THROUGHOUT ALL AGES
(Ephesians 3:21)
In an earlier chapter, we have traced the history,
continuation, and existence of some of the true congregations of Christ up to the 17th and
18th centuries in Britain. In this chapter, we will see their migration into America. At
this point, someone may ask, "Where does John Smyth fit in?" The answer is that
he does not. If the records of history are accurate about his religious activities, there
is no way that we can consider the congregation gathered by him, or any of its offspring,
as a congregation of Christ's, according to our interpretation of the New Testament. But,
because many are so fond of perpetuating the myth that the Baptists in England originated
with Smyth, I suppose the matter should be addressed here.
As sources, I will use the encyclopedias, and
various "Baptist histories," as well as books of general history. Those things
such as names, dates, and places, commonly agreed upon, I will simply present as fact,
rather than be overly cumbersome with quotations.
In 1600, John Smyth became a lecturer or preacher of
the city of Lincoln, in the established Church of England. After dispute and debate about
the discipline and ceremonies of the Church of England, Smyth either left, or as some
think, was thrown out of, the Church of England. He then became the pastor of one of the
Brownist congregations in Lincolnshire. In 1606, or 1607, Smyth, Thomas Helwys, John
Murton, along with Robinson and Clifton, who were co-pastors of another Brownist
congregation nearby, and others, left England to escape religious persecution, and went to
Amsterdam in Holland. In Amsterdam, these exiles joined a congregation of Brownist where
F. Johnson was pastor, and H. Ainsworth was a teacher. After some time, controversey arose
between Smyth and the Brownists there. J.J. Goadby, on pages 30-31 of Bye-Pathes in
Baptist History, says:
The New Testament churches, with their simple order and discipline,
seemed strangely unlike the half Jewish society at Amsterdam, with which he was united. He
felt, moreover, that he could no longer hold the doctrines of personal election and
reprobation. His faith was also shaken in some other points "assuredly believed
among" the Amsterdam Separatists. He had ceased to be a Calvinist, and had become an
Arminian. Much talk arose about these changes in his opinions. Meanwhile, Smyth adopted
new views on the subject of baptism.
The last question came up in reviewing his dissent from the
Establishment. He and his Brownist friends had rejected the ordination of the State
Church, but they still retained her baptism. Smyth now made the subject his special study,
and was speedily led to adopt believers' baptism as alone consistent with New Testament
teaching. With his usual frankness he openly and zealously advocated his new opinions.
This was more than the charity of his associates could bear.
Arminianism was bad enough; but believers' baptism was worse; at least so thought
Robinson, Clifton, and others. Smyth, and those who sympathised in his opinions, were cut
off from the church.
The exclusion of John Smyth, Thomas Helwys, and others who agreed with
him, resulted in their proceeding to form a congregation of their own. In The Early
English Baptists, B. Evans, whose account agrees with that of Goadby's, above, says,
in volume I, pages 203-204:
Upon the very threshold of their enterprise a formidable difficulty
presented itself. Who should baptize them? There were Baptists in Holland, those who
administered the ordinance by immersion, as well as those who adopted the mode at present
practised by our brethren in the Netherlands. From some cause or other, application was
not made to any of them, and the story goes that after much prayer Smith baptized himself,
then Helwys, and then the remainder of the company.
Now that the dust has settled, most who have studied
the matter are in agreement, rather than John Smyth "baptizing" himself, as he
was accused of, it is most probable that Smyth "baptized" Helwys, Helwys
"baptized" Smyth, and then the two "baptized" the rest. It does not
matter which way they did it, if the information we have is correct, because neither had
any authority to baptize. Since God had not given either of them authority to baptize, as
He did John the Baptist, and neither had Jesus or any of His congregations given them that
authority, we must conclude that what took place was not baptism.
Most think that the mode of "baptism" used
by Smyth and Helwys was pouring, and the weight of evidence agrees. That does not matter
either, since they were grossly in error anyway. The Bible does not teach of any such
thing as "plan A, plan B, and plan C," for baptism. It is either scriptural and
valid, or unscriptural and of no benefit. They were no more able to baptize (with a
baptism acceptable unto God) than Mother Goose, Humpty Dumpty, or Donald Duck.
There is no doubt in my mind why the Smyth/Helwys
congregation didn't go to the Baptists in Holland who "administered the ordinance by
immersion," mentioned in the above quotation from Evans. Those Baptists believed in
the Sovereignty of God, and the total depravity of man. They would not have approved of
the Arminian profession of faith of Smyth and his followers. It was in 1609 or 1610 that
the Smyth/Helwys congregation was founded, and very shortly after, a difficulty arose and
John Smyth and others were excluded from it. They then joined a congregation of
Mennonites, who by then were practicing baptism by pouring and sprinkling, and had fallen
into other error. As Encyclopedia Britannica (1957) says, "The Arminianism of
the Mennonites and their rejection of infant baptism appealed to Smyth." Evans, on
page 208, vol.I, of Early English Baptists, says:
It is admitted, on all hands, that from some cause or other, the church
over which Smith and Helwys presided was divided, but the cause of the division is not so
manifest. Smith, with some twenty-four persons, was excluded from the church, and these
sought communion with one of the Mennonite churches in the city. It is more than probable
that it was one of the Waterland, one of the most liberal of the Mennonite churches, and
their mode of baptism was by sprinkling, or affusion.
On page 209, Evans gives the confession and appeal for membership to
the Mennonites, and in the appendix on pages 244 and 245, the names of Smyth, his wife
Mary, and thirty others who signed it:
The names of the English who confess this their error, and repent of
it, viz., that they undertook to baptize themselves contrary to the order appointed by
Christ, and who now desire, on this account, to be brought back to the true church of
Christ as quickly as may be suffered.
We unanimously desire that this our wish should be signified to the
church.
The Smyth party was accepted by the Mennonites, who concluded that:
The said English were questioned about their doctrine of salvation, and
the ground and the form (mode) of their baptism." "No difference was found
between them and us. (Evans, p.208)
Thomas Helwys continued as sole pastor of the
remaining congregation until 1614, when he and some of the rest returned to London. The
few remaining then joined the Mennonites in 1615. John Smyth died in Holland of
consumption in August, 1612. Helwys and those returning with him formed yet another
congregation after they settled in London. Some insist that that was the start of the
General Baptists of England, who were of Arminian persuasion. I find no evidence or
indication that any of the Particular Baptists of England received their baptism or origin
from the Helwys congregation. The preponderance of the evidence indicates that even the
General Baptists did not receive their baptism from the Helwys congregation, even though
it may have been the first to have claimed the name of "General Baptist church."
I believe Thomas Crosby's four volume History of the English Baptists, published in
1738, well supports that opinion. It appears to me that the congregations that showed the
most evidence of being Jesus' kind of congregation have been the slower, and more
reluctant to give themselves a name. They would describe themselves as "the baptized
congregation at _____," or "the baptized church of Christ meeting at ____,"
or some similar description. Representative of their terminology in the late 1600s is in
this inscription on the tombstone of Thomas Lowe, buried at Hill Cliffe:
HERE LYETH THE BODY OF THAT EMINENT AND FAITHFUL SERVANT OF CHRIST
THOMAS LOWE, PASTOR OF THE BAPTIZED CONGREGATION AT WARRINGTON, WHO DIED AT DRAKELOW THE
21 FEBY. 1695 AND IN THE 62 YEAR OF HIS AGE. (History of the Baptist Church
at Hill Cliffe. James Kenworthy, p.53)
On page 105 of Baptist Piety, "The Last Will and Testimony
of Obadiah Holmes," Edwin S. Gaustad explains:
Obadiah Holmes addresses his letter simply to "the Church of
Christ at Newport . . . who are baptized upon the professing of their faith. . . ."
Letters from the Newport Church to the Boston Baptists often said merely, "To the
Church of Christ gathered at Boston," while John Russell, the pastor of that church
in 1680, described it as "a Church of Christ in Gospel Order." But gradually the
word "baptized" became less a verb and more an adjective. In 1719 a letter from
the Boston fellowship, which began "The Church of Christ in Boston Baptized Upon
Profession of their Faith," was shortened that same year in a Newport letter to
"We, the baptized Church of Christ meeting at Newport." The distinguishing tag
"Baptist," or earlier "Anabaptist," was meant -- like most tags in the
history of Christianity -- to be a pejorative one thrust upon the despised sect by its
enemies. The sect itself -- like most new groups in the history of Christianity -- saw no
need for any label at all since it was only re-creating the true and pure church of Jesus
and the apostles. But history is more powerful than logic, and denominational names are
the result.
As to the General Baptists of England originating
with the Smyth/Helwys affair, I believe the most probable case is that a few may have
recieved their baptism from Helwys, but for the most part, the strongest connection is
that existing congregations were seduced and corrupted by the propaganda and teaching of
the Helwys organization, and thereby fell into their errors and accepted their name.
Either way, if they were corporately and consciously preaching a gospel that involves a
God that is less than completely sovereign, and man that is not totally depraved, they
were administering a defective "baptism." Remember that baptism is picturing or
preaching in typology.
Of the John Smyth organization, Thomas Crosby says,
on page 99, volume I of his History of the English Baptists, that:
If he were guilty of what they charge him with, 'tis no blemish on the English
Baptists; who neither approved of any such method, nor did they receive their baptism
from him.
Dr. John Clarke, who was a Baptist preacher in
London, came to Boston, Massachusetts, probably in 1636, with his wife Elizabeth. Due to
religious persecution, John and Elizabeth Clarke, and others left Boston. In the second
edition of The First Baptist Church in America, by J.R. Graves and S. Adlam, Conrad
N. Glover writes, on page 219:
John Clarke was respected as a man of great learning. He bore high
repute for scholarship and ability in languages, including Latin, Greek, Hebrew, and Law,
Medicine and Theology. He was by profession a physician and a Baptist minister. He
possessed the qualifications of a leader, and a leader he became.
