Chapter 18 - Hardshells on Conversion

In this chapter I will be extending many of the things I have said in previous chapters on regeneration, faith, and repentance. I have shown how the modern PB's do not believe that all the elect will be converted, because they do not believe that "regeneration" and "conversion" are essentially the same, but believe one can exist without the other. This, of course, is not the view of the truly Old Baptists. All the confessions of faith of the Baptists, prior to the "rise of the Hardshells," believed that all the elect will not only be "regenerated" but also "converted." Even many Hardshell churches today have old "articles of faith" which say that "all the elect will be "converted."

KETOCTON PRIMITIVE BAPTIST ASSOCIATION ARTICLES OF FAITH

Adopted at organization of the Ketocton Association August 19, 1776, and reaffirmed by this Association exactly 200 years later, August 19, 1966."

Under Article #8 this old confession says:

"That those that are redeemed by Christ, are in due time called to a saving knowledge of the Lord Jesus - embracing Him as the only way to God and Savior of poor sinners. This effectual calling is accomplished by the agency of the Holy Ghost operating in a free, irresistable and unfrustrable manner, by which the understanding is enlightened and the will subjected to Christ. Hence the scriptures testify that they are made willing in the day of His power. This eternal change or new birth in the soul is wholly ascribed to the Power of God; for it is said of the regenerate, they are begotten of God, quickened of God, born of God - all expressive that it is the Lord's work, and He is entitled to the praise." (www.oldschoolbaptists.com/comh/ktart.html)

Under #7 of an old Primitive Baptist article faith, it is said -- "We believe that God's elect shall be called, converted, regenerated, and sanctified by the Holy Ghost." (A Set of Old School Primitive Baptist Articles of Faith - The Primitive Baptist Unity Website - home.hiwaay.net/~klhall/articles.html)

So, here are existing "Primitive Baptist" confessions that teach counter to modern Hardshell views on Conversion. The brethren who wrote the original articles of faith in the first churches in the Ketocton Association, like William Fristoe, believed what article #8 says, but modern so-called "Primitive Baptists" do not believe what they still profess to believe! I will have more to say about this in later chapters where their history is once again taken up and discussed. It is foolish for them to claim to be "Original" Baptists and yet do not believe what the Confessions say about faith, repentance, justification, regeneration and the new birth, the condition of the heathen who do not hear the gospel, etc. It is as Brother Peck said, "an arrogant claim without foundation." I too will have more to say about Brother Peck in later chapters.

Under the title "As to Articles of Faith," Hassell wrote:

"These are not held to be essential to the existence of a church, but of much importance to its order and stability. The churches composing the Kehukee Association, as well as all others in America, perhaps, of like precious faith, have articles enrolled, which are occasionally read for the instruction and benefit of the members in their church meetings. Primitive Baptists stand by their Articles; they read them, they believe them to be true, and they preach the doctrine contained in them; and hope that themselves and their successors will continue to do so even to the end of the world. And this they do with great pleasure, though well aware that such a course is disapproved by nearly all other professed Christians in America. While some denominations have creeds more or less orthodox, yet is is lamentably true that they are almost universally disregarded by the ministers and members of nearly all the religious sects and societies in the land. Evidently the tendency for the last hundred years, especially in the United States, has been to leave the ancient landmark of salvation by grace and move in the direction of salvation by works." (Hassel's History, page 836, 837)

But, it has been shown that "Primitive Bapists" do not believe their old confessions and articles of faith, so this is all fanciful belief. Did Tolley and dad stand behind the old confessions or did they not rather try to distance themselves from it?

WHAT IS THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN REGENERATION AND CONVERSION?
By Elder Hoyt Simms (Modern Hardshell)

"Conversion is a spiritual or moral change attending a change of belief. It means to turn from one belief or course to another. Regeneration is a change in one's nature by a spiritual birth, which gives one an inner spiritual nature. Jesus spoke of this to Nicodemus when He said, "Ye must be born again" (John 3:7). Conversion played a great part in the history of the early church as converts were made through the Gospel; that is, people were influenced or persuaded by the Gospel to turn to Christianity as a way of life. It is basically the same today.

Too often conversion and regeneration are confused. They are not the same. Conversion is a change in belief or the course of one's life. Regeneration is a change in one's nature. The means of conversion is primarily the Gospel. The means of regeneration is solely the work of God's Spirit and because of the distinct nature of the two, regeneration must come first. They may be experienced simultaneously, but even then the cause or means of each remains distinct as indicated above. Regeneration makes children of God; conversion causes children of God to become Christians. Regeneration brings people into a saving relationship with God; conversion then brings them into a serving relationship to Him."

(http://www.oldlinemessenger.homestead.com/files/ SOME_QUESTIONS_AND_ANSWERS_ABOUT_PRIMITIVE_BAPTIST.htm)

A man need not be a Christian to be "regenerated"! Where is there a single verse of Scripture that teaches such an idea? There ought to be several plain passages of Scripture that teach such a thing. Where are those verses of Scripture?

From the above commentary by Simms it is obvious that he sees "regeneration" as not causing a man to "change his beliefs" at all! If a man "believes" he is not a sinner, that he is as good as the next, and then he is "regenerated," according to Hardshellism, he will still believe that! Why? Because "regeneration" does not change belief! A man can "believe" that God is an elephant and Hardshell "regeneration" won't change that at all! Who can believe such nonsense?

How he can say all this in view of Ephesians 2:1-5 is beyond me to comprehend. All the Hardshells will acknowledge that these verses are clearly talking about "regeneration." Yet, what is it that this "quickening" does in the life of the Ephesians? Did it change their "course"? If it did not, then were they still, after this "quickening," "walking after the course of this world"? Hardshells, like Simms, will say that "regeneration" does not change a man's "course"! Paul said it did and would! I will take what Paul said about it and so will every really sound Old Baptist.

