 4:35) It cannot be too carefully noticed, that the purpose of God relates strictly and properly to his own actions. Now, God is not the actor of sin, and therefore his purpose can never make him the author of it.

The objection, though it may appear to have greater force when applied to the first sin of man, is not, in reality, more applicable to this, than to every sin which has been since committed. God made Adam, and all his descendants, moral and accountable agents, permitted their sin; and he overrules the evil, from the beginning throughout, to effect a most glorious result. In all this, what God has done, and is doing, he purposed to do. In all, his action is most righteous, wise, and holy; and, therefore, his purpose is so. He is the author, not of the moral evil which he permits, but of the good of which he makes it the occasion.

The distinction between the permission and the authorship of sin some have denied; but, in so doing, they have not the countenance of God's word. The whole tenor of the inspired volume leads us to regard God as the author of holiness, but not of sin. We are taught that in him is no sin (1Jn 1:5); that "he is light, and in him is no darkness;" (1Jn 1:5) that "every good and perfect gift," not sin, "comes down from the Father of lights;" (Jas 1:17) that God is not tempted of evil, neither tempts he any man (Jas 1:13). In such language we are taught to consider God as the author and source of holiness; and it is as contrary to the doctrine of the holy word to attribute sin to him, as darkness to the sun, yet this same word teaches his permission of evil. "He suffered all nations to walk in their own way." (Acts 14:16) His long-suffering, of which the Scriptures speak so much, implies the permission of sin. But of that which is highly displeasing to him, even when he bears with it, he cannot be the author.

 

John L Dagg
John Leadley Dagg (1794–1884) born in Loudoun County, Virginia, lived to be over 90 years old. He died in June of 1884, as one of the most respected men in American Baptist life and remains one of the most profound thinkers produced by his denomination. Dagg overcame extraordinary problems – a limited education, near-blindness, and being crippled – to become a great pastor in Philadelphia and elsewhere and then an educator both in Alabama and as president at Mercer University in Georgia. He was a convinced Calvinist of an evangelical kind who wrote a winsome English prose.

As an educator and theologian, Dagg is best known for his work in Georgia between 1844 and 1870. From 1844 to 1856 he was on the faculty of Mercer University, then located in Penfield, as professor of theology and later president of the college.

His greatest contribution to Baptist life came after his retirement in 1856. He prepared A Manual of Theology (1857), the first systematic theology by a Baptist in America, A Treatise on Church Order (1858), The Elements of Moral Science (1859), and The Evidences of Christianity (1869). His reputation as a theologian and ethicist rests on these four works. The first two are still in print.

 

John Dagg: First Writing Southern Baptist Theologian
John Dagg and His Theology
John Leadley Dagg (1794-1884) was one who inherited and disseminated this body of shared protestant theology, albeit with baptistic distinctives in matters of baptism and church government. His particular distinction comes in being the first Baptist theologian in the south to publish a systematic theology after 1845. In 1857, the Charleston-based Southern Baptist Publication Society (predecessor to the Sunday School Board) published his 379-page Manual of Theology. This was followed the next year by the Society’s publication of his 312-page companion volume Treatise of Church Order, and the next by the publication of his Elements of Moral Science. The first two of these, used as theological textbooks throughout the second half of the nineteenth century, were later republished together as the Manual of Theology and Church Order(Gano Books, 1982).1 As a tribute to the labors of this influential Southern Baptist theologian, this brief article offers a description of Dagg’s theology and a defense of its lasting value.

As has already been intimated, Dagg’s theology was reformed, or Calvinistic. His theology was not Calvinistic in the sense of being a full reproduction of the teachings of John Calvin (1509-1564). Calvin’s teachings are too far-reaching and complex to be accurately summarized by a single word. On the other hand, Dagg’s understanding of Christian theology was Calvinistic not merely in the sense of affirming the sovereignty of God, but in the sense of holding to what are often termed the “five points.” First formulated in the Remonstrant controversy in seventeenth-century Holland, the “five points” of the Synod of Dort (1619) were popularized in England and America in the seventeenth and eighteenth centuries by religious controversy over Arminianism.2 For two hundred years these doctrines were the dominant orthodoxy of many American Protestants, including the Baptists.

Dagg’s Manual teaches that our most reliable and most important knowledge of God comes through His perfect Word written, the Bible. This is the book which teaches us of God and His ways with us, and of the response which we are to make to Him. With traditional arguments and texts, but with striking concision and moving devotion, Dagg presents the student with the infinitely attractive God of the Bible–one, spiritual, omnipresent, eternal, immutable, omniscient, omnipotent, infinitely good, always truthful, perfectly just, holy and wise. This is the God who has created us, and revealed Himself to us, teaching us how to live while sovereignly ruling over his creation.

Doctrine of Man
Dagg neither defends or attacks the freedom of the will, but rather defines it quite carefully, so as to exclude a reduction of humans to automatons on the one hand, or irrational, motive-less actors on the other. (Dagg had evidently read Jonathan Edwards’ On the Freedom of the Will, though he doesn’t cite it.)

“The first man, having been placed under a covenant of works, violated it, and brought its penalty on himself and his descendants.”3 So, Dagg taught, in Adam we all fell. Today, all people sin, thus displaying their fallen natures. Born under God’s judgment, we are unable to help ourselves out of our mortal trouble. This help we require comes to us only by God’s grace through Jesus Christ. Jesus Christ, Dagg taught, was fully human and fully divine. The Son of God, “assumed human nature, and in that nature lived a life of toil and sorrow, and died an ignominious and painful death…was raised from the dead, ascended to heaven, and was invested with supreme dominion over all creatures.”4 As prophet, priest and king, the mediator Jesus Christ reveals, offered himself as sacrifice, intercedes and rules. He briefly treats God the Holy Spirit as the Divine sanctifier and comforter of His people.