The conditions in Massachusetts Bay Colony became so intolerable in
1637 that John Clarke and some three hundred with him entered into a compact to remove
themselves out of the colony.
They traveled to New Hampshire, but, being dissatisfied with the colder
climate, returned south to a place named, by the Native Americans, Pocasset. On page 220
of the above named book, C.N. Glover says:
The land settled by John Clarke and his followers was purchased from
the Indians. The date of the transaction was March 24, 1638.
Later in the same year, a congregation was organized with John Clarke
as the pastor. On page 235, Glover says:
There are historic statements which lead me to believe that John Clarke
began his ministry with the people of his colony immediately after they settled at the
north end of Aquidneck Island, first called by its Indian name, Pocasset, and in 1638
changed to Portsmouth, and a meeting house built. Then during the next year in April,
1639, Dr. Clarke and others moved to the present site of the city of Newport and founded
Newport where another meeting house was erected. It is believed by historians that the
church begun at Portsmouth in 1638 was moved along with the settlers to Newport, where it
has continued in active service ever since, with the exception of a period of interruption
during the Revolutionary War when the British occupied the town of Newport.
The lengthy inscription on John Clarke's tombstone gives this
informative and authoratative account:
To the Memory of
DOCTOR JOHN CLARKE,
One of the original purchasers and proprietors of this island and one
of the founders of the First Baptist Church of Newport, its first pastor and munificent
benefactor; He was a native of Bedfordshire, England, and a practitioner of physic in
London. He, with his associates, came to this island from Mass., in March, 1638, O.S., and
on the 24th of the same month obtained a deed thereof from the Indians. He shortly after
gathered the church aforesaid and became its pastor. In 1651, he, with Roger Williams, was
sent to England, by the people of Rhode Island Colony, to negotiate the business of the
Colony with the British ministry. Mr. Clarke was instrumental in obtaining the Charter of
1663 from Charles II., which secured to the people of the State free and full enjoyment of
judgement and conscience in matters of religion. He remained in England to watch over the
interests of the Colony until 1664, and then returned to Newport and resumed the pastoral
care of his church. Mr. Clarke and Mr. Williams, two fathers of the Colony, strenuously
and fearlessly maintained that none but Jesus Christ had authority over the affairs of
conscience. He died April 20, 1676, in the 66th year of his age, and is here interred.
Of his visit to the site of John Clarke's grave, in
1854, J.R. Graves, on pages 14 and 15 of The First Baptist Church in America,
wrote:
The worn appearance of the stone testifies to its extreme age, and the
language and style of the epitaph witness that it has come down to us from "former
generations"--the centuries past.
I unhesitatingly accepted this mural witness as unimpeachable, and
studied it, examining and cross-examining it for the utmost syllable of its testimony.
On page 162 of The First Baptist Church in America, J.R. Graves
wrote:
In the course of my reading I met with the following statements in
Crosby, and in the history of the Philadelphia Association, to which I called the
attention of Elder Adlam:
"When the First Church in Newport was one hundred years old, in
1738, Mr. John Callender, their minister, delivered and published a sermon on the
occasion." Note on page 455.
That statement, made in a note at the bottom of page 455 of Minutes
of the Philadelphia Association, published by the American Publication Society, is
further evidence as to the correctness of the 1638 date.
In 1663, a congregation was organized in
Massachusetts, with John Miles as pastor. John Miles was pastor of a Baptist congregation
at Swansea, in Wales, who came to America to escape persecution under Charles II. Page 61
of The American Baptist Heritage in Wales says:
It does not appear when Mr. Miles sailed for America, when he landed in
that country, nor what family, friends, or neighbors accompanied him. The first account we
have of him west of the Atlantic is in Mr. Backus' History [A History of New England
With Particular Reference to the Denomination of Christians Called Baptists. Isaac
Backus] above referred to, Vol. 1, Page 353, naming Mr. Miles among the ejected ministers,
it is added, "upon which, he and some of his friends came over to our country, and
brought their church Records with them. And at Mr. Butterworth's in Rehobath, in 1663,
John Miles, elder, James Brown, Nicholas Tanner, Joseph Carpenter, John Butterworth, Eldad
Kingsley, and Benjamin Alby, joined in a solemn covenant together."
This was the first Baptist church in that part of America as noted
above. It seems the men members of it were only seven. What number of women members there
were we know not. It does not appear that any of the men members went with Miles to
America, but Mr. Nicholas Tanner, said in the records to have been baptized on the 11th of
the 11th month, 1651. This young church was then in Plymouth Colony; where they had quiet
about four years: but at a court holden at Plymouth, 2nd July 1667, the society was fined
in a considerable sum of money, and ordered to remove from that place. On the 30th of
October ensuing, that court made them an ample grant in another place, which Mr. Miles and
his friends called Swanzay. It seems they so spelled Swansea in Wales then. "There
they made a regular settlement which has continued to this day . . . . Their first meeting
house was built a little west of Kelly's Ferry, against Warren; but Mr. Miles settled the
west side of the great bridge which still bears his name," Page 354.
But what about Roger Williams? That is a situation
similar to the John Smyth story. All reliable sources are in agreement with the following
account of what happened in 1639 (one year after the organization of the congregation at
Newport), from page 475, volume I, of A General History of the Baptist Denomination
by David Benedict:
Being settled in this place, which, from the kindness of God to them,
they called PROVIDENCE, Mr. Williams and those with him, considered the importance of
Gospel Union, and were desirous of forming themselves into a church, but met with
considerable obstruction; they were convinced of the nature and design of believer's
baptism by immersion; but, from a variety of circumstances, had hitherto been prevented
from submission. To obtain a suitable administrator was a matter of consequence: at
length, the candidates for communion nominated and appointed Mr. Ezekiel Holliman, a man
of gifts and piety, to baptize Mr. Williams; and who, in return, baptized Mr. Holliman and
the other ten.
It has been much alleged that the Baptists in
America began with Roger Williams, and that Williams was the founder and first pastor of
the First Baptist Church in Providence, but the facts, and the older records show that not
to be the case. The whole mess, at least in great part, appears to have originated with
the manufacture of history at the hand of John Stanford, who was pastor of "The First
Church in Providence." Benedict says, on page 485, vol.I:
Thus far the history of this church has been transcribed from its
records, which were set in order in 1775, by Rev. John Stanford, now of New-York, who was
then preaching with them. This account, up to Dr. Manning's beginning in Providence, is
found almost in the same form as here stated in Morgan Edward's MS. History, &c.
prepared in 1771. It was published in Rippon's Register in 1802, and as it is well
written, I have chosen to copy it without scarce any alteration.
J.R. Graves visited Benedict at his home in Pawtucket, R.I., and on
page 21 of The First Baptist Church in America, wrote:
Touching the conflicting claims of the Newport and Providence churches
above referred to, and his verdict in favor of Providence, expressed in his History, he
remarked, that "it was his rule not to go behind the records of the churches. His
verdict was in accordance with the records of the Providence church. If he had erred he
had been misled by those records, and with no intention to disparage the claims of the
Newport church. He admitted the growing perplexities that had for years confused and
unsettled his mind as to the correctness of Mr. James [John] Stanford's history of the
Providence church, compiled without any church record, and a full century after its
origin. It would not be strange, but indeed probable, that errors, and not a few, would
occur."
John Callender was called as the sixth pastor of the
First Baptist Church of Newport in 1731. In 1738, concerning the First Baptist Church at
Providence, Callendar wrote:
The most ancient inhabitants now alive, some of them above eighty years
old, who personally knew Mr. Williams, and were well aquainted with many of the original
settlers, never heard that Mr. Williams formed the Baptist Church there, but always
understood that Brown, Wickenden, or Wigginton, Dexter, Olney, Tillinghast, etc., were the
first founders of that church. [The First Baptist Church in America.
J.R. Graves and S. Adlam, pages 137-138]
On pages 22 and 23 of A History of the Baptists in New England,
Henry S. Burrage says:
Mr. Williams was baptized by Ezekiel Holliman, and he in turn baptized
Holliman and "some ten more." But Williams remained only a few months in
connection with the church. He had doubts in reference to the validity of his own baptism,
and the baptism of his associates on account of the absence of "authorized
administrators." For him there was no church and no ministry left. The apostolic
succession was interrupted and apostolic authority had ceased. It was the baptizer, and
not the baptism about which he doubted. He was a high church Anabaptist. He went out of
the church, left his little congregation behind, preached when and where he could, and
became a "seeker" the rest of his days. And during the rest of his days he never
came to a "satisfying discovery" of a true church or ministry.
In A History of New England With Particular
Reference to the Denomination of Christians Called Baptists, Isaac Backus wrote:
Mr. Williams had been accused before of embracing principles which
tended to Anabaptism; and in March, 1639, he was baptized by one of his brethren, and then
he baptized about ten more. But in July following, such scruples were raised in his mind
about it, that he restrained from such administrations among them.
On pages 162 and 163 of The First Baptist Church in America,
J.R. Graves introduced a quotation of Cotton Mather, from Thomas Crosby, with this:
This is Cotton Mather's testimony as to the perpetuity of Williams'
informal society. If it was in existence when Mather wrote, he well knew it. If it
dissolved when Williams left it, and repudiated it as a scriptural church, he knew it; and
he says it "came to nothing," there was nothing left for even Mather to
reproach, and Mather died in 1727-8:
The quotation of Mather, from Crosby (Vol.I, p.117) says:
One Roger Williams, a preacher, arrived in New England about the year
1630; was first an assistant in the church of Salem, and afterwards pastor. This man, a
difference happening between the government and him, caused a great deal of trouble and
vexation. At length the magistrates passed the sentence of banishment upon him, which when
he removed with a few of his own sect and settled at a place called Providence. There they
proceeded," says Mr. Mather, "not only unto the gathering of a thing like a
church, but unto the renouncing of their infant baptism." After this, he says,
"he turned Seeker and Familist, and the church came to nothing."