Hardshell "Theologian," R. V. Sarrels wrote (again, from his "Systematic Theology"):

"The issue in this whole matter, however, turns upon the question of logical priority, upon which is antecedent and which is consequent: that is, whether regeneration precedes conviction and conversion, or whether these precede regeneration. There is no way to bring cause and effect so close together that they are chronologically indistinguishable. The whole aim here by Shedd and Dr. Strong, and of practically all other theologians who deal with this question, is to dispose of the time element so completely and effectively that cause becomes conditioned upon effect, rather than effect upon cause. Dr. Shedd, though seemingly inconsistent in setting up the regeneration-conviction-conversion syndrome, truthfully states in another place that, "Conversion is that action of man which results from regeneration." (Dogmatic Theology, II, 529) (From page 361, 362, of Sarrels "Systematic Theology")

But, if regeneration and conversion are both "effects" of the same cause rather than the cause or effect of the other, then does not this line of argument become chaff before a gust of wind? Where does the Bible say that "regeneration causes conversion? Where do the New Testament writers distinguish between the two and argue for the "logical" or "chronological order" of one over the other and who make it a crucial point of doctrine?

Again Sarrels writes:

"All efforts to dispose of the time element in the regeneration-conviction-conversion picture and reduce these to absolute simultaneity must forever fail. The crux of this problem is to establish anteriority in this work. If life is logically antecedent to action, then it is impossible that action, itself a consequent, could be related causatively to that which is its antecedent. Until he is regenerated, man is dead in sin, and the cancellation of the chronological ingredient from this equation, if it could be done, would not and could not make action antecedent to life. No amount of literary effort can so effectively dispose of the time element in this formula as to give logical anteriority to either conviction or conversion...neither conviction nor conversion comes ahead of regeneration, or the giving of life, for it is impossible that that which is caused could stand ahead of that which caused it." (page 362)

But again, where is the passage that says that regeneration causes conversion? That would be like saying that regeneration causes regeneration, or quickening causes regeneration, or regeneration causes new creation, etc. Again, there is a separate cause producing both regeneration and conversion, two aspects of the same experience.

Under "A Critical Study Of Conviction," Sarrels writes further:

"In the restricted sense that we here use the term conviction, it means a decision reached with respect to the justness of God's condemnation of sin. The process of conviction may be gradual, or conceivably quite sudden, yet in whichever case, the result is the same. The convicted person is brought to feel his own guilt and helplessness, and to put his seal of approval of God's act in condemning him. The term, therefore, connotes introversion, the directing of the interest inward. It is the objectifying of one's self in analysis and appraisal. But conviction is no mere psychological process. It involves the seeing one one's self as a sinner justly condemned by the God against whom one has sinned, and the realization that without the grace of God one's doom is certain. Dr. Hodge states with great meaning that "every soul truly convinced of sin is brought to feel and acknowledge, (1) That he is guilty in the sight of God, and justly exposed to the sentence of his violated law. (2) That he is utterly polluted and defiled by sin...that his heart is not right, that sin exists in him as a power or law working in him all manner of evil. And (3) That he can make no atonement for his guilt, and that he cannot free himself from the power of sin. (Systematic Theology, II, 273) (page 363)

Can anyone then know any of this without the gospel and word of God? How can one be convinced of all these things, of all this truth, if it is not by the gospel? Do those supposed "regenerated heathen" know all this? They know the true God against whom they have sinned? They know of his atonement for sin? All this apart from the gospel? Where is this taught in the Bible?

Also, if the Holy Spirit convicts those who are already born again, already washed, cleansed, forgiven, sanctified, and "freed from sin," then does the Holy Spirit not convince such of a falsehood when he convinces such a one that they are condemned and unclean?

Listen to Elder Sarrels on this point:

"Conviction is impossible for the unregenerate man. How can the unregenerate man, still dead in sin and hostile to God, act contrary to his nature and move in agreement with God? How can the unregenerate man be convinced that his estimate of values is wrong?" (ibid)

So, only the regenerated, cleansed, and justified man can be convicted, right? Of what does the Holy Spirit convince the person? That he is condemned, unclean, a sinner bound in sin? Yes, that is what the Hardshells will admit. Then, I ask you, does the Holy Spirit not convince a man of a falsehood when he tells him he is unclean, unholy, and condemned? Does he not lie to him when he tells him he needs to be clean when he is already clean?

If I meet a man who has just been regenerated, cleansed of his sins, will the word of God have any cleansing power for him? Will there be anything to cleanse by the word?

Sarrels says again:

"True conviction is exclusively the experience of the quickened or regenerate man. Like conversion to which, under the working of the Holy Spirit, it leads, conviction results from regeneration. He who is convicted of sin sees himself to be a guilty sinner (BUT IS HE REALLY?) in the sight of God, and perceives that his own righteousness is as "filthy rags." He knows and feels that if he is ever saved it can be only by the grace of God. With no righteousness of his own to plead, this broken, penitent wretch--wretch in his own sight, but not in God's sight--is ready to turn to God." (ibid)


Did you notice that? "Not in God's sight." In other words, the convicted soul is not really what the Holy Spirit is convincing him that he is! One senses that Sarrels felt the weight of such a "reductio ad absurdum," for he writes in closing these words.

"...the quickened person in conviction sees himself NOT as he actually is, but as he would be without the grace of God." (ibid)

Can you believe that bunk? A man under conviction is being convicted of only hypothetical sin! He is not being convicted of actual sin! The Holy Spirit is telling the convicted soul a lie when he tells him he is lost and condemned! The Holy Spirit lies when he convinces such an one that they are unclean and in need of pardon and justification! Unbelievable!

On John 16:8-11 he writes:

"...this statement reveals to us the work of the Holy Spirit in effectively convicting and converting." (364)

Then again writes:

"No one could reasonably claim that the Holy Spirit will convict every person in the world. There must be some sort of restriction or limitation placed on the term "world" in this text. We seem forced to conclude, moreover, that as many as are embraced in the term will actually be convicted of sin. There can be no reasonable question about the effectiveness of the Spirit's work in convicting the "world," all the "world" embraced in the text. Christ says the Holy Spirit "will convict the world."" (ibid)

He says that the "world" is the "Jacobic world," meaning the elect. But, if this is so, what of his "Conditionalism"? Here is a post regenerative work that God will without fail do for all the regenerated. Not many "Conditionalist" will say that God does anything irresistably in the life of the believer "after regeneration." If a man is convicted after regeneration, it will be by the free act and power of his own will, not because God's grace lays constraint upon him to do so, but because, as I said, everything after regeneration is done by the free will obedience of the regenerated soul.

You will not get a uniform answer on whether this "convicting work," post regeneration, comes solely by the gospel and word of God, but I suspect most will affirm that conviction does take place in the hearts of heathen who are supposedly "regenerated" but who do not know anything of the truth of the gospel or word of God.

