Chapter 62 - Hardshells on Gill V

Having shown 1) that Dr. Gill did NOT "change his mind" on the important subject of regeneration and the new birth, in the foregoing chapters, neither in his "Body of Divinity" nor in his "Cause of God and Truth" (from what he had taught throughout his life, in his Commentaries), and having shown 2) how the Hardshells, like Elders Daily and Crouse, have misrepresented and misinterpreted the highly esteemed Doctor in the few citations they brought forth from those two books, I will now, in this chapter, show what he taught relative to the "state of the heathen," an integral element of the "means question."

Neo-Hardshells today affirm the near universal salvation of the heathen, and in doing so, have had to "water down" the scriptural experience and meaning of regeneration and the new birth, making it a "hollow log" experience, a "bunch of nothing."

In 1785, when Elder Carey preached on the need of sending God's gospel to these lost heathen souls, it is reported that Elder John Ryland said to him - "SIT DOWN, young man; when God wants to convert the heathen, He'll do it without your help and mine."

That rebuke by Elder Ryland, if it occurred (I have had other historians to question its veracity), truly came from a Hyper-Calvinistic heart. It is contrary to the understanding of most Baptists, however, and certainly contrary to the first Baptist of Mississippi.

I cite now what I wrote earlier in this work (chapter eight) as pertinent again for this chapter in our series on Dr. Gill.

"Often the Hardshells speak of how "beautiful" this teaching of wholesale heathen salvation, without a conversion to Christianity, is to them. The only thing, according to Hardshell "theologians," that those non-Christian, yet "born again" people, get for their heathenish ways, is the loss of some joy in this life!

Also, Hardshells think that all this glorifies God, who they say, saves them "without any help from man." Or, "God has given the heathen to Christ," they say, and he did it "without Bibles, the Gospel, or a preacher."

How contrary all this is to what the really Old Baptists believed about the matter. For Griffin, in his "History," says that the first Baptists of Mississippi stated in a resolution that they should stir up themselves to "send the gospel to every human being, for it is God's method by which he will give to His Son the heathen for his inheritance, and the remotest parts of the earth for his possession" (page 100).

Also, the Hardshells never consider that the “arguments” they make on the heathen and about "regeneration" fall back into their faces when it comes to conversion. If it "takes away" from God's sovereignty and sole glory for him to use "human means" and "human agents" in "regeneration," then why does it not do the same when He "converts" by human means and agents?"

Would Dr. Gill have said "amen" to John Ryland's rebuke to Carey were he present to hear it? Would the first Baptists of Mississippi have done so?

In my series of chapters on "Addresses to the Lost," I ended with an avalanche of scripture that clearly proved that all the heathen are lost, and are as the apostle affirmed - "without God and without hope in the world." We will see that Dr. Gill also acquiesced in that view.

Recall also how Sarrels, in his Hardshell "Systematic Theology," taught that many heathen have a genuine hope of salvation, and "as good a one as any Christian." We will see that Dr. Gill repudiated that view.

So, I will now give the citations from Dr. Gill, from his "Body of Divinity," from the section on "the state and case of the heathens," and then make numerous observations and comments (with some comments made in between citations).

"Of The State and Case of the Heathens"

"In favor of the doctrines of absolute election and reprobation, particular redemption, and special grace in conversion, we observe, that, for many ages, God suffered the heathen world to walk in their own ways, leaving them without a revelation of his mind and will, without the gospel, and means of grace; and which has been, and still is, the case of multitudes to this day. This it cannot reasonably be thought he would have done, had it been according to the counsel of his will that all the individuals of mankind should be saved, and come to the knowledge of the truth; or had Christ died for and redeemed them all; or was it the will of God to bestow on all men sufficient grace, whereby they may be saved. Nor can it be thought that God deals more severely with men, according to the above doctrines, than he seems to have done with the heathen world in this respect: particularly, in favor of God’s decrees, it is observed, that if God conveys his gospel to, and bestows the means of grace on some people, and not on others, when the one are no more worthy of it than the other, and so must arise from his free grace, sovereign pleasure, and the counsel of his will; why may not the decree of the end of bestowing salvation on some, and not on others, as well as the decree of the means of sending the gospel to some, and not to others, be thought to be equally free, absolute, and sovereign? And seeing it is in fact certain, that the greatest part of mankind have been always left destitute of the means of grace, we need not wonder why that God, who freely communicates the knowledge of himself by the gospel to some nations, denying it to others, should hold the same method with individuals that he doth with whole bodies: for the rejecting of whole nations by the lump, for so many ages, is much more unaccountable than the selecting of a few to be infallibly conducted to salvation, and leaving others in that state of disability in which they shall inevitably fail of it."

Contrary to Elder Gowens, who denies any "means of grace" whatever, Dr. Gill affirmed them! According to Dr. Gill, the Lord "decreed the end as well as the means (gospel revelation)," so it is assured all the elect will hear the gospel. According to Dr. Gill, how does one come to "know God"?