(Ecclesiastical History of New England, p.7, Cotton Mather).
It is conclusive that the Roger Williams organization "came to
nothing" within about four months. Although it is known that there were members of
the Newport congregation living at Providence, there are no known records, or hint of the
existence, of a Baptist congregation at Providence until about 1652. In 1653 or 1654,
there was a division in that congregation (the one organized at Providence in 1652), and a
new one was organized with Gregory Dexter as pastor. Wickenden and Browne were apparently
co-pastors, also. In The Baptist Succession, D.B. Ray says:
Gregory Dexter was a Baptist preacher in London, who came over to
Providence, Rhode Island, in 1644. He was associated with Wickenden and Browne, as one of
the founders of the present Providence first church.
The original congregation (organized in 1652) continued until about
1715 or 1718, when, "becoming destitute of an elder, the members were united with
other churches," (Callender) and became extinct. The congregation of whom Dexter,
Wickenden, and Browne were pastors, has continued to the present at Providence.
Now, let us go back to the congregation at Newport,
where John Clarke was pastor. History shows that many, many congregations throughout the
country are descendants of that congregation. Another evil myth (like those of the
Baptists being started with John Smyth or Roger Williams) is that effective mission work
among Baptists is of modern origin. Effective in man's eyes, or God's? How much more
effective can you get than doing something God's way? With even the very minimal amount of
history I have related here in this book, it is clearly seen that members of Jesus'
congregations, in every era, have gone into all the world, preaching the gospel, baptizing
those whom God saves, and organizing them into true bodies of Christ, by His authority.
In A Brief History of the First Baptist Church of
Harrison, Ohio, Larry L. Burton and Berlin Hisel traced the geneology of the First
Baptist Church of Harrison, step by step, back to the First Baptist Church of Newport,
Rhode Island. After a paragraph about the organization of the First Baptist Church of
Newport, Burton and Hisel wrote:
In about the middle of the 17th century, a Baptist minister, Elder
Thomas Dungan from Ireland, left his native home to escape persecutions under King Charles
II, and coming to Rhode Island, joined himself to Dr. Clarke's church. In 1684, Elder
Dungan and a small group of members from the church in Newport came south to Bucks County,
Pennsylvania, and established as a church body there. This was the Cold Spring Baptist
Church, and it was about three miles north of Bristol, Penn., not too far from Trenton.
Elder Dungan was old when he came to America, and he died in 1688. But something he did
just prior to his death has had lasting results.
That "something he [Dungan] did" was to be used of God to
instruct and counsel Elias Keach, who was baptized and ordained at the Cold Spring Baptist
Church. The circumstance, as recorded by Morgan Edwards in his Materials Toward a
History of the Baptists of Pennsylvania, can be found on page 91, volume II, of A
History of the Baptists by John Christian, or on pages 581 and 582, volume I, of A
General History of the Baptist Denomination by David Benedict, and elsewhere. On pages
581 and 582, Benedict's History says, of Elias Keach:
He was son of the famous Benjamin Keach, of London; arrived in this
country a very wild youth, about the year 1686. On his landing, he dressed in black, and
wore a band, in order to pass for a minister. The project succeeded to his wishes, and
many people resorted to hear the young London Divine. He performed well enough, till he
had advanced pretty far in the sermon; then stopping short, he looked like a man
astonished. The audience concluded he had been seized with a sudden disorder; but on
asking what the matter was, received from him a confession of the imposture, with tears in
his eyes, and much trembling. Great was his distress, though it ended happily; for from
this time he dated his conversion. He heard of Mr. Dungan. To him he repaired to seek
counsel and comfort, and by him he was baptized and ordained. From Coldspring, Mr. Keach
came to Pennepek, and settled a church there as before related; and thence travelled
through Pennsylvania and the Jersies, preaching the Gospel in the wilderness with great
success, insomuch that he may be considered as the chief apostle of the Baptists in these
parts of America. He and his family embarked for England, early in the spring of the year
1692, and afterwards became a very famous and successful minister in London.
About the year 1702, the congregation at Cold Spring
dissolved. In 1688, a congregation was organized at Pennepeck, in Philadelphia County,
Pennsylvania, called the Lower Dublin Baptist Church. It is often referred to as "the
Pennepeck Church." Elias Keach, missionary out of the congregation at Cold Spring,
was called as their first pastor. Page 90 of volume II of A History of the Baptists
by John T. Christian says:
The records of the church state that "by the good Providence of
God, there came certain persons out of Radnorshire in Wales, over into this Province of
Pennsylvania, and settled in the Township of Dublin, in the County of Philadelphia, viz.:
John Eatton, George Eatton and Jane, his wife, Samuel Jones, and Sarah Eatton, who had all
been Baptized upon Confession of Faith and Received into Communion of the Church of Christ
meeting in the Parishes of Llandewi and Nantmel, in Radnorshire, Henry Gregory being Chief
Pastor. Also John Baker who had been Baptized and was a member of a congregation of
Baptized believers in Kilkenny, in Ireland, Christopher Blackwell, pastor, was in the
providence of God settled in the township aforesaid. In the year 1687 there came one
Samuel Vaus out of England, and settled near the aforesaid Township and went under the
denomination of a Baptist and was so taken to be."
The next year Elias Keach came from London and baptized some persons.
[There was two years interval between Keach's coming from London in 1686 and his settling
at Pennepeck, in 1688, in which he was a member of the congregation at Cold Spring, as
described previously. S.F.] Twelve entered into church relations and chose Mr. Keach as
pastor. Soon after, a few Baptists from this province and West Jersey joined them, also
some persons baptized at the Falls, Cold Spring, Burlington, Cohansey, Salem, Penn's Neck,
Chester, Philadelphia and elsewhere united with the church. These were all in one church,
and Pennepeck was the center of the union, where as many as could met to celebrate the
Lord's Supper. Quarterly meetings were held in other places to accommodate the members
there. From this church went out many others. . . . (Horatio Gates Jones, The Baptists
in Pennsylvania. Being a sketch of the Pennepeck or Lower Dublin Baptist Church. The Historical
Magazine, August, 1868. New Series, IV. 76).
Benedict adds, on page 581, that:
Thus, for some time, continued their Zion with lengthened cords, till
the brethren in remote parts set about forming themselves into distinct churches, which
began in 1699. By these detachments it was reduced to narrow bounds, but continued among
the churches, as a mother in the midst of many daughters.
In 1701, sixteen people were organized as a Baptist
congregation in South Wales, and came, as a complete body with Thomas Griffith as pastor,
to America on the ship named "James and Mary." In History of the Welsh
Baptists, J. Davis says, on page 72:
In the year 1701, he [Thomas Griffiths] and fifteen of the members of
the church went to America in the same vessel. They formed themselves into a church at
Milford, in the county of Pembroke, South Wales, and Thomas Griffiths became their pastor
in the month of June, 1701. They embarked on board the ship James and Mary, and on
the 8th day of September following, they landed at Philadelphia. The brethren there
treated them courteously, and advised them to settle about Pennepeck. Thither they went,
and there continued about a year and a half. During that time twenty-one persons joined
them, but finding it inconvenient to abide there, they purchased land in the county of
Newcastle, and gave it the name of Welsh Tract, where they built a meeting-house, and
Thomas Griffiths labored among them as their pastor till he died, on the 25th of July,
1725, aged eighty years.
On pages 106 and 107 of The American Baptist Heritage in Wales,
we have, preserved by Joshua Thomas, the following account of the "extracts"
translated into English by later members of that congregation from their records which
were kept in Welsh until 1732:
"In the year 1701, there was a number of the members of the
Baptist churches in the counties of Pembroke, Carmarthen, and Cardigan inclined to
emigrate to Pennsylvania. Having consulted among themselves, they laid the case before the
churches, who agreed to grant them leave to go. But the churches considered that as they
were sixteen members and one of them a minister, it would be better for them to be
constituted a church in their native land; they agreed and did so. Being thus formed into
a church, they gave them a letter of recommendation for their reception as brethren,
should they meet any Christians of the same faith and practice. They sailed from
Milford-Haven in June that year, and arrived in Philadelphia in September.
They met with kind reception from the church meeting at Pennepec and
Philadelphia. They spent about a year and a half in that vicinity, in a dispersed way.
These new comers kept their meetings weekly and monthly among themselves: but held
Christian conference with the other church, with which they wholly agreed but in the
article of Laying on of hands, to which the newcomers strictly adhered: but the majority
of the other church opposed it. In the year and a half that way they had two and twenty
added to them, which probably made 38. But at the end of this term, these with others from
Wales, purchased a large tract of land in Newcastle county on Delaware, which in their own
language, they called Rhandiry cymrn, but being turned into English, Welshtract. This was
in the year 1703, and in the same year they built their meeting house. In the extract the
names of the sixteen are given, there Thomas Griffiths is called pastor; and Elisha Thomas
is called Elijeus Thomas. There also they give the names of the two and twenty added, as
above. . . .
And on the next page:
"There were thirteen added to them the first after their abode at
the Tract, two by letters from Wales, and eleven by Baptism, and in a few years they
became numerous, many were added to them from different churches in Wales, and large
additions yearly by personal profession before the church; so that in a few years a
hundred and twelve were added to the first thirty-eight, and many of these were gifted
brethren, in all 150." But probably some had died.