Sarrels then says:

"Those who claim that the convicting work of the Holy Spirit is limited to gospel areas are hard pressed when they make the term "world" have a universal application." (pages 364, 365)

There you have his view that conviction of sin is something that those who know nothing of the Bible or its God, or its Messiah, do experience that conviction that is taught in the Bible. It is absolutely absurd. Yet, I have myself heard sermons where some Hardshell heretic was trying to talk about some kind of conviction of sin that the Indians talked about. But, such was nothing more than the Indian expressing some view of the afterlife and some fears and hopes in regard to it. It is an absolute "cunningly devised fable" that tries to make man's natural fears of his sins and of the afterlife the product of the convicting work of the Spirit in regeneration! It really does not deserve an answer but I have said enough already in dispute of such an idea that it deserves no more time.

True conviction of sin has God, the true God of the Bible, as the object against which one has sinned. True conviction brings true repentance and faith in God, and these cannot be had except through the gospel.

He wrote further:

"Under conviction of sin there are three things which the Holy Spirit brings home to the heart of the quickened person:

1. The fact of sin.
2. The nature of sin.
3. The desert of sin." (page 365)

But again, he has a person "regenerated" who has not yet been convicted of sin and who therefore is, while "regenerated," still not cognizant of the fact of sin, or that he is a condemned sinner, and is still not aware of the nature and desert of sin! Again, where is this baloney in the word of God? This is an invention of men!

Then he writes:

"We here give some attention to a matter mentioned earlier in this chapter: Since we hold, (a) that God, without the use of the gospel as a means, regenerates his loved ones in heathen lands as well as in cultured lands, and, (b) that in all of these lands, both heathen and cultured, the Holy Spirit performs his convicting work, we make the following differential observation: As the innate knowledge of God's existence, or First Truths, may exist in only faintly discernible ideas about the Supreme Being, and may range from this all but dormant and little understood stamp of the Maker to the highest and most enlightened concept of God's existence, so the facts connected with conviction--and conversion--may begin with the faintly dim ideas about sin, righteousness, and judgment, about repentance, faith, and justification, and range from this to the most advanced intellectual concepts concerning these progressive steps in the experience of a believer in gospel lands." (pages 365, 366)

A man who has "dormant" and "little understood ideas" about God, sin, and condemnation, has not been convicted, no matter how much the Hardshells try to show otherwise by their infamous Hardshell "logic." Again, where is this in the word of God?

Sarrels goes on to say that the person being convicted is also "convicted of righteousness," and "convicted of judgment," and then says:

"This person, having been brought to understand "the exceeding sinfulness of sin," and his own responsibility for this sin against God, now understands that he is a sinful, guilty person justly exposed to the judgment of God's violated law. He knows "If his soul were sent to hell, God's righteous law approves it well."" (368)

God taught him all this without ministers of his word? Where is there any evidence of this in the Bible or in the history of heathen and pagan nations?

He writes again:

"Before we pass on it might be well to note that not every convicted person understands all that is involved in the convicting work of the Holy Spirit. Still, all is there. No one understands all about nature, yet all is there to be understood." (ibid)

"No one understands all about nature...yet"? Yes, but a man under conviction has more than faint views about his lost condition and of the God against whom he has sinned and with whom he has to do. And, if he comes to God, he must believe in him, the true God, and not just in any false god.

Sarrels writes again, saying:

"We believe Dr. Strong pretty well states the view of all schools of Conditionalism on the subject we are here discussing when he says conversion is "the obverse side of...regeneration" (Systemative Theology, 831). The obverse side of a thing is its counterpart or complement. Conversion, he says again, "is the human side or aspect of regeneration" (ibid, 829). Dr. Shedd says, "Evangelical faith is the particular act that unites the soul to Christ (Dogmatic Theology, II, 532). Dr. Mullins says conversion is "The turning of a sinner from his sins unto Christ for his salvation" (The Christian Religion, 377). As a sort of final touch here, we quote Dr. Strong again, "If a person is ever regenerated, it must be in and through a movement of his own will" (Systematic Theology, 830). And both Luther and Calvin held that the act of faith, which includeds or implies conversion, precedes regeneration. So at the very bottom of the regeneration and conversion questions neither the older Calvinism nor the Reformed Theology differs from Arminianism." (368)

That is an ignorant statement and one not a 32nd cousin to the truth. Those who believe that God saves and regenerates through the means of his preached gospel are not, by this fact alone, to be considered "Arminian." And, to believe that the elect are "called by the gospel" does not in any way mean that this calling to faith and repentance is the sinner "meeting conditions" by his own free will initiative and power. This is just more misrepresentation from the Hardshells.

Sarrels then says:

"...in perhaps the vast majority of cases the elements of conversion--repentance, faith, and justification--may be present only embryonically, an analysis of these elements brings us to a fuller appreciation of the conversion experience." (ibid)

Again, it is an attempt at "Sophistry" to try and speak of people having "faith," "repentance" and "justification" in a "non-cognitive" manner, on the "sub-conscious level." There is no foundation for such a view in the Scriptures. It is a novel idea, a human invention. It is ironic that these heretics who have traditionally decried "human inventions" have "invented" so many novel ideas in Christian doctrine.

Where in the Bible is there evidence that a man is "converted" in this manner of which the Hardshells speak?

Sarrels writes again, saying:

"Faith implies and involves: 1. Faith in the existence of the holy God. "He that cometh to God must believe that he is" (Heb. 11:6). While the consciousness of sin and guilt implies an experimental conviction of the existence of the holy God against Whom the sin is committed, it also implies a faith in this God and a trust in him. The unregenerate man is self-centered. He believes in himself and trusts in himself. When this man is quickened and brought under conviction he no longer believes in himself and no longer places trust in himself. Quickening, or regeneration, changes his center of gravity." (370)

Notice how he tries to put "regeneration" and "conviction" together, implying that a man does "learn" something in "regeneration." This is the same man who has consistently said that "regeneration" was "not cognitive" but on the "unconscious level." But here, when he speaks of "faith," he speaks of what a man is "conscious" of, of what he "believes." But, given what he has said in the previous citations (and those to follow) he does not believe that "conviction" is a part of "regeneration."

