Jarrel - Baptist Church Perpetuity - Landmark Baptist

Jarrel - Baptist Church Perpetuity - Landmark Baptist Jarrel - Baptist Church Perpetuity - Landmark Baptist

landmarkbaptist.org
from landmarkbaptist.org More from this publisher
09.02.2013 Views

odies from 1521 onwards … practiced strict communion. English General Baptists, from the beginning of their history in 1610, were strict. Their Confessions published in 1611, 1660, 1663 and 1678 plainly require baptism before communion. Their churches would not even allow attendance upon other worship. They said, ‘The whole Scripture is against such Balaamitic and wavering actions.’ They were never open communion until in the last century they became Socinians. The Confessions of Faith of the Particular Baptists in England are emphatic for strict communion. … The same is true of all the Confessions that can be found in Baptist history until 1688. Then the Century Confession of London which is always pleaded for open communion appeared. … This confession itself makes communion a church ordinance, and puts it after immersion; but as these brethren avowed their aim to show how little Baptists differed from Presbyterians and Congregationalists they granted an appendix that while most of the churches adhered to strict communion some few did not; and they recognized this fact and would not impose conditions upon these.” Rev. Dr. Underwood, f1035 of Chilwell College, Nottinghamshire, in a paper, read before the English Baptist Union, at Birmingham, Oct., 1864, said: “In the matter of communion our churches are far from being uniform. Until within a very few years nearly all our churches were close and strict.” In the language of Rev. Porter S. Burbank, one of the most representative Freewill Baptist defenders: “The Freewill Baptist connection in North America commenced A.D. 1780, in which year its first church was organized.” f1036 . From history and its own confession the Free-will Baptist sect is certainly of modern origin. The Six Principle “Baptists” are of the seventeenth century — Rev. A.D. Williams, their representative, beingwitness. f1037 They being Arminian in showing Baptists have ever been Calvinists, the foregoing chapters, have demonstrated them not in the line of Church Perpetuity. The so-called “German Baptists” or Tunkers thus originated in Germany, in 1708: “The first constituents were Alexander Mack and wife, John Kipin and wife, George Grevy, Andreas Bhony, Lucas Fetter and Joanna Nethigum. They agreed to read the Bible together, and edify one another in the way they had been brought up, for as yet they did not know there were any Baptists in the world. However, believers’ baptism and a Congregational church soon gained on them, insomuch that they were determined to obey the gospel in these matters. They desired Alexander Mack to baptize them, but he deemed himself in reality unbaptized, refused, upon which they cast lots to find who should be the administrator; on whom the lot fell hath been carefully concealed. However, baptized they were in the river Eder, by Schwartzenau, and then formed themselves into a church, choosing Alexander Mack as their minister.” f1038

So, without looking into their other errors, we can safely set aside the so-called “German Baptists” as Tunkers from all claim to Church Perpetuity. The German Seventh Day Baptists were originated in Germany, in 1728, by Conrad Beissel, one of the Tunkers. It is, therefore, a split off the Tunker sect. f1039 The origin of the Seventh Day English Baptists as a church is thus given by Rev. G.B. Utter, one of the most eminent representatives of that sect: “The Seventh Day Baptists in America date from about the same period that their brethren in England began to organize churches.” Then he dates its American rise in 1671. f1040 Prof. W.W. Everts, Jr., writes me that the ancient Baptists observed the first day of the week as the day of rest and worship. Save among Judaizers, who practiced circumcision and other such errors there were no scattered advocates of the seventh day, nor any permanent organization in its interest, until the rise of these so-called Seventh Day Baptists. Seventh Day “Baptists” certainly are a modern sect. Religious Denominations in the United States and Great Britain,” published by “Charles Desilver,” is probably the best book in its line. I have now examined all the different “Baptists” which it mentions — six beside the Regular Baptists — and have found that not one of them has any true claim to be the New Testament Baptists in the Church Perpetuity line. LET IT BE EMPHASIZED, THAT: ALL THIS TALK ABOUT THERE BEING TWENTY-SEVEN DIFFERENT KINDS OF BAPTISTS, AND THAT WE CAN’T KNOW WHICH OF THEM IS THE OLD BAPTIST CHURCH, ORIGINATES IN IGNORANCE, OR IN PURE HATRED TO THE BAPTIST CHURCH AND DISREGARD FOR VERACITY AND IS “DARKENING OF COUNSEL.” Like the fable of the dog on the hay, bitter and unscrupulous Baptist assailants, knowing their own churches are but modern sects, and that they cannot appropriate Church Perpetuity are determined to leave “unturned no stone” to make the people believe that “Baptists are in as bad a fix as we are.” f1041 Owing to this attempt to mislead honest men and women I have given the question, Who are the Old Baptists? much more space than it deserves.

So, without looking into their other errors, we can safely set aside the so-called<br />

“German <strong>Baptist</strong>s” as Tunkers from all claim to <strong>Church</strong> <strong>Perpetuity</strong>.<br />

The German Seventh Day <strong>Baptist</strong>s were originated in Germany, in 1728, by<br />

Conrad Beissel, one of the Tunkers. It is, therefore, a split off the Tunker sect.<br />

f1039<br />

The origin of the Seventh Day English <strong>Baptist</strong>s as a church is thus given by<br />

Rev. G.B. Utter, one of the most eminent representatives of that sect:<br />

“The Seventh Day <strong>Baptist</strong>s in America date from about the same period that<br />

their brethren in England began to organize churches.”<br />

Then he dates its American rise in 1671. f1040 Prof. W.W. Everts, Jr., writes me<br />

that the ancient <strong>Baptist</strong>s observed the first day of the week as the day of rest<br />

and worship. Save among Judaizers, who practiced circumcision and other<br />

such errors there were no scattered advocates of the seventh day, nor any<br />

permanent organization in its interest, until the rise of these so-called Seventh<br />

Day <strong>Baptist</strong>s. Seventh Day “<strong>Baptist</strong>s” certainly are a modern sect.<br />

Religious Denominations in the United States and Great Britain,” published by<br />

“Charles Desilver,” is probably the best book in its line. I have now examined<br />

all the different “<strong>Baptist</strong>s” which it mentions — six beside the Regular<br />

<strong>Baptist</strong>s — and have found that not one of them has any true claim to be the<br />

New Testament <strong>Baptist</strong>s in the <strong>Church</strong> <strong>Perpetuity</strong> line.<br />

LET IT BE EMPHASIZED, THAT: ALL THIS TALK ABOUT THERE BEING<br />

TWENTY-SEVEN DIFFERENT KINDS OF BAPTISTS, AND THAT WE CAN’T<br />

KNOW WHICH OF THEM IS THE OLD BAPTIST CHURCH, ORIGINATES IN<br />

IGNORANCE, OR IN PURE HATRED TO THE BAPTIST CHURCH AND<br />

DISREGARD FOR VERACITY AND IS “DARKENING OF COUNSEL.”<br />

Like the fable of the dog on the hay, bitter and unscrupulous <strong>Baptist</strong> assailants,<br />

knowing their own churches are but modern sects, and that they cannot<br />

appropriate <strong>Church</strong> <strong>Perpetuity</strong> are determined to leave “unturned no stone” to<br />

make the people believe that “<strong>Baptist</strong>s are in as bad a fix as we are.” f1041<br />

Owing to this attempt to mislead honest men and women I have given the<br />

question, Who are the Old <strong>Baptist</strong>s? much more space than it deserves.

Hooray! Your file is uploaded and ready to be published.

Saved successfully!

Ooh no, something went wrong!