Also on page 108, Thomas says:
Mr. Morgan Edwards, author of the Materials [Materials Toward
a History of the Baptists of Pennsylvania], in a letter to the writer of this dated
5th Nov. 1784, says "Mr. Joshua Edwards was born in Pembrokeshire Feb. 11th 1703,
landed (in America) about 1721, was ordained July 15th 1751, was alive in 1772, had eleven
children, but had not the particular care of any church." Then in the same letter he
informs, that about the year 1737, about thirty members from Welshtract removed to Peedee,
in South Carolina, and there formed a church in 1738, which church is now (said he then)
shot into five branches, that is Cashawa, Catfish, Capefear, Linches Creek, and Mar's
Bluff or Cliff. Mr. Joshua Edwards is one of the ministers who served those churches
lately.
Mr. (now Dr.) J. Jones, in a letter of June 1784, said that he assisted
at the constitution of a branch of Welshtract church, in Nov. 1780. That new church is
called London tract; the minister Mr. Thomas Fleeson. He mentions another church formed
out of it, but does not give the name.
For several years, many Baptists came to America
from Wales and England. Many Baptist preachers were sent from the congregations there, to
work in America. From pages 76 and 77 of The American Baptist Heritage in Wales is
the following letter of reccomendation, which is a sample of the order practiced among the
Lord's congregations:
South Wales in Great Britain
The church of Jesus Christ meeting at Swansea, in Glamorganshire,
teaching believers baptism, laying on of hands, the doctrine of personal election, and
final perseverance. To any church of Christ Jesus in the province of Pennsylvania, in
America, of the same faith and order to whom this may concern. Send Christian Salutation:
Grace, mercy, and peace be multiplied unto you from God the Father through our Lord Jesus
Christ.
Dearly beloved, Brethren in our Lord Jesus Christ.
Where as our dearly beloved brethren and sisters by name, Hugh David,
an ordained minister, and his wife Margaret, Anthony Matthew, Simon Matthew, Morgan
Thomas, Samuel Hugh, Simon Butler, Arthur Melchoir, and Hannah his wife, design by God's
permission to come with Mr. Sereney to the fore said province of Pennsylvania: This is to
testify unto you, that all the above names are in full communion with us, and we commit
them, all of them to your Christian care, beseeching you therefore to receive them in the
Lord, watch over them, and perform all Christian duties toward them as becometh Christians
to their fellow members. So we commit you and them to the Lord, and to the word of his
grace, which is able to build you and them up in the most holy faith. May the God of peace
ever sanctify you wholly, and that your, and their spirits, souls, and bodies, may be
preserved blameless unto the coming of our Lord Jesus Christ shall be the earnest prayers
of your brethren in the faith and fellowship of the Gospel.
Dated the 30th of the 7th month 1710: signed at our meeting by a part
for the whole:
Morgan Jones, John David, William Matthew, Jacob Morgan, Owen Dowle,
Morgan Nichols, John Howell, Hugh Matthew, Robert Edwards, John Hughs, Philip Matthew,
Thomas Morgan, William Morgan, (and another name not legible).
According to the minutes of the Philadelphia Baptist Association
(1707-1807), Morgan Edwards, J. Davis, Joshua Thomas, and others, Hugh Davis (spelled
David in the above letter) and fifteen others organized a congregation at Great Valley,
Chester County, Pennsylvania, April 22, 1711, and chose Hugh Davis as pastor.
In 1710, Nathaniel Jenkins, who was born in
Cardiganshire, Wales, in 1678, came to America, and became the first pastor of a
congregation of Baptists constituted in 1712 at Cape May, New Jersey. (A General
History of the Baptist Denomination by David Benedict, vol.I, p.570)
Abel Morgan, born in 1637 at Llanwenog, in
Carmarthen County, Wales, began preaching at nineteen years old. He was ordained at
Blaenegwent, in Monmouthshire, and arrived in America on February 14, 1711, and pastored
the congregation at Lower-Dublin, at Pennepek, Pennsylvania (mentioned earlier), until he
died December 16, 1722. (Benedict, vol.I, p.583)
By migration, sometimes by choice and many times by
persecution, and the mission efforts of these and other congregations and their descendant
congregations, God used them to take the truth into New York, Ohio, Kentucky, Virginia,
the Carolinas, and other surrounding territories. People who were saved by God's grace and
baptized under the authority granted these congregations by Jesus, covenanted themselves
together and were organized into new congregations of Jesus' after the New Testament
pattern.
Robert Nordin and Thomas White were ordained in
London, and sent by the General Baptists to Virginia in 1714. Benedict says:
But White died by the way, and Nordin arrived in Virginia, and gathered
a church at a place called Burley, in the county of the Isle of Wight. [vol.II, pages
23-24]
Robert Nordin died in 1725. In 1727, Richard Jones and Casper Mintz
came from England to Burley, and Jones became their pastor.
On page 25, Benedict says:
In 1756, the church at Burley sent the following letter to the
Philadelphia Association:
"The church of Jesus Christ in Isle of Wight county, holding adult
baptism, &c. to the Reverend and General Assembly or Association at Philadelphia, send
greeting. We the above mentioned church, confess ourselves to be under clouds of darkness,
concerning the faith of Jesus Christ, not knowing whether we are on the right foundation,
and the church much unsettled; wherefore, we desire alliance with you, and that you will
be pleased to send us helps, to settle the church, and rectify what may be wrong; and
subsribe ourselves, your loving brethren in Christ, Casper Mintz, Richard Jones, Randal
Allen, Joseph Mattgum, Christopher Atkinson, Benjamin Atkinson, Thomas Cafer, Samuel
Jones, William Jordan, John Allen, John Powell, Joseph Atkinson.--Dec. 27, 1756."
Shortly afterwards, according to Morgan Edwards, the congregation at
Burley "was broken up, partly by sickness, and partly by the removal of families from
hence to North-Carolina, where they gained many proselytes, and in ten years became
sixteen churches." [Benedict, vol.II, p.24] Of them, Benedict says, on page 98 of
vol.II, that:
These people were all General Baptists, and those of them who
emigrated from England, came out from that community there. And although some of their
ministers were evangelical and pure, and the members regular and devout; yet, on the
whole, it appears to have been the most negligent and the least spiritual community of
Baptists, which has arisen on the American continent. For so careless and indefinite were
they in their requisitions, that many of their communicants were baptized and admitted
into their churches; and even some of their ministers were introduced into their sacred
functions, without an experimental acquaintance with the gospel, or without being required
to possess it. It does not appear that they extended the bounds of their communion to any
but those of their own order; but so loose and indefinite were their terms in other
respects, that all, who professed a general belief in the truths of the gospel, submitted
to baptism, and religiously demeaned themselves, were admitted to it.
In this situation, this cluster of churches continued, until more
orthodox principles were introduced, and a spirit of reformation began to prevail, which
finally leavened nearly the whole body, and transformed it into an Association of
Calvinistick, or as they were then called, Regular Baptists.
John Gano, Benjamin Miller, and Peter P. Vanhorn were instrumental in
that transformation. On page 99, Benedict says:
Mr. Gano was sent out by the Philadelphia Association, with general and
indefinite instructions, to travel in the southern States, &c. He, on his return,
represented the melancholly condition of this people to the Association, who appointed
Messrs. Miller and Vanhorn for the special purpose of instructing and reforming them. Mr.
Gano appears to have shaken the old foundation, and begun the preparation of the materials
which Messrs. Miller and Vanhorn organized into regular churches.
Probably, the first Baptist congregation in North Carolina was
organized more than twenty years earlier, about 1727. It was gathered by Paul Palmer at a
place called Perquimans, on Chowan-river. He was born in Maryland, and baptized at Welsh
tract.
In 1683, some Baptists moved to near Charleston,
South Carolina, from Piscataway, in Maine, to escape persecution by the Pedobaptists of
New England. They organized a congregation, with William Screven as pastor, and about the
same time were joined by some emigrating from England, who were Particular Baptists.
[Benedict, vol.II, p.120] On May 24, 1736, twenty-eight members of that Congregation at
Charleston were organized into a separate congregation at Ashley River. [Benedict, vol.II,
p.125] The following year, in 1737, thirty members moved from Welsh Tract church
[mentioned earlier], to South Carolina, and constituted the third congregation of Baptists
in that state. David Benedict gives the following account on page 130, vol.II, of A
General History of the Baptist Denomination:
This church was at first called Pedee, from the circumstance of its
being situated on the Great Pedee-river, 60 miles north of Georgetown; but when other
branches were settled on the same river, it became necessary to give this a more special
name, and accordingly the compound name of Welsh-Neck was selected, which is
descriptive of the people who founded the church, and of its local and peninsulated
situation. This church originated in the following manner: In the year 1737, the following
Baptist members of the Welsh-Tract church, which was then in the province of Pennsylvania,
but now in the State of Delaware, arrived here; viz. James James, Esq. and wife, and three
sons, Philip, who was their minister, Abel, Daniel, and their wives; Daniel Devonald and
wife, Thomas Evans and wife, one other of the same name and his wife; John Jones and his
wife, three of the Harrys, Thomas, David, and John and his wife; Samuel Wilds and wife,
Samuel Evans and wife, Griffith Jones and wife, and David and Thomas Jones and their
wives. These thirty members, with their children and households, settled at a place called
Catfish, on Pedee-river, but they soon removed about fifty miles higher up the same
river, where they made a permanent settlement, and where they all, except James James,
Esq. who died at Catfish, were embodied into a church, Jan. 1738.
Now, let us go back to Virginia, where a
congregation was organized on Opeckon Creek in 1751. Volume II, pages 26 and 27, of
Benedict's History says:
In the year 1743, a number of the members of the General Baptist church
at Chesnut Ridge, in Maryland, removed to Virginia, and settled in this place; the most
noted of whom were Edward Hays and Thomas Yates. Soon after their removal, their minister,
Henry Loveall, followed them, and baptized about fifteen persons, whom he formed into a
church on the Arminian plan. Mr. Loveall, becoming licentious in his life, was turned out
of the church [Life of Gano, pp.40 and 50], and returned to Maryland; and the
church was broken up, or rather transformed into a church of Particular Baptists, in 1751,
by the advice and assistance of Messrs. James Miller, David Thomas, and John Gano, who
was, at that time, very young. Mr. Miller had visited this church in some of his former
journies, and had been instrumental of much good among them; and when they, in their
troubles occasioned by Loveall's misconduct, petitioned the Philadelphia Association for
some assistance, he and Mr. Thomas were appointed by the Association for the purpose. Mr.