He writes further:

"Every regenerated person, in some measure of understanding, has a "hope as an anchor of the soul, both sure and steadfast, and that entereth into that within the veil" (Heb. 6:19). This hope, this hope of eternal life (Titus 1:2), bridges the grave and links God's child to eternity. However far, by reason of biological background, tuition, or weaknesses of the flesh, one may wander from the path of truth and righteousness, or however little one may ever have known about these, the hope that when this life is over he will be free from all the hurtful things common to life here makes him "hold on his way."" (page 423)

This view of things is not anything even near kin to what our Baptist forefathers believed about either regeneration or conversion or faith. They certainly did not believe that any non-Christian had any hope of eternal life. To affirm that any idol worshipping heathen who does not know the God of Abraham and his Son Jesus Christ has the same hope as Christians is the worst lie ever told and very damaging to the cause of the Lord and of his gospel.

He continues with his anti Christian sentiments, writing:

"In the final count there is absolutely nothing of more concern to God's child than that at the last he will be at home with God, and to be "persuaded that He is able to keep that which has been committed to Him against that day" (II Tim. 1:12)." (ibid)

This is some "persuasion" that the elect experience in Biblical regeneration? You have got to be kidding! What has an idol worshipping heathen who does not know our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ committed unto the Lord his life? How dare any Hardshell take such a verse and apply it to some unconscious experience or to some experience of a heathen's devotion to a false god!

If this supposed "regenerated heathen" really "loved" God, would he not seek out the Messiah for that which his supposedly regenerated heart" is longing? I think that I can say with Paul that such a "persuasion comes not from him who calls you," but from the underworld. (Galatians 5:8)

He says again:

""We have the mind of Christ," says Paul (I Cor. 2:16)...However embryonic this mind of Christ may be in one's conscious life, even among civilized people, or however indistinct and distorted this may be in saved people who have no knowledge of Christ in the gospel sense, the mind of Christ is there; as something absolutely native to the new creation, it is there in every person on earth. Paul did not preach ANOTHER God to the men of Athens who had gathered on Mars' Hill; he preached to them the very God WHOM THEY INGNORANTLY WORSHIPPED." (Ibid)

I have already cited part of this before to show how absurd and anti Christian are the views of the Hardshells. I have also stated how they are no different from the Freemason philosophy and theology. It is indeed very ironic. They have historically opposed the "Masons" with great zeal but their belief relative to "saved people in all religions," is no different than what the "Freemasons" teach. Their "brotherhood" also will encompass anyone of any religion who simply professes belief in some "god," some "higher power." The way the PB's explain the brotherhood and family of God's elect, relative to their common faith and salvation, is no different from "Freemasonry Philosophy."

Paul absolutely did not preach the same God to the Athenians. He preached to them a God that they did not worship. To "worship" God Almighty "ignorantly" is to "worship" another in his stead.

In commenting upon the words of David, "My heart is fixed, O God, my heart is fixed" (Psa. 57:7), Sarrels says:

"Research in the field of psychic phenomena has brought to light the amazing potential resident even in backward races. And in these subconscious regions God works in implanting this same fixedness of heart which David had." (Page 424)

It is blasphemous to claim that the heathen, who "know not God," and who are "without hope," would have the same fixedness of heart upon "God" as did King David! And to try to prove that people have this heart fixation upon the Lord without cognitive awareness of it is ludicrous. These Hardshells have so much going on with people on the supposedly "sub-conscious level." They can believe and repent on the sub-conscious level, they can be convicted on the sub-conscious level, yea even be converted, know Jesus and the gospel, and even persevere in the faith of Christ all in a manner in which the person is totally unaware! Who hath heard such things?

And again Sarrels writes:

"Pure reason leads us to hold that God's child, who in his heart has been brought into vital union with Christ, should in fellowship with him and in step with him move on to the victorious end." (ibid)

Again, here is a man who is "regenerated" and "knows" and "loves" God on a level of which he is not even aware! It is a far-fetched and fantastic idea and has no Biblical support whatsoever. This becomes clear if you read these Hardshells, like Sarrels, who rarely cite a verse of Scripture but keep saying, "Pure reason leads us to hold" such and such a view of things. They will cite their speculations and deductions from metaphysical fields of science and say "Research in the field of psychic phenomena" teaches us so and so. They need to throw "human logic" and the carnal reasonings of their natural minds out the window and accept by faith what the Scriptures plainly teach and quit trying to take their view to the Bible and hack and hew on it till it is made to conform to their man-made theorems.

Concerning the view that "the gospel is God's appointed means to reach and save the unregenerate," he says it is "essentially Pelagian," which is an utter falsehood. Since he argues that "commands imply ability," it is he who is Pelagian. (ibid)

Sarrels writes again, saying:

"Not only does this view limit salvation to areas where the gospel is preached; it actually limits salvation to those who believe the gospel and obey it. (As the Scriptures themselves do!) The Moslems, the Buddhists, the Brahmans, and all other non-Christian adherents, even in gospel lands, are according to the strict sense of this view doomed. Not only this--strictly interpreted and applied, this view would exclude Jews and Unitarians, and, by some, even Catholics, who do not believe what is preached (like the gospel?) as some religious groups would present the matter. These are hard facts which need to be placed before the world. For reasons which are but briefly alluded to in some parts of the work, but developed more fully in other parts, we hold that God, despite the teachings of man, saves his chosen people all over the world." (page 434)

Yes, he and his Hardshell heretics can believe that Christ and gospel rejecters are saved but we will just take what the Bible says about. Paul said:

"And to you who are troubled rest with us, when the Lord Jesus shall be revealed from heaven with his mighty angels, In flaming fire taking vengeance on them that know not God, (like the heathen) and that obey not the gospel of our Lord Jesus Christ: Who shall be punished with everlasting destruction from the presence of the Lord, and from the glory of his power; When he shall come to be glorified in his saints, and to be admired in all them that believe (because our testimony among you was believed) in that day." (II Thess. 1:7-10)

Did Paul "limit" salvation to those who obeyed the gospel? Did he allow for the salvation of non-Christians as Sarrels? No, he did not. Neither did Jesus. Jesus said:

"I said therefore unto you, that ye shall die in your sins: for if ye believe not that I am he, ye shall die in your sins." (John 8:24)

The God of the Hardshells may be the same God as the Athenian idolators, and as the worshippers of Buddha, or Allah, or of some other false deity, but not the God of Christians.

