Primitive Baptist & Landmarkers

Bro. Dallas

Here is an article entitled, In Defense of Special Atonement by Elders David and Sonny Pyles. They have included more there than I would here, so it might be just as well to read that than to wait on my hands to get it done. In this article they outline why we believe as we do, using scriptural support for it.

I am aware of the scriptural references those who would oppose this position would use for defense of that position.

As you are well aware, Paul wrote that we look through a glass darkly. The article cited above gives more or less my view and that of the vast majority of Primitive Baptists on the subject. I will note, however, there are a (very) few Primitive Baptists who would agree that hearing the preached gospel is required.

There are scriptures which you must agree that are difficult for our limited minds to reconcile with one another. So, I don't fall out with anyone who sees things in a different light than I do. Maybe I am wrong, maybe they are, perhaps both views are in error.

But, if you have a desire to explore the deep recesses of Primitive Baptist theological thinking, explore the Primitive Baptist Web Station.

I wouldn't agree with every iota presented there, and they wouldnt agree with me on every point, but the basic theological thought is the same.

I should further explain. For the last 10 years or so, the vast majority of "old Line" Primitive Baptists in the US have been at peace. However, in the last couple of years a controversy has arisen and it looks like their will be another distinct faction of Primitive Baptists emerging from it. The Pyles belong to what will presumably be the other side from the one that I am on. They tend toward your point of view on regeneration, but not completely. I know I have told more than Bro. Glen would like me to, but it is my honest assessment of things. I could be wrong and hope that I am.

If you are looking for, and have time/inclination to explore older Primitive Baptist writings, then this web site would be the place to go:
Primitive Baptist History Page.

I wouldn't expect that anything there would change your mind, but it always helpful (I think) to know what views others hold.

Warm regards
Jeff

 

RSR.

You wrote:

A couple of years ago I borrowed a book written by a follower of Campbell on their history. Wish I had bought it, but it was about 120 years old, and wasn't worth the money to me. Wish I could remember the author/title.

At any rate, I have come to the conclusion that they pick up on a theme and beat it to death. I have heard from others (totally heresay evidence I grant you), that they bash who ever strikes their fancy in other places. Everyone I have ever heard preaches in very nearly the same way -- very arrogant and argumentitive. (maybe it is me, but it is my perception). Course there are lots of Baptists who are arrogant and argumentitive too.

As for "Speak where the Bible speaks and remain silent where the Bible is silent." There is no church that I have ever encountered of any denomination, including my own, that actually lives up to it.

BTW, I usually enjoy your posts, just thought I would add that, so you'd know, before I forgot something I felt impressed to say.

Jeff

 

Campbellites (as opposed to the Stone faction of the movement, I think) and Baptists have been bickering for quite a while.

You are correct bro. rsr. {folks, forgive me for mentioning the Campbellite question} I was just curious as whether they operated in all places as claiming seperation from the Baptists, they seem to view this as a prideful thing in 'reestablishin' the ancient Gospel; I believe John Gill supports the view of Baptism to be administered by a Pastor, based upon his view of the candidate's profession. This would lead to the belief in the universal and invisible church, i believe. This is why I say Mr. Campbell did not have a valid baptism, his was not in view as I could see it as accepting Baptist Faith and Principles and aligning with a local visible body. Rather he opposed these, as for the assoc. you mentioned, I had forgotten of that incident, however, his preaching was made evident.

Early on no one took to his views, so I guess people thought he was no threat, however, on an occassion he preached his belief of Baptismal regeneration to an uninterested crowd, in closing his sermon a man walked in from outside as Mr. Campbell was giving the invitation saying:

"Who will be among the first to come forward to receive baptism unto salvation and restore the ancient gospel to what was once delivered to the church?" The man walked in as he was speaking this, he went forward and declared his willingness to receive such an offer. From here others began to join in and the error caught on.

The question I have: How much of the sermon did the visitor hear?
Where did the visitor come from, who was he affiliated with?
Was he planted?

I don't know these answers, and as we are not concerned with the Campbellite position again I apologize for bringing them in to our discussion.

I will say I would not consider these to ever be a 'Baptistic' body which was excluded, or seperated. As I stated above, the Baptist preacher administering the baptism for Mr. Campbell failed to do so properly.

(I included Bro. John Gill's belief so you would know I understand the strength of the position that the preacher can baptize whomever he would, as John Gill is much more knowledgeable than myself, nonetheless, I disagree with this view because I believe it naturally leads us, or ultimately would force an acceptance of the universal, invisible church belief.)

God Bless.
Bro. Dallas

[ November 12, 2002, 02:32 PM: Message edited by: Frogman ]

 

That's all right brother, I jumped him, you only trailed.

Now, let's just permit him to go into a hole.
God Bless.
Bro. Dallas

 

Frogman,

Campbell was "never" baptized after this. The only 'immersion' he ever recieved was by a baptist preacher. I believe Barton Stone was the first to baptize for the purpose that the Campbellite churches do today.
In Christ,
Bobby

 

BeeBee,
You may be correct. If so thanks for your clarification, if not, thanks for your post.

God Bless.
Bro.Dallas