Gano, though not appointed, chose to accompany them. The account of this transaction is
thus given by Mr. Gano: "We examined them, and found that they were not a regular
church. We then examined those who offered themselves for the purpose, and those who gave
us satisfaction, we received, and constituted a new church. Out of the whole who offered
themselves, there were only three received. Some openly declared, they knew they could not
give an account of experiencing a work of grace, and therefore need not offer. Others
stood ready to offer, if a church was formed. The three beforementioned were constituted,
and six more were baptized and joined with them.
The congregation at Opeckon united with the
Philadelphia Association soon afterwards, in the same year. Congregations in the
Philadelphia Association continued to send missionaries to Virginia, as well as many other
places. Some of those emigrating from England were Particular Baptists. As the population
grew, and evangelistic efforts continued, new congregations were organized. In 1760, the
above mentioned David Thomas moved, permanently, from Pennsylvania to Virginia, where he
worked for thirty years, and then moved to Kentucky. Imprisoned Preachers and Religious
Liberty in Virginia, by Lewis Peyton Little, says, on pages 76 and 77, that:
David Thomas was the first Baptist preacher to carry the gospel into
Orange County. This occurred in 1763. Then came Samuel Harriss in 1765. James Read became
an early co-laborer with Samuel Harriss, and by the labors of these three many converts
were made, among whom were Lewis Craig, Elijah Craig, Nathaniel Saunders and Lewis Conner.
"When Mr. Harris left them he exhorted them to be steadfast and
advised some in whom he discovered talents, to commence the exercise of their gifts, and
to hold meetings among themselves. * * * The young converts took his advice, and began to
hold meetings every Sabbath, and almost every night in the week, taking a tobacco house
for the meeting house." (Semple's History (1810),p.8)
On November 20, 1767, a congregation was organized
with twenty-five members, called Upper Spottsylvania. In November, 1770, Lewis Craig was
ordained and became pastor at Upper Spottsylvania. [A History of Kentucky Baptists
by J.H. Spencer, p.27, vol. I.] Baptist preachers were regularly whipped, jailed, fined,
and otherwise persecuted in Virginia at that time. On page 29 and 30, vol.I, of A
History of Kentucky Baptists, Spencer says:
As has been stated, Mr. Craig was ordained to the pastoral office, in
November, 1770. But this did not prevent his preaching abundantly in all the surrounding
country. In 1771, he was arrested in Caroline county, where he was committed to prison and
remained in jail three months. Before he left Virginia, he was instrumental in gathering
at least three churches in Dover Association-Tuckahoe, Upper King & Queen, and Essex.
During a revival in Upper Spotsylvania, in 1776, over one hundred were added to its
membership. This church prospered as long as Mr. Craig remained with it in its first
location. . . . . . . . . . .
Mr. Craig continued to serve Upper Spottsylvania church as pastor, till
1781, when he moved to Kentucky. So strongly was the church attached to him, that most of
its members came with him. At exactly what time in the fall they started has not been
ascertained. But Mr. Craig was on the Holsten river on the road leading from his former
home, by way of Cumberland Gap, to his destination in Kentucky, on the 28th of September,
1781; for on that day, he aided in constituting a church at that point, then in the
extreme western settlement in Virginia.
Dr. S.H. Ford, in the Christian Repository of March, 1856, says
of Craig and his traveling charge: "About the 1st of December, they passed the
Cumberland Gap, . . . and on the second Lord's day in December, 1781, they had arrived in
Lincoln (now Garrard Co.), and met as a Baptist church of Christ at Gilberts Creek. Old
William Marshall preached to them, with their pastor, the first Sunday after their
arrival."
That congregation at Gilberts Creek was, as far as is known, the third
of its kind in Kentucky. The first, Severns Valley, (near Elizabethtown) had been
constituted earlier the same year, on June 18, 1781, with 18 members, and on the same day
ordained John Gerrard as pastor. On page 21, vol. I, of A History of Kentucky Baptists,
Spencer quotes Samuel Haycraft in the Christian Repository of April, 1857, in which
he says:
When this present wide-spread and favored country was but a wilderness;
when not a human habitation was to be found between Louisville (then called the Falls of
the Ohio,) and Green river, save a few families, who had ventured to Severn's Valley--a
dense forest, and unexplored--and commenced a rude settlement far from the haunts of
civilized man; there the lamented John Gerrard, a minister of God, came like John the
Baptist, "The voice of one crying in the wilderness," and finding a few
desciples of the Lord Jesus Christ like sheep without a shepherd, on the 18th day of June,
1781, they were collected together under a green sugar tree; and in the fear of God, in
church covenant gave themselves to the Lord and to one another, and were constituted a
Baptist Church, named after Severns Valley and the creek which flows through it.
Sixteen days later, another was organized. On page 23, vol. I, Spencer
says:
Cedar Creek church was the second organized in Kentucky. It was
gathered by Joseph Barnett who was assisted in its constitution by John Gerrard, July 4,
1781. It is located in Nelson county, about five miles south-west from Bardstown.
Now, back to the congregation at Gilberts Creek, of
which, on page 31, vol.I, Spencer says that:
It continued to prosper under the care of Mr. Craig, till 1783, when he
and most of the members moved across Kentucky river, and formed South Elkhorn church. . .
.
Immediately after moving to Fayette county, in 1783, Mr. Craig gathered
South Elkhorn church, and was chosen its pastor. He occupied this position, about nine
years, laboring abundantly in all the surrounding country. During this period, Elkhorn
Association was formed, and many other preachers moved to that region of the country.
During the years that followed, many other
congregations were organized. One of the most sound congregations in existence today was
organized just five years later at Bryants Station, now written Bryan Station. On page
112, vol.I, of A History of Kentucky Baptists, J.H.Spencer says:
The church at this point was probably gathered by Augustine Eastin, and
was constituted by Lewis Craig and other "helps," on the third Saturday in
April, 1786. The following eight persons were in the constitution. Augustine Eastin, Henry
Roach, Wm. Tomlinson, Wm. Ellis, sr., Joseph Rogers, Ann Rogers, Elizabeth Darnaby and
Elizabeth Rice.
About a month later, Ambrose Dudley became the first pastor at Bryants
Station. Ambrose Dudley came from Spottsylvania County, Virginia. On page 113, vol.I,
Spencer says, of Dudley, that:
After preaching with much acceptance several years he moved with his
young family to Kentucky, arriving at his destination, six miles east of Lexington, May 3,
1786. Within a few weeks after his arrival he took charge of the church at Bryant's. Here
and at David's Fork church, and perhaps at other points, he ministered till the Master
took him to himself.
About two months later, a congregation was organized nearby, at Town
Fork. On page 115, vol.I, Spencer says:
It was constituted of about ten members, in July, 1786, by Lewis Craig,
John Taylor, Ambrose Dudley and Augustine Eastin.
John Gano, who has been earlier mentioned, became
the first pastor at Town Fork. These congregations, and others, continued to multiply,
both near and far. Page 220 of A General History of the Baptist Denomination by
David Benedict, vol.II, says:
The church at the Mouth of Sulphur Fork is the oldest now in existence
[1813] in West-Tennessee. It was constituted in 1791, by the assistance of Elder Ambrose
Dudley and John Taylor, from the Elkhorn Association in Kentucky. These ministers by
request of the brethren in this place travelled not far from two hundred miles, mostly
through a wilderness, where they were continually exposed to be destroyed by the Indians.
This church was at first called Tennessee; it united with the Elkhorn Association, where
it continued until the Mero District Association was formed. This church remained alone in
the wilderness, having no other within more than a hundred miles of it, until 1794, when
that on White's Creek in Davidson county, about six miles to the north of Nashville, was
gathered.
Lengthy as it has become, this is but a very brief
sketch of history of some of Jesus' congregations, hopefully arousing an increased
awareness and appreciation of how that He has propagated them, just as He promised, almost
two-thousand years ago. Although they have been despised, persecuted, and most of the time
seen in the world's eyes as insignificant, there has been a continued existence of Jesus'
kind of congregation ever since He built the first one as a pattern and declared,
"the gates of hell shall not prevail against it" (Matthew 16:18). It is very
clear that it was Jesus' intention that His kind of congregation continue until the day
that all the saved are called up to meet Him in the air. Matthew 16:18 sounds like Jesus
was confident in His ability to preserve His kind of congregation. He surely would not
make such a bold statement and undertake something that He would not be able to
accomplish. To have done so would have been to ignore His own advice in Luke 14:28-31,
where He said:
For which of you, intending to build a tower, sitteth not down first,
and counteth the cost, whether he have sufficient to finish it? Lest haply, after he hath
laid the foundation, and is not able to finish it, all that behold it begin to mock him,
Saying, This man began to build, and was not able to finish. Or what king, going to make
war against another king, sitteth not down first, and consulteth whether he be able with
ten thousand to meet him that cometh against him with twenty thousand?
The counterfeiters of Christianity have assailed and
taunted Jesus' congregations with John Smyth and Roger Williams fables, "universal
church" theories, and other such absurdities, until the day has come when most,
unaware of their own heritage, and weak in the faith, have sold, or are about to sell,
their birthright for a mess of unionism and compromise.
If God is able to create man, and accomplish a
continued existence of the human race by procreation, through fire, flood, famine, and
disease, for six thousand years without any change of method, and is able to save lost
sinners and keep them saved throughout all eternity without any change of method, He is
surely able to accomplish the perpetuity and baptismal succession of His congregations
without any change of method for two thousand years! Is God sovereign or not? He is not
just partly sovereign, He either is, or is not. My God is sovereign! "He's got the
whole wide world in his hands."