He writes these words next:

"This view makes God's system of operations to be less efficient than Satan's system of operations. No one denies that Satan carries on his work all over the world without the use of documents, preachers, or witnesses. Out in slum districts, in gangland's hide-outs, in vice centers, and in areas of the world where the Bible is unknown, this arch enemy of God is driving day and night to further his cause. And Satan does this by working directly and immediately in the hearts of men." (ibid)

Can you believe that such argumentation comes from a professing minister of the Bible, and of the Lord Jesus Christ? Yet, he is not alone in this "line of argumentation." I have seen it argued vehemently in debate by the Hardshells. The famous debater Claud Cayce, certainly argued this regularly. So did the famed debater John R. Daily. They even used charts to get the point across, arguing that the "means" method of calling the elect to salvation made the Devil more successful than God! But, does this "line of argument" really help them any at all? Can this same argument not be turned back on them? Do they not believe that "conversion" only takes place through the gospel? Do they not teach that this is God's method and means to bring the knowledge of Christ to those elect who have been regenerated? Well, is the Devil not "converting" more than God by their own argumentation? Silly boys, come, reason better than that!

Besides, let us pay close attention to these words of Christ about the ancient cities of Tyre and Sodom.

"Then began he to upbraid the cities wherein most of his mighty works were done, because they repented not: Woe unto thee, Chorazin! woe unto thee, Bethsaida! for if the mighty works, which were done in you, had been done in Tyre and Sidon, they would have repented long ago in sackcloth and ashes. But I say unto you, It shall be more tolerable for Tyre and Sidon at the day of judgment, than for you. And thou, Capernaum, which art exalted unto heaven, shalt be brought down to hell: for if the mighty works, which have been done in thee, had been done in Sodom, it would have remained until this day. But I say unto you, That it shall be more tolerable for the land of Sodom in the day of judgment, than for thee." (Matt. 11:20-24)

When Brother Carey began to stir up the Baptists brotherhood relative to their duty of "preaching the gospel to all men," with the purpose of saving souls, saving the elect whom God had predestined be called by that means, the "Hyper-Calvinists who were present within the Baptist' ranks began to take umbrage at the language Carey and others used to stir up the people to give of their money to support the missionaries. The "Hyper-Calvinists thought it was blashemous to suggest that one of the elect would not be saved if the people did not send missionaries.

I will be citing more along this line in a later chapter, but let me just first reply here by referring all to the words of Christ just cited. Can I not legitimitly say, as Christ himself, that some in Sodom and Tyre would have been saved had they had the means of seeing the miracles of Christ? Christ says these "would have repented," would have been saved, would not have been destroyed and bound over to eternal judgment, had they simply had the same external means as did those to whom he preached.

If such can be said, then it can also be said that many people went to Hell, people who "could have been saved, had they had" the external means of the gospel of grace. So, this "line of argument" may "sound good" to those who want to believe things based upon their own "carnal reasoning" and perverted "logic," but to those who know the Bible, these "mental meanderings" of these Hardshell heretics are known to lead into the deepest darkness of error.

Again we hear our famed "apologist" write:

"Certainly our objections here are not against preaching the gospel of Christ in all the world. (Oh God forbid that anyone should get that impression!) But when it is claimed that this gospel is meant to serve an end which it cannot serve, and which God never intended that it should serve, then we must register a solemn protest. (Is that what it is? Since the Baptists have believed this throughout their history, where is all this "protest" prior to the "Hardshells"?) The gospel of Jesus Christ has meant more to this cold world than any other message ever proclaimed by man, but it does not do, it cannot do, that which is done only by the recreative or regenerative power of Almighty God. It is inconceivable to us that a loving, merciful God would hinge the destiny of a lost world on a haphazard system to be executed by inattentive, careless, and often indifferent men." (ibid)

Well, brother, God is the one who is in control, ultimately, of the whole affair. Did not Paul end by saying, "how shall they preach except they be sent?" Will God not be sure to send the gospel where it needs to be preached so that his elect may be gathered and called to life in Jesus his Son? But, I would ask Sarrels, "has God not suspened conversion on that system you just called "haphazard"? And, does the spreading of that converting word, does it not depend upon those whom God sends, in some degree? Hardshells are infamous for "arguing from both sides of their mouths" on matters.

Before closing this section I want to cite some from the works of that great Old Baptist, Dr. John Gill.

Dr. Gill wrote:

"2b1. First, I shall consider the various parts of faith in Christ, or what is requisite to constitute it.

2b1a. Knowledge of Christ is necessary to the exercise of faith on him, for "How shall they believe in him of whom they have not heard?" and if they have not so much as heard of him, they cannot know him, and consequently cannot exercise faith upon him; and "How shall they hear without a preacher" to make him known unto them? #Ro 10:14. When our Lord put the question to the man who had been blind, "Dost thou believe on the Son of God? he answered and said, Who is he, Lord, that I might believe on him?" upon which Christ made himself known unto him, "Jesus said unto him, Thou hast seen him, and it is he that talketh with thee"; his eyes had been opened to see him, and his ears now heard him, and both being true in a spiritual sense he immediately expressed his faith in him, saying, "Lord, I believe", and as a proof and evidence of it, "worshipped him", #Joh 9:35-38. Previous to faith in Christ, as a Saviour, there must be knowledge of the want of him; as such a man must be made sensible of the sinfulness of his nature, and of the exceeding sinfulness of sin, and of the just demerit of it, and of the miserable state and condition it has brought him into, out of which none but Christ the Saviour can deliver him; and therefore he then applies to him as the apostles in distress did, saying, "Lord, save us, we perish!" #Mt 8:25 he must be made acquainted with his impotency to save himself; that his own right hand, his works and services, cannot save him; that if ever he is saved it must be by the grace of God, through the blood and righteousness of Christ, and not by them; he must have knowledge of the fulness and abilities of Christ as a Saviour; he must have seen him full of grace and truth, as having all the fulness of the blessings of grace in him suitable to his wants, whose redemption is plenteous, his salvation complete, he being made everything to his people they want, and able to save to the uttermost all that come unto God by him; and he being just such a Saviour they need, and his salvation so suitable to them, they that know his name, Jesus the Saviour, put their trust in him; and the more ready they are to do this, as they are fully convinced there is no other Saviour; that salvation is in him, and in none else; that it is in vain to expect it from any other quarter from the works and services of the creature, and therefore determine upon it they shall not be their saviours; but say, with Job, "Though he slay me yet will I trust in him--he also shall be my salvation!" #Ps 9:10 #Job 13:15,16. Hence knowledge being so requisite to faith, and included in it, faith is sometimes expressed by it, #Isa 53:11 Joh 17:3 both in spiritual knowledge and special faith, eternal life is begun, and with which it is connected; and so knowledge and faith are joined together as inseparable companions, and as expressive of the same thing; "And we have known and believed the love that God hath to us", are firmly persuaded of it, #1Jo 4:16 and some of the strongest acts of faith in the saints have been expressed by words of knowledge; "I know that my Redeemer liveth, &c. I know in whom I have believed", &c. #Job 19:25 1Ti 1:12."