Doctrine of Salvation
Dagg presents the plan of God’s salvation of sinners as a covenant made within the Godhead before creation, whereby God would graciously save all who repent of sin and believe in Christ. This comes about by the gracious work of the Holy Spirit changing us, sanctifying us, and preserving us to the end. As does Calvin in his Institutes, so it is at this point in his theology that Dagg expounds the biblical doctrines of election, particular redemption and effectual calling, as he meditates on the saving work of God the Father, God the Son and God the Holy Spirit. Who can deny that the Bible clearly teaches that God’s work of salvation is a work of wonderful unity? God the Father graciously elects, God the Son gives Himself as a substitute for, and God the Holy Spirit gives the new birth to the same group of people. Finally, Dagg teaches the immortality of the soul, the resurrection of the body, and the final judgment which results in the righteous being taken to Heaven, and the wicked cast eternally into Hell.

Doctrines of Baptism and the Church
As might be expected in a Baptist Treatise on Church Order, Dagg gives the largest single amount of space to a consideration of baptism. He explores the command to be baptized, the etymology of the relevant words, the theological significance of it, the proper subjects of it, its relation to church membership, and its administration. He has a special section where he considers the traditional reformed arguments for infant baptism, concluding that they are far from compelling.

Many other matters are also addressed in his Treatise on Church Order. He defends the nature of the church as being most certainly local, but, as over against the Landmarkist tradition which would soon arise, Dagg held to a traditional understanding of the universal church as “the whole company of those who are saved by Christ.”5Nevertheless, he maintains that, unlike the unity of the local church, the unity of this church is to be displayed spiritually, and not organizationally. Dagg defends “strict communion” in which only those who have been baptized as believers are to be admitted to the table, and public worship and the ministry of the Word as divinely ordained duties of the church.



Dagg’s Ministry
While many today might wonder if such a thoroughly Calvinistic preacher could ever find useful service with evangelistically-minded Baptists, Dagg’s years of productive ministry ought to remove all doubt. Indeed, the long list of his services to churches and denominations alone should put to rest any idea of Calvinism leading to lazy inactivity.

Converted in 1809, at the age of fifteen, Dagg knew half a century of fruitful ministry from the time of his ordination in November, 1817, until his infirmities forced him into virtual immobility. In Virginia, from 1817 until 1825, he pastored several small churches, and helped to begin his local association, and the Baptist Convention of Virginia. In 1825 he moved to Pennsylvania, where he took up the pastorate of the prominent Fifth Baptist Church of Philadelphia, which, at the time, was one of the largest congregations in the city. Dagg was an officer in the Philadelphia Baptist Missionary Society (1825-1827) and one of the founders of the Pennsylvania Baptist Missionary Society (forerunner of the Pennsylvania Baptist Convention): He was also the host pastor for the 1829 Triennial Convention (mother of the SBC, ABC and other Baptist denominations in America).

Dagg served on the Board of Managers of the Triennial Convention (1826-1836), as a Vice-President of the Triennial Convention (1838-1845), on the Board of Directors of the American Baptist Home Missionary Society (1832-1836), as Vice-President of the American and Foreign Bible Society (1837-1843), and as President, Vice-President and other positions of the Baptist General Tract Society (1824-1843). He was particularly concerned for mission work in western Pennsylvania and in the evangelization of the Cherokee nation in Georgia.

In the providence of God, this article about Dagg may be written because of a failure in his ministry. In 1834 Dagg’s otherwise successful pastorate in Philadelphia ended due to the loss of his voice. Apart from this failure, would he ever have turned his efforts from the pulpit to the pen? Wanting to retain his services in the area, the Baptists of the Philadelphia Association approached him about serving as President and Professor of Theology at a new school (the Haddington Institute) they desired to open. Dagg accepted the position and served there until 1836, at which time the school was dissolved.

From 1836 to 1844, Dagg served as President of the Alabama Female Athenaeum in Tuscaloosa, Alabama. During this time Dagg was active in the Alabama Baptist convention, serving on committees, and as an officer, also helping form the Alabama Baptist Bible Society and serving as its President for two years.

The great distance of Alabama from the eastern seaboard made Dagg’s continued participation in national Baptist meetings difficult. Expressing regret to Dagg about his absence from the troubled 1841 Triennial Convention in Baltimore, Spencer H. Cone (1785-1855), prominent Baptist minister in New York City and longtime friend, wrote, “I was much disappointed in not seeing you in Baltimore,…that you lacked `influence’ either with the South or North, I cannot, for a moment, admit, for I know no one whose voice would have commanded more respect in our anxious and important session….”6

 

Dagg is an important, and probably too often undervalued, Baptist theologian. The Manual of Theology can also be found on Google Books. 4 Lessons Pastors Can Learn from John Leadley Dagg at Founders is an interesting read.

The Treatise on Church Order is part 2 of his Manual of Theology, and can be found HERE.

 

Last year I purchased Dagg's Manual of Theology and Manual of Church Order from Reformation Heritage Books.

I've nibbled here and there at them and have the latter book on my desk at the moment. They are very helpful books and recommended.