Rather than be repetitious of matters already
discussed in this and previous chapters, allow me to simply re-state some conclusions
drawn that are relative to the subject at hand.
*Jesus built something that He called His ekklesia, which can
best be translated in English as assembly, or congregation.
*Jesus built His congregation as a pattern by which He would build all
others.
*Jesus' kind of congregation is spoken of as a body, is compared to a
human body, is claimed to be a body of Christ, with Him and no other as its head.
*Jesus has given a commission exclusively to His bodies, with
the promise of perpetuity.
*A congregation ceases to be Jesus' congregation when He is no longer
its head or when it is no longer declaring the true gospel, in word or in picture,
regardless of its past virtue or the name over its door.
In following these conclusions, we are immediately
led to the fact that when one of Jesus' congregations compromises the truth of the gospel
in its preaching, either verbally, or in its practice or typology, regardless of man's
opinion or designation, that congregation forfeits its status as one of Jesus'
congregations, as well as its authority to administer a baptism that is acceptable to God.
Now, this brings it down to the point that we begin to feel uncomfortable, and many will
say that that is drawing the line too close, but what does God say? Has God passed some
ammendments to His Word, or is the Bible still to be our final authority for all faith and
practice?
When a congregation receives a person as a member,
whose baptism was administered by another congregation, organization, or individual, that
congregation is declaring that that baptism in its entirety (administrator, mode,
candidate, authority, and design and purpose) is acceptable. When they declare that it is
acceptable, and it is not, they are declaring a lie. People often take offense at the
"L" word, but it is a Bible word. The receiving and approving congregation is
declaring that the "picture preaching" of the administrator is acceptable, and
in doing so, declaring that they are alike, that they are fellows, that one is as good as
the other in that respect. Any congregation knowingly, without repentence and
rectification of the matter, making such a false declaration, CANNOT be Jesus' kind of
congregation, though they may have been yesterday.
The same conclusion must be drawn concerning pulpit
affiliation. When a congregation knowingly and willfully places someone in their pulpit
who, by their affiliation with some denomination, professes belief in, or allowance for, a
salvation that is not wholly of grace (obtained by praying through, holding on, holding
out, baptism, membership, sacraments, easy believism, or any other works of man), that
congregation is showing approval of the same and is partaker of the evil deeds. To be
consistent, I believe we must say the same for those who "minister in song." The
same reasoning must be applied in the sending and supporting of missionaries.
Participation and dabbling in such practices must be considered as spiritual adultery,
just as the idolatry of the Israelites. Any carelessness, compromise, and indiscretion in
those regards should be considered as conduct unbecoming of any engaged to be the bride of
Christ.
Whenever those practices surface within a body,
where there still exists a congregation of true disciples who are committed to going
"fully after the LORD," there will be a reaction. The true disciples will
rebuke and try to counsel and correct those in error. If the counsel is accepted,
repentance and rectification will take place. If the admonition is not accepted, those in
error are to be rejected (Titus 3:10, Romans 16:17, and II Timothy 3:5). If the true
disciples find themselves the minority, and their admonition rejected, they must
"come out from among them," and be separate (II Corinthians 6:17), and the Head,
and the authority will go with them. That is what happened to the Novations, Donatists,
and others, in the third century. Their refusal to accept the defective baptism of those
in error resulted in the label of Anabaptist, which has been given the Lord's
congregations all the way into the nineteenth century.
Study Revelation 2:1-7, with the interpretation
given in Revelation 1:20. In those verses, Jesus dictated a letter addressed to the pastor
of the congregation at Ephesus. In that letter, Jesus made the accusation that, "thou
hast left thy first love." The first love of any person that has been saved by the
grace of God should be a love for God and all that He is. I John 4:19 says,
"We love him, because he first loved us." We can not really love the real Jesus,
the Christ, the Son of the living God, without a jealous and fervent love for truth. In
John 14:6, Jesus declared that He, Himself, is the truth. The love for truth,
especially in regard to salvation and the gospel, will be directly proportional to our
love for God. The plea and advice given to that pastor was, "Remember therefore from
whence thou art fallen, and repent, and do the first works" (preach and uphold all
the truth). The consequence of not doing so was that Jesus would remove His congregation
from that place, "quickly," and we can be sure that Jesus, and its authority,
went with it.
Just the fact someone calls something "the
gospel" does not make it the true gospel. Just the fact that someone calls something
"baptism" does not make it acceptable to God. Just the fact that someone calls
something "a church" does not make it the Lord's.
So, what happens when a true congregation of Jesus'
shows its approval of the preaching or the baptism of something that claims to be the
same, uses the same name, and claims to be of like faith and order, but are known
to be guilty of the errors discussed above? I believe the answer is obvious. Irregular
congregations are not to be given approval or recognition by Jesus' congregations. We are
to "mark" them, and "avoid" them. The scriptural reaction is:
Now I beseech you, brethren, mark them which cause divisions and
offences contrary to the doctrine which ye have learned; and avoid them. For they
that are such serve not our Lord Jesus Christ, but their own belly; and by good words and
fair speeches deceive the hearts of the simple. (Romans 16:17-18)
Before going this far with the subject, someone will usually say,
"Perhaps you have not considered all the implications of this." I have. I have
seriously considered the implications (and there are many) of this stand for the past
fifteen years, and have made an intense study of the subject for five years. We had better
be concerned with the implications of rejecting and disobeying an unchanging God's
instructions in such an important matter! What will be God's reaction to those who are
willing to advance a false gospel? "The pillar and ground of the truth" (I
Timothy 3:15) must uphold the truth. We must take side with God, even if it causes the sky
to fall on the front steps, and causes the creek to run backward.
Truth cannot be altered. Our fear of implications or
disregard for reality does not change the truth. It appears that these doctrines are often
shunned or rejected out of fear that one's own baptism will be proven irregular. If such
information were to ever be made manifest that would indicate that my baptism is improper,
I pray that God will grant me the soundness of mind to get it done right and to not worry
about implications.
Congregations finding their garments dirtied by
their affairs with false religion and false doctrine must "Remember therefore from
whence thou art fallen, and repent, and do the first works." For disciples finding
themselves in unrepentant company, it is high time to "come out from among them, and
be ye separate, saith the Lord, and touch not the unclean thing; and I will receive you. .
. ."
Many have assumed that Jesus has given His
congregations all power in heaven and in earth, but He has not. Jesus declared, "All
power is given unto me in heaven and in earth," but He has never transferred or
assigned all power to anyone or anything. He has given much power to His kind of
congregation, but He is still the head. Jesus certainly has not authorized His
congregations, or anyone else, to disobey, or to change the rules as we go. As already
seen, Jesus not only gave His congregations the exclusive authority to teach and to
baptize, but has commissioned them to. They are, of course, by design, authorized to do
such things as purchase and own buildings and property, use electricity, choose furniture,
have a bank account, and other things of expediency, but never to disobey, or to teach
false doctrine. Jesus' congregations have the authority to bind only in accordance with
what has been bound in heaven. They have the authority to loose only in accordance with
what has been loosed in heaven. Our binding and loosing must be confined to the limits
predetermined by God in heaven (Matthew 16:19, 18:18).
Many, many congregations and pastors have been
seduced into apostasy by peer pressure, association, pride, and ambition, resulting from
participation in various schemes that men have invented for the execution of mission work,
training, pension plans, and other programs by boards, or co-operative arrangements rather
than adhering to Jesus' method. Jesus authorized His congregations, exclusively, as the
only kind of organization authorized to do His work. They are His bodies. Jesus has not
given His congregations the authority, nor permission, to delegate, or re-assign that
authority to anything other than one of His congregations.
To be consistent with the belief in an unchanging
God, with unchanging ways, and an unchanging plan of salvation, we are forced to admit
that the qualifications, consequences, and implications of apostasy are the same today as
they were when the New Testament was written. God has not issued a "grandfather
clause", nor does He make any exceptions just because someone continues to use
(abuse) a good name. Those who refuse to have Christ as their head today are just as much
in error as those from whom the Novations and Donatists withdrew in the third century.
Since the succession of authority is lost in
apostacy, and in consideration of the facts of history, it is conclusive that the only
true congregations of Jesus in existence today are found among those known as Baptists,
and sadly, we must say, most congregations by that name have also fallen away.
If we use the New Testament as the "measuring
stick," the latest date that we could credit the Catholics, either Roman or Greek,
with any possibility of having any succession of authority is about the year 251, before
they were ever known as catholic, when the irregular and apostate congregations, being
rebuked for their errors, refused to repent and submit to Christ as their head and
choosing, instead, to do as they pleased. In 313, only sixty-two years later, they openly
acknowledged Constantine as their head rather than Christ.
None of the Protestant denominations existed until
the sixteenth century, with whatever authority they may claim coming from the Roman
Catholics who had no authority from God, and possessing a "baptism" that was no
baptism.
The Lutheran Church was started in 1520 by Martin
Luther, with Roman Catholic "baptism." The Episcopal, or Church of England, was
started in 1534 by King Henry VIII, with Roman Catholic "baptism." The
Presbyterian Church was started two years later, in 1536, by John Calvin, also with Roman
Catholic "baptism." The Reformed Churches originated late in the sixteenth
centuy, being, as the name would suggest, a product of the Reformation, with a
"baptism" received from the Roman Catholics or Presbyterians. Congregationalism
was started in 1580 or 1581, by Robert Browne, in Norwich, England, with Church of England
"baptism." The Methodist Church was started sometime around 1740, by John and
Charles Wesley, with Church of England "baptism."