And further:

"2b1b. An assent unto Christ as a Saviour, enters into the true nature of faith; not a bare naked assent of the mind to the truth of the person and offices of Christ; that he is the Son of God, the Messiah, Prophet, Priest, and King, such as has been yielded to him by men destitute of true faith in him, as by Simon Magus and others, yea, by the devils themselves, #Lu 4:34,41.

"Of all the poison, says Dr. Owen {4}, which at this day is diffused in the minds of men, corrupting them from the mystery of the gospel, there is no part that is more pernicious than this one perverse imagination, that to "believe in Christ" is nothing at all but to "believe the doctrine of the gospel!" which yet we grant is included therein.''

Such a proposition, that Christ is the Saviour of the chief of sinners, or that salvation is alone by him, is not presented merely under the notion of its being "true", and assented to as such, but under the notion of its being "good", a suitable, acceptable, and preferable good, and to be chosen as the good part was by Mary; as being both a "faithful saying" to be believed as true, and as "worthy of all acceptation", to be received and embraced as the chiefest good. Faith is an assent to Christ as a Saviour, not upon an human, but a divine testimony, upon the record which God has given of his Son, and of eternal life in him. Some of the Samaritans believed on Christ because of the saying of the woman; but others because of his own word, having heard him themselves, and knew that he was indeed the Christ, the Saviour of the world: true faith, in sensible sinners, assents to Christ, and embraces him not merely as a Saviour of men in general; but as a special, suitable Saviour for them in particular: it proceeds upon Christ's being revealed "in" them, as well as "to" them, by the Spirit of wisdom and revelation, in the knowledge of him as a Saviour that becomes them; it comes not merely through external teachings, by the hearing of the word from men; but having "heard and learned of the Father", such souls come to Christ, that is, believe in him, #Joh 6:45 not the doctrine of him only, but in him himself."

And further:

"2b1c. Knowledge of Christ as a Saviour, and an assent unto him as such, is attended with love and affection to him; faith works by love, love always accompanies faith, at least follows it; Christ is precious to them that believe; they love him, value him, prefer him, to all others as a Saviour; (Gill did not believe that there were heathen who had faith in Christ in the manner the Hardshells teach) and every truth respecting Christ is not "barely assented to", but as they receive Christ, they receive the "love of the truth" with him."

And then again these good words:

2b1d. "True, spiritual, special faith in Christ includes in it a dependence on him, trust and confidence in him alone for everlasting life and salvation; it is a soul's venturing on Christ, resolving if it perishes it will perish at his feet; it is a resignation of itself to Christ, a committing its soul, and the important welfare and salvation of it into Christ's hands, trusting him with all, looking to him, relying on him, and acquiescing in him as the alone Saviour. All which will more fully appear by considering,

2b2. Secondly, the various acts of faith on Christ, as described in the sacred Scriptures.

2b2a. It is expressed by seeing the Son; this is one of the first and one of the lowest acts of faith, and yet eternal life is annexed unto it; "This is the will of him that sent me", says Christ, "that everyone which seeth the Son, and believeth on him, may have everlasting life", #Joh 6:40 it is a sight of the glories and excellencies of Christ's person, of the fulness of his grace and righteousness, and of the completeness and suitableness of his salvation. It is a looking to Jesus, the author and finisher of faith, a view of him as altogether lovely, the chiefest among ten thousand. Faith is a light struck into the heart of a sinner whose understanding was darkened, yea darkness itself, till God commanded light to shine in darkness; by which, though first but glimmering, he sees himself a sinner, miserable and undone, without a Saviour, when Christ is held forth in the gospel to be looked at by him; that is a glass in which he is to be beheld, and where he is openly set forth crucified and slain for sinners; and so is the hope set before them, both to be looked at and to be laid hold on by them, who was typified by the brazen serpent set upon a pole by Moses, for the Israelites bitten by the serpents to look at and live, #Joh 3:14,15. And not only sensible sinners are directed to behold the Lamb of God which taketh away the sin of the world, as John's hearers were by him; and are encouraged by the ministers of the word, who show unto men the way of salvation, to look to and believe on the Lord Jesus Christ and be saved; but they are encouraged by Christ himself; who says, "Behold me, behold me", to a nation not called by his name, "look unto me, and be ye saved, all the ends of the earth, for I am God, and there is none else!" #Isa 65:1 45:22 which sight of him fills their souls with love to him, as the most lovely and amiable one, with eager desires after him, and an interest in him, signified by hungering and thirsting after his righteousness, and panting after his salvation. And this sight of Christ by faith is nigh, and not afar off; now, and not hereafter; and for a man's self, and not another; he looks to him not merely as a Saviour of others, but to him as a Saviour and Redeemer suitable for him."

(His By Grace--"John Gill: A Body of Doctrinal & Practical Divinity-Practical Book 1, Chapter 6")

From all this it is evident that Gill's understanding of "saving faith" is far different from the understanding of the Hardshells. They might like Gill in some areas, and some of the uninformed might think Gill is a Hardshell, but one can see from the above citations that Gill rejected Hardshellism.

Here are the passages where we have the word "converted" used.

"For this people's heart is waxed gross, and their ears are dull of hearing, and their eyes they have closed; lest at any time they should see with their eyes and hear with their ears, and should understand with their heart, and should be converted, and I should heal them." (Matt. 13:15)

I asked in my last chapter, in my "Second Cracking" of the "Hard Shells," where in the gospels of Matthew, Mark and Luke is "regeneration" discussed. There was a reason for that question. I do not think any will find it discussed at all in these gospels. The above might be an exception. But, it is neo-Hardshells who reject the word "conversion" as referring to "regeneration." As I have said, the first generation Hardshells did not take that approach on the word "conversion."

But, in the "conversion" of the text above, they have ears, eyes, and a heart, but they need to open them and come to "understand" in order to be saved and converted. So, will they not say that this verse is not talking about "regeneration"?

"And said, Verily I say unto you, Except ye be converted, and become as little children, ye shall not enter into the kingdom of heaven." (18:3)

Again, this verse has been so abused by the Hardshells, especially in debate with their adversaries. They have tried to find a verse that upholds their idead that every child of God is regenerated in precisely the same way so that they can get one to believe that all adults are regenerated like the infants. But, there are some problems here. The neo-Hardshells do not believe that the word "conversion" can be applied to "regeneration." They would therefore have to agree with many of their Hardshell forefathers. But, it is clear that this verse is not talking about an unconscious coming to Christ, something that supposed "regenerated infants" experience. It is connected with mental understanding, with humility of thought, and such is not the case with infants in the womb nor of an experience that is non-cognitive.

"That seeing they may see, and not perceive; and hearing they may hear, and not understand; lest at any time they should be converted, and their sins should be forgiven them." (Mark 4:12)

Notice here that "conversion" is connected with pardon of sin, with a change of understanding issuing in perceiving truth. So, the PB's will not make this verse to refer to regeneration. Again, you will probably find that they have no verses in the first three gospels that talk about what they call "regeneration."

"But I have prayed for thee, that thy faith fail not: and when thou art converted, strengthen thy brethren." (Luke 22:32)

Conversion does take place after initial conversion and regeneration, for we are, as God's children, in constand need of change, of reform, of conforming our thinking and lives to the Lord and his word and Spirit. So, though it does not always speak of initial regeneration, still the idea of change in the heart, mind, and understanding is integral to the word. The very idea that "conversion" could be on the sub-conscious level is preposterous and not in keeping with the meaning and import of the word.

"He hath blinded their eyes, and hardened their heart; that they should not see with their eyes, nor understand with their heart, and be converted, and I should heal them." (John 12:40)

Again, similar to what was said in the first three gospels, where conversion is connected with eyes being opened, ears hearing, the mind perceiving and the heart understanding. It is connected with saving knowledge, as Gill stated.

"Repent ye therefore, and be converted, that your sins may be blotted out, when the times of refreshing shall come from the presence of the Lord." (Acts 3:19)

This is a difficult verse for the Hardshells. Here repentance and conversion are both commanded, are both intimately connected with what it means to be pardoned, to have our sins blotted out. What do they do here? They will of course say that the forgiveness of sins is a temporal parental forgiveness that has nothing to do with eternal salvation. But, they are simply rebelling against the text.

"For the heart of this people is waxed gross, and their ears are dull of hearing, and their eyes have they closed; lest they should see with their eyes, and hear with their ears, and understand with their heart, and should be converted, and I should heal them." (28:27)

Again, the same idea as in the other verses. Nothing here intimates that one can have "embryonic conversion," or any other non-cognitive experience.

"Let him know, that he which converteth the sinner from the error of his way shall save a soul from death, and shall hide a multitude of sins." (James 5:20)

This too is another verse that shows that "conversion" is somethings that continues in the life of the believer as part of their sanctification and of their continuously being transformed and conformed to the glorious image of Christ.

"Is Faith Necessary"

"For by grace are ye saved through faith; and that not of yourselves: it is the gift of God: Not of works, lest any man should boast."--Eph. 2:8,9

"The questions posed, is faith necessary, might seem to some to be a strange and ridiculous one. The average Sovereign Grace Baptist would speedily answer in the affirmative. However, there has arisen a movement which denies the necessity of faith in the elect of God. Many of our dearest brethren don’t see this basic, beautiful truth. Hardshellism has replaced gospel preaching as well as the commission. Hopefully, this short article shall put an end to the debate so far as the Word of God is concerned.

Our text verse is a rather familiar one amongst our brethren. We do not deny that God has a chosen people. In fact, we affirm that He has a chosen people who must, and will be saved. They are referred to as “the elect of God” (Col. 3:12), the “chosen of God” (I Pet. 2:4), “the sheep” (Mat. 25:33), and other various names. Salvation is received totally because of the grace of Almighty God. We can do absolutely nothing to obtain or merit eternal life. However, according to our text verse, an elect is saved by grace through faith. This is where hardshellism parts with the historical teaching of Baptists and with the Word of God. Faith is necessary. It is the gift of God, but, nevertheless, necessary, as we shall see. God’s people are a people of faith.

In Jhn. 3:16, we read that “whosoever believeth in him should not perish but have everlasting life.” I realize this verse is quoted by the religious world and used in the depths of Arminianism to try and prove that God loves every individual without exception. I emphatically deny that teaching, but, do not deny the inspiration of this verse and thus, the practical application. Therefore, we can obviously see from this passage that the promise of everlasting life is here made to whomsoever “believeth in him.” Again, in Jhn. 3:18, we read, “He that believeth on him is not condemned: but he that believeth not is condemned already, because he hath not believed in the name of the only begotten Son of God.” Again, the promise of eternal life apart from condemnation is here made to him “that believeth.” On the other hand “he that believeth not is condemned.” This tells us that it is not according to God’s way of working to save people into unbelief. Our duty here is to read the Scripture and rely on it for guidance. This portion of Scripture teaches that believers in Christ are saved. How does this portion of Scripture line up with the Bible as a whole? We shall see, for Scripture must interpret Scripture.

In Jhn. 5:24, John is inspired to write these words: “Verily, verily, I say unto you, He that heareth my word, and believeth on him that sent me, hath everlasting life, and shall not come into condemnation; but is passed from death unto life.” Once again, the Holy Spirit affirms that blessed promise of everlasting life unto Him “that heareth my word, and believeth.” Here, death is, in one sense, the natural state into which man is born. Man is brought into this world “dead in trespasses and sins”(Eph. 2:1). In this state, man is lost and deserving of the death of the eternal lake of fire. In this condition, man has not been “born again”(Jhn. 3:3). On the other hand, the believer is said to be passed from the state of “death unto life.” Life is representative of man’s condition after he has been brought to faith. This man has been “quickened” (Eph. 2:1) and “born again” (Jhn. 3:3). God didn’t, however, quicken this man into unbelief. This would contradict the fact that only the believer is promised eternal life. If the believer has “passed from death unto life,” the unbeliever then has not.