It was noticed earlier, the presence of those who
were called General Baptists, in England, who were of Arminian persuasion, and the earlier
appearance of some in Virginia, but, as David Benedict wrote, in 1813, on pages 410 and
411, volume II, of A General History of the Baptist Denomination:
. . . there has always been some churches and many individuals, who
have objected to some of the strong points of Calvinism, or adopted them with some
peculiar modifications; but no very considerable party of this character arose, until a
little more than thirty years ago, when one was founded by Elder Benjamin Randal, of New
Durham, New-Hampshire. This Elder Randal, as his biographer observes, was led, about 1780,
"to object against the whole doctrine of John Calvin, with respect to eternal,
particular, personal, unconditional election and reprobation. . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
. . . A number soon fell in with his views, broke off from the Calvinistick churches in
New-Hampshire and the District of Maine, and from a small beginning they have arisen to a
large community, which is scattered in different parts of Maine, New-Hampshire, Vermont,
New-York, the Canadas, and in some other places.
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . This party was as strenuous for
believers' baptism as before; they were, like all new sects, very sanguine in their new
discoveries, and from a distinguished article in their doctrinal system, they were
denominated Free-will Baptists.
They, in teaching that salvation is obtained or lost as much or more by
man's will and works, reject the salvation taught by Jesus and the apostles, and thereby
teach a "gospel" that is no gospel, and administer a "baptism" that is
no baptism.
The Christian Church, or Disciples of Christ, was
started in the early 1800's by the work of Alexander Campbell. World Book Encyclopedia
(1985) says, with a note that the article was "Critically reviewed by the Disciples
of Christ," that:
Disciples of Christ is a Protestant denomination that developed in the
United States during the early 1800's. Its full name is the Christian Church (Disciples of
Christ). Its founders included three men of Presbyterian background--Thomas Campbell and
his son Alexander in Pennsylvania and Barton W. Stone in Kentucky. . . . . . . . . . . . .
. . .
Thomas and Alexander Campbell were Presbyterians who came from
Scotland, to Pennsylvania, and, adopting immersion as the only proper mode of baptism,
sought and recieved a supposed Baptist baptism. In 1823, Alexander Campbell began the
monthly publication of The Christian Baptist by which he sowed much discord and
false doctrine, especially throughout Pennsylvania and Kentucky. On pages 609 and 610 of A
History of Kentucky Baptists, volume I, J.H. Spencer says:
Up to August, 1829, Mr. Campbell was a member of a society, recognized
as a Baptist church. This church was a member of Mahoning Baptist Association. Mr.
Campbell's influence was so great, both in the church of which he was a member, and the
small association to which it belonged, that, notwithstanding his known and publicly
avowed heterodoxy, neither had he been disciplined by his church for heresy, nor his
church by its association for retaining him as a member. The Baptist denomination was
therefore, held responsible for his teaching. The Baptists, generally, were becoming very
restless under this exceedingly odious responsibility, while his disciples were daily
multiplying in the Baptist churches, and becoming more bold and confident in proclaiming
his heresies,under the pseudonym of the "ancient gospel."
In August, 1829, Beaver Association, a small Baptist fraternity in
Pennsylvania, met at Providence meeting-house, near Pittsburg, and, after discussing the
subject of Mr. Campbell's teaching, resolved to withdraw fellowship from Mahoning
Association, on account of its maintaining, or countenancing, the following sentiments, or
creed:
1. They maintain that there is no promise of salvation without baptism.
2. That baptism should be administered to all who say that Jesus Christ
is the son of God, without examination on any other point.
3. That there is no direct operation of the Holy Spirit, on the mind,
prior to baptism.
4. That baptism produces the remission of sins and the gift of the Holy
Spirit.
5. That the Scriptures are the only evidence of interest in Christ.
6. That obedience places it in God's power to elect to salvation.
7. That no creed is necessary for the church but the Scriptures as they
stand.
8. That all baptized persons have a right to administer the ordinance
of baptism.
This is believed to have been the first official declaration of
nonfellowship for Mr. Campbell and his followers. The other associations corresponding
with Mahoning, withdrew fellowship from it, during the same, and the following month.
The following pages of Spencer's History relate the like action taken
by congregations and associations throughout Virginia and Kentucky, where the Campbellite
heresy had infiltrated some of the Baptist congregations in their areas. Although Campbell
and his disciples practiced the proper mode (immersion only), and some of the
congregations might have once had authority, in teaching and practicing the
immersion for obtaining salvation, they rejected Jesus' salvation by grace through faith
alone, and in so doing, rejected His authority as well. In immersing a person thinking
himself to be a lost sinner until the act was completed, they were immersing an improper
candidate. They were and are, therefore, immersing an improper candidate for an improper
purpose with improper authority.
At about the same time, the Primitive Baptists, or
"Hard-Shell Baptists," were started in much the same way as the Campbellites by
the work of Daniel Parker. Not only is being "missionary" an integral and
inseparable part of the commission given by Jesus to His congregations in Matthew
28:19-20, mission activity is seen to have been practiced in every age by His true
congregations. Spencer, speaking of the Baptists in Kentucky in regard to this subject and
period of time, on page 581, volume I, says that in 1820, "The spirit of missions had
been greatly revived and the churches were contributing more liberally to Foreign Missions
than those of any other portion of the United states." In 1820, and again in 1824,
Daniel Parker published a 38 page Pamphlet titled, "A Public Address to the Baptist
Society," in opposition to the Baptist Board of Foreign Missions. Two years later,
about 1826, Parker published a pamphlet on his "Doctrine of the Two-Seeds," and
in 1829, he began a monthly publication called The Church Advocate, devoted to the
opposition of missions. [Spencer, pages 576-578, volume I.] The spread of Parker's
propaganda resulted in the splitting of some congregations and associations, about the
year 1832, with the seceders adopting the Anti-mission, Two-seedism, and
Non-resurrectionism doctrines of Parker. In The Baptist Succession, D.B. Ray says,
on pages 93-94, that:
This secession, upon the part of our Anti-mission brethren, occurred at
different times in different parts of the country. In Virginia, the separation took place
in the year, 1832. Elder S. Trott, an "Old School Baptist" of distinction, says
of the separation:
" . . . . . . . . . . . . . . We took as a distinguishing
appelation the name, 'Old School Baptists'." [Religious Denominations in the
United States and Great Britain by Charles Desilver.,p.87.(The history of each
denomination is furnished by a leading writer of its own communion.] Here is the candid
confession of a leading Anti-Mission Baptist, that the brethren now claiming to be
"Old School" or "Primitive" Baptists, separated themselves from
the body of the denomination, and took a stand "as a distinct people;" and at
that time, about 1832, took the appelation or name, "Old School Baptists."
Therefore, according to Elder Trott, there was no body of Baptists in the world calling
themselves "Old School," prior to the year 1832.
In Tennessee the separation occurred later. Dr. John M. Watson, says:
"After our painful separation from the Missionaries in 1836, a number of churches, in
the bounds of the Old Concord Association, met together and formed the Stone River
Association. We had then, as was generally supposed, a strong and happy union; but,
alas! there was an element of heresy incorporated in that body as bad, if not worse, than
that from which we had just withdrawn." [Old Baptist Test.,p.36, By Dr. John
M. Watson, a leading Anti-Mission Baptist of Tennessee.] In the above, Dr. Watson admits
that the "Old Baptists" separated or withdrew from the
"Missionaries." It is admitted that, in some cases, the Anti-Mission brethren
had the majority in churches, and even in some associations; but as a body they were
largely in the minority--only a fraction--when the separation occurred. Elder Jeter says
of these Baptists: "The class of Baptists described in the above extract were called
in some places, Old School and in others, from the name of the place at which they held
their seceding convention--'Black Rock' Baptists. They separated themselves from the
Regular Baptists about the time of the rise of Mr. Campbell's Reformation." [Campbellism
Re-examined, p. 33.]
They, in departing from the "one faith," departed from the
"one baptism" (Ephesians 4:5) as well.
The Mormon Church was founded by Joseph Smith in
Fayette, New York, on April 6, 1830. In 1834, after two name changes, they settled on the
Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints. [Mormonism by Kurt Van Gorden, page
11] They believe that God continues to reveal and inspire new truths having equal
authority with, and even superseding or amending the Bible and previous revelations. They
believe and teach that the atonement of Jesus Christ alone is not sufficient for
salvation, but must be obtained by works of man. Page 670 of Mormon Doctrine by
Bruce R. McConkie says:
Full salvation is attained by virtue of knowledge, truth,
righteousness, and all true principles. Many conditions must exist in order to make such
salvation available to men. Without continuous revelation, the ministering of angels, the
working of miracles, the prevalence of gifts of the spirit, there would be no salvation.
There is no salvation outside the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints.
That must be a different "Jesus Christ" than the one who
said:
I am the way, the truth, and the life: no man cometh unto the Father,
but by me. (John 14:6)
In 1863, the Seventh-day Adventists were organized
by followers of William Miller, a so-called "Baptist minister," who had
predicted that the second coming of Christ would occurr in the spring of the year 1844. [The
World Book Encyclopedia. "Critically reviewed by the Seventh-day
Adventists"] Regardless of the background of William Miller, or any of his followers,
they, in believing and teaching of man's works for the obtaining of salvation, rather than
works as a result of salvation, teach another "gospel" which is no gospel.
The Pentecostal and Holiness denominations have
originated in the present century, within the lifetime and memory of persons still living.
As The World Book Encyclopedia (1985) says:
Pentecostal churches trace their origins to revivals of tongue-speaking
that occurred at Bethel Bible College in Topeka, Kans., in 1901, and at the Azusa Street
Mission in Los Angeles in 1906. Similar revivals also took place in Great Britain and in
Europe, Asia, and Latin America during the early 1900's. Since the 1930's, the Pentecostal
denominations have grown rapidly. The Pentecostals are sometimes called Christianity's
"Third Force," alongside Roman Catholicism and traditional Protestantism.