Acts 15:9 reveals of the Gentiles, that God “put no difference between us(the Jewish believers) and them, purifying their hearts by faith.” Here, the Lord is the One who purified the heart. This is in the Lord’s hand. How does He do it would be our question? He purifies the heart by faith. The “love of God is shed abroad in our hearts” (Rom. 5:5) WHEN He quickens us. Before men’s hearts have been purified, they are without faith. Men have faith because it has been freely given to them by God. Faith is a gift of God (Eph. 2:8). The faith, however, is necessary. This is God’s ordained way to work. God was not limited in His knowledge or ability to work another way. Notwithstanding, this is the way God has chosen to carry out His ordained and perfect will. If God has ever worked another way (which I do not believe He has), it is not recorded within the pages of Holy Writ.

“Being justified freely by his grace through the redemption that is in Christ Jesus: Whom God hath set forth to be a propitiation through faith in his blood, to declare his righteousness for the remission of sins that are past, through the forbearance of God; To declare, I say, at this time his righteousness: that he might be just, and the justifier of him which believeth in Jesus. Where is boasting then? It is excluded. By what law? of works? Nay; but by the law of faith. Therefore we conclude that a man is justified by faith without the deeds of the law.”--Rom. 3:24-28. Here we have another passage which supports the fact that faith is God’s ordained gift that He gives to His children for whom Christ died. In this passage, we are said to be justified by faith. In the scope of eternity, we are justified because Christ paid our sin debt on the cross at Calvary some two thousand years ago. However, in time, we are justified by faith. The Lord is said to be a “justifier of him which believeth in Jesus.” There is no room to deny what Paul was inspired to write. We are not justified by works of the law, for we cannot keep the law. But, Christ, who fulfilled it is our “propitiation through faith in his blood.” Is it not wrong then to tell the world to believe in Christ? Is this not what Paul told the Phillipian jailor(Acts 16:30,31)? Paul realized it wasn’t in his power to save. He also realized that Christ had given His churches a commission to evangelize the world with gospel preaching.

The believer in Christ is an overcomer. Who is he that overcometh the world, but he that believeth that Jesus is the Son of God--I Jhn. 5:5. How can we deny this? We are promised that we have and will overcome this world if we believe on Christ. Here is not stated that the elect overcome the world. That would be a true statement if it did. But, more to our inept understanding, the Lord simply says, “he that believeth Jesus is the Son of God is he that overcometh the world.”

Hardshellism says that a man can desire Christ as much as he wants to, but, he can’t come if he’s a non-elect. This type of thinking mixes truth with heresy. Surely a non-elect can’t come to Christ. However, he will never yearn for the saving power of the blood of Christ. He will not see himself as a sinner in need of a Savior. Those who do see this are the elect of God and will come. Hardshellism and the priesthood of the church heresy generally declare(if not by doctrine, by practice) that those outside of believers in the doctrines of grace are lost. There is absolutely no scriptural warrant for any such belief. There are many babes in Christ who know him, but, lack a knowledge of true doctrine. Anyhow, we do not know who the elect are. We do not have the power to distinguish.

In seeing that faith is essential to salvation, we then should pose the question, “How does the Lord impart faith to His elect?” We will affirm, as have our Baptist forefathers, that He does it through the gospel message. “Faith cometh by hearing and hearing by the word of God”(Rom. 10:17). This is not to give ability to anyone apart from the working of the Holy Spirit to believe the gospel message. It is asserted, however, that the Holy Spirit works through the gospel to impart faith to His elect people. There is no salvation apart from believing in Christ. This point has been sufficiently stated. However, faith must have an object. Nobody has faith in “nothing.” Faith has the object of Christ and His salvation. Therefore, when the gospel message is preached (read, taught, heard, witnessed, etc.), the Holy Spirit distinguishes between the elect and non-elect and grants faith to His sheep.

In II Ths. 2:13,14, we read, “But we are bound to give thanks alway to God for you, brethren beloved of the Lord, because God has from the beginning chosen you to salvation through sanctification of the Spirit and belief of the truth: Whereunto he called you by our gospel, to the obtaining of the glory of our Lord Jesus Christ.” Paul here states, through inspiration, that these were “from the beginning chosen,” as are all of God’s saints. He also shows the necessity of the “sanctification of the Spirit”, or quickening, or regeneration. However, he uses the conjunction “and” to show that the “belief of the truth” is equally as vital. Then, in the following verse states, “Whereunto He called you by our gospel.” This is God’s overall plan summed up in this passage. He has a chosen people whom He will call to belief in Christ through the preaching of the gospel. There is no gap of any time frame between regeneration and believing in Christ. This would conclude that man could be a regenerated unbeliever, and this is a contradiction of terms. When the Lord calls, or regenerates, one of His own, He supplies him with the faith necessary to be saved, through the gospel message that he has heard.

“Knowing brethren beloved, your election of God. For our gospel came not unto you in word only(as it does generally to all who hear it), but also in power, and in the Holy Ghost and in much assurance:”--I Ths. 1:4,5a. “Of his own will begat he us with the word of truth”--Jam. 1:18a. “In whom ye also trusted, after that ye heard the word of truth, the gospel of your salvation: in whom also after that ye believed, ye were sealed with that holy Spirit of promise”--Eph. 1:13. “For I am not ashamed of the gospel of Christ: for it is the power of God unto salvation to every one that believeth; to the Jew first, and also to the Greek. For therein is the righteousness of God revealed from faith to faith: as it is written, The just shall live by faith.”--Rom. 1:16,17. These verses should suffice our need to prove that God saves His elect by drawing them by His Spirit through the gospel message.

Now, some would say, “But, you are limiting God. You are taking away from His glory.” To this, we turn to I Cor. 1:21, which says, “For after that in the wisdom of God the world by wisdom knew not God, it pleased God by the foolishness of preaching to save them that believe.” In this verse, we have explained the reason God saves His people by bestowing faith to them through the gospel. The reason is because it pleased Him to do so. I am not limiting the Lord in saying He works this way. God could have saved His elect any way He desired to do it. That was by the foolishness of preaching. Does God work in ways that aren’t pleasing to Him? Does He change? To both questions, we answer in the negative. God always carries out His well pleasing will.

In conclusion, to answer our original question, “Is Faith Necessary?”, we conclude that it is. “Without faith it is impossible to please” God(Heb. 11:6). Therefore, God grants faith to the recipients of His Sovereign Grace through the gospel message as it pleases Him to do so."

(http://www.sovereigngrace.net/isfaithnec.htm)