Also, The World Book Encyclopedia, in an
article titled "Assemblies of God," which it says was "Critically reviewed
by the Assemblies of God," says:
Assemblies of God is the largest Pentecostal religious denomination in
the world. The church developed from a revival movement in the early 1900's and was
organized in Hot Springs, Ark., in 1914.
Of "Churches of God," The World Book
Encyclopedia says:
Churches of God consist of about 15 religious groups in the United
States that use the same name--Church of God--but differ in faith and practice. Most of
these groups trace their origins to the Pentecostal, Holiness, or Adventist movements.
And, The World Book Encyclopedia says, of
"The Church of God in Christ," that it:
. . . is a Christian denomination that bases its faith on the doctrines
of the apostles as recieved on Pentecost (Acts 2:4). Bishop C.H. Mason and others founded
the church in 1895. They began preaching that there could be no salvation without
holiness. The Baptist Church expelled them because of this teaching. Members believe that
the church name was revealed to the bishop in 1897 from a reference in I Thessalonians
2:14. In 1907, a church meeting in Memphis, Tenn., formed the First General Assembly of
the Church of God in Christ.
Notice that although they profess and teach some
sort of belief in Jesus as the Son of God and Saviour, each of these denominations adds
some kind of works for the obtaining of salvation. That makes their faith a different
faith. Things cannot be different and still be the same. Ephesians 4:5 teaches that there
is but "one faith" that is acceptable to the "One God and Father of
all" (v.6), and only "one baptism" that can declare that faith in a manner
that God will approve. That "one faith" and "one baptism" are the only
ones we should approve of, also. I am not saying that there are none saved that are
affiliated with one of those denominations. The contention is that if they are saved, they
are not declaring it properly. They are not giving God all the glory, and by that improper
declaration, people are being misled about a matter of eternal life or death. Certainly,
those who believe what they claim, that their faith is not in Jesus alone, but in Jesus
plus their own works, or the works or merit of their "church," or any other
formula, do not possess a saving faith. I realize that the making of such a
statement will procure much hatred, but I would rather be hated for just a little while
for telling the truth, than to be hated for eternity for concealing the truth.
I wish that this narrative of departure from the
faith could be concluded here, but it cannot. Although the Lord's true congregations have
for many years been found among those called Baptists, the present situation is that most
have departed rather than to "earnestly contend for the faith which was once
delivered unto the saints" (Jude 3). Observation and investigation will show that
many congregations who still hang on to the name of Baptist are filled with teachers,
deacons, and even pastors who will concede that "we are all (denominations) pretty
much alike, and have only minor differences." Many insist that, "The Baptists
started with John Smyth, in the seventeenth century." Most have accepted a
"universal church" theory, and many insist that one immersion is as good as
another. Many will agree that some other congregation of the same name teaches false
doctrine, or "don't know what they believe," but are eager to recognize their
baptism. Most will accept the baptism of anything called a "Baptist church,"
even though it recognizes and accepts the baptisms administered by other denominations.
Many send all their mission money to unscriptural and ungodly missionaries, schools, and
programs which they have no control of. Many praise and glorify their adulterous and
scandelous members, instead of disciplining them. Many show no reservation or hesitation
about inviting someone from another denomination to fill their pulpit. If the Bible means
anything at all, if it is worth the paper it is written on, that is not Jesus' kind of ekklesia.
We can see in the New Testament that Jesus' congregations can sometimes be terribly in
error about some things, and ignorant about some things, and still be His; but when God's
simple plan of salvation gets changed, it becomes the congregation of someone else.
The authority to baptize must come from God. God
gave John the Baptist the authority to baptize. God could have given direct authority, if
He wanted to, to Philip to baptize the Ethiopian eunuch in Acts 8, (we can certainly see
that He made all the other arrangements for the occasion), but I believe that Philip had
been granted the authority by the congregation of which he was a servant and member, to
conduct such a matter in that manner. The same can be said about Ananias, who baptized
Paul. Acts 9:17-18 says:
And Ananias went his way, and entered into the house; and putting his
hands on him said, Brother Saul, the Lord, even Jesus, that appeared unto thee in the way
as thou camest, hath sent me, that thou mightest receive thy sight, and be filled with the
Holy Ghost. And immediately there fell from his eyes as it had been scales: and he
received sight forthwith, and arose, and was baptized.
But, I believe that in this case, also, the most probable is that
Ananias was pastor of Jesus' congregation at Damascus, and had been granted the authority
by that congregation to baptize those he thought to be proper candidates. As has already
been shown, Jesus gave His kind of congregation the authority to teach and baptize. If the
Bible is to be our final authority for all faith and practice, we must reject any and all
revelation or authority claimed to have been received contradictory to the Bible, or since
it was written. The fact that obedience in following our Lord in proper baptism is basic
and elementary to any further following or walk with Him insists that only properly
baptized persons can properly be a member of one of Jesus' congregations. If a
congregation must consist of saved and properly baptized persons joined together and
teaching the true gospel in order to qualify as one of Jesus' congregations, then any
congregation that is made out of persons who obtained their "baptism" from an
improper source cannot be one of Jesus' congregations, no matter how saved they may be,
nor how sound their teachings are otherwise. And, a true congregation can never evolve
from it. That is a conclusive fact, and no quantity of time or variety of circumstance and
opinion can change it.
It is important that the doctrine of baptismal
succession be taught. The consequence of neglect is disaster. A doctrine that is neglected
by one generation will be abandoned, ridiculed, and rejected by the next. The result will
be a congregation that is highly susceptible to the ever intensifying efforts of
counterfeit Christianity to seduce and defile them. Where Baptist succession is not taught
and defended, alien immersion is likely to soon be accepted. Someone may say, "As
long as I'm there, it will not." That brings up a good point. You may not be, and if
you are, you may be so much in a minority that it will be the occasion of your departure.
Baptist succession must be taught, not just on Wednesday night, not just to a fourth of
the congregation, not just to the older folks, and not just once in fifteen or twenty
years.
Notice that each of the Protestant denominations
(Jesus' congregations are not Protestant) have held on to "something old"
from the Roman Catholics, some sort of works for salvation. All, except Jesus'
congregations that have earnestly contended for the faith once delivered to the saints,
have invented "something new" that is contradictory to God's Word. Most, even
many that I believe are still Jesus' congregations (if they will repent and turn from
their error), have "something borrowed" from the Roman Catholics, and that is
the "Christian" holidays that were adopted from paganism, and change the truth
of God into a lie. It seems that there are a blue million gimmicks, plans, programs,
methods, and devices that have come along to distract congregations from doing "the
first works" (Revelation 2:5). There is much talk these days about the bride of
Christ. The bride of Christ will not be dressed in "something old, something new,
something borrowed, something blue"!
All "guests" (Matthew 22:11-13) will be
required to have on a "wedding garment" which is the imputed righteousness of
God (Romans 4:6). No one will be present except those whom God has clothed with the work
of Christ. All efforts of our own to cloth ourselves will be worthless, as far as gaining
admittance into heaven and attending the wedding. But, notice in Revelation 19:7-8, that,
the bride of Christ will not only be clothed in the righteousness of God, but will have
additional clothing, also. It is seen in verse 7, that, the Lamb's wife will have
"made herself ready." Not only will the bride be clothed in the righteousness of
God, but it is seen in verse 8 that she will "be arrayed in fine linen, clean and
white," which "is the righteousness of saints." If we look at the
"Textus Receptus" (the original Greek), or in Strong's Concordance, it is seen
that the word translated, "righteousness" in Revelation 19:8 to describe
"the righteousness of saints" is different to the Greek word translated,
"righteousness" to describe "the righteousness which is by faith," as
in Hebrews 11:7. The Greek word in Revelation 19:8 is dikaioma (Strong's # 1345),
which Thayer's Greek-English Lexicon of the New Testament defines:
1. that which has been deemed right so as to have the force of law;
a. what has been established and ordained by law, an ordinance. . . .
The Greek word in Hebrews 11:7 is dikaiosune (Strong's # 1343),
which Thayer's Lexicon defines:
1. in the broad sense, the state of him who is such as he ought to
be, righteousness (Germ. Rechtbeschaffenheit); the condition
acceptable to God. . . .
Berry's Interlinear Greek-English New Testament translates the
word in Revelation 19:8 as "righteousnesses" (plural). The bride of Christ will
be made up of persons who not only have been saved by God's grace, but have also, by God's
grace, gone "fully after the LORD," no matter what the cost.
* * *
In 1554, Cardinal Hosius, a Catholic, and chairman
of the Council of Trent, wrote:
If the truth of religion were to be judged of by the readiness and
cheerfulness which a man of any sect shows in suffering, then the opinions and persuasions
of no sect can be truer or surer than those of the Anabaptist, since there have been none
for these twelve hundred years past that have been more grievously punished. (My
Church by J.B. Moody, p.314)
Cardinal Hosius was admitting that the Anabaptists had existed since at
least 354 A.D.
John Clark Ridpath, a Methodist who was Professor of
History at DePauw University, and author of the three volume Cyclopaedia of Universal
History, A History of the United States, and Ridpath's History of the World
wrote, in a letter to W.A. Jarrell, author of Baptist Church Perpetuity or History,
that:
I should not readily admit that there was a Baptist church as far back
as A.D. 100, though without doubt there were Baptists then, as all Christians were then
Baptists. (Baptist Church Perpetuity or History by W.A. Jarrell, p.59)
In 1819, two men, both members of the Dutch Reformed
Church, were appointed by the King of Holland to write a history of the Dutch Reformed
Church. They were J.J. Dermout, the Kings chaplain, and A. Ypeij, a professor of theology
in Groningen. They wrote History of the Dutch Reformed Church, which, on page 148
of Volume I, says:
. . . the Baptists may be considered as the only Christian community
which has stood since the days of the apostles, and as a Christian society which has
preserved pure the doctrines of the gospel through all ages.
|