Dr. Gill continues:

"Besides, though we know so little of the future state of heathens from the Scripture, yet we are not altogether at an uncertainty about either the measure or duration of their punishment; for as to the former, we are told (Matthew 11:21, 22) that it shall be more tolerable for Tyre and Sidon, for the inhabitants of these places, who had not the advantage of Christ’s ministry and miracles, at the day of judgment, than for the inhabitants of Chorazin and Bethsaida, who were favored with them; and it is reasonable to conclude, that this will hold good of all men, without a divine revelation; and as to the latter, it is certain, when our Lord shall descend from heaven, he will take vengeance on them that know not God, the Gentiles, and that obey not the gospel of our lord Jesus Christ; meaning such who have enjoyed, but have neglected and despised the means of grace; who, one as well as another, shall be punished with everlasting destruction from the presence of the Lord, and the glory of his power (2 Thess. 1:8, 9). Moreover, whereas it is suggested, that Providence may put the heathens into a better state before their final doom, since God overlooked the times of their former ignorance (Acts 17:30), there being the like reason for his still overlooking them; it should be observed, that God’s overlooking the times of heathen ignorance, was not an instance of his kindness and goodness, but of his disregard unto them: the meaning is, that he looked over them, took no notice of them, made no revelation to them, but left them in their blindness and ignorance, without giving them any helps, or sending them any persons to instruct and teach them."

Two integral elements of modern Hardshellism are thus denied by Dr. Gill: 1) Some who reject the gospel are saved, and 2) some who die without revelation (heathen) are nevertheless saved.

How would Dr. Gill answer Daily's question on "necessity"? Does his view of the necessity of a divine revelation of gospel truth not do the thing that Daily says the Baptists, prior to the division with the "New School," did not do? i. e., - "damns all the heathen who have never heard"?

Dr. Gill continues:

"We also know of no such covenant made with, nor of any tender of it, nor of any publication of it to the heathen world; but rather, that all that are destitute of revelation, are strangers to the covenant of promise (Eph. 2:12), which passage likewise acquaints us, that such as are without the knowledge of Christ, and God in Christ, are without hope; and that such who live and die so, have no good ground of hope of eternal life and salvation; which plainly points out the state and case of the heathens, and leaves us at no great uncertainty about it..."

Where is there any intimation that Dr. Gill "changed his mind" on the means of the gospel and of its necessity in regeneration and salvation? How then can any Hardshell still affirm, as did Elder Potter in his closing speech with Elder Throgmorton, on the question - "Who Are The Primitive Baptists?" - that Dr. Gill was "our man"? It is ludicrous and made to fool the ignorant and unlearned. In the above words Dr. Gill clearly says that all who die without gospel revelation are lost eternally (Unless God uses some "secret method" of which the scriptures do not tell us).

Dr. Gill says further:

"...unless the law and light of nature, by which men may have some knowledge of a divine Being, though they know not who he is, and of the difference between good and evil, and unless the motives from providential goodness to serve and glorify God can be thought to be means of grace, the heathen must be without any, who are destitute of the gospel revelation; and then to be without a gospel revelation, and without any means of grace at all, must be the same thing; seeing the gospel revelation, the word, and ordinances, are the common and ordinary means of grace. It will not be denied, that God may make use of extraordinary means; send an angel from heaven to acquaint men with the way of salvation by Jesus Christ, or by some other secret method, unknown to us; yet from the possibility of things to the certainty of them, we cannot argue: and though we would be far from judging of and determining the final state of such who are destitute of revelation; yet, according to the Scripture account of them, we cannot but conclude, that as such, and while such, they are without the means of grace, being without Christ, aliens from the commonwealth of Israel, and strangers from the covenants of promise, having no hope, and without God in the world."

Again, Hardshellism is denied! I will address some of Gill's comments, in the above words, in my ending observations.

Dr. Gill continues:

"It is strange that this passage of Scripture should be a proof of heathens having the means of grace, or of their being capable of seeking and serving God acceptably, and of their having faith in God, even that faith which in verse 1 is said to be the substance of things hoped for, the evidence oaf things not seen; when the apostle is only speaking of such a faith, as is; founded upon the word of God, and of such persons only who were favored with a divine revelation; of the patriarchs before and after the flood, the forefathers of the Jews; various instances of whose faith he produces, partly to prove the above definition of faith, and partly for the imitation, example, and encouragement of the Hebrews, to whom he writes; men who also enjoyed the oracles of God, had plenty of the means of grace, and were blessed with a gospel revelation. Besides, let it be observed, that since to come to God, as this author explains it from the context, is to do that which is pleasing to him; and since it appears from the former part of this text, that without faith it is impossible, eujaresth~sai, to do that which is well-pleasing to God; and from the words themselves, that believing is absolutely requisite to coming to him; not only that he exists, but that he is, in Christ, a God gracious and merciful, and a rewarder, in a way of grace, of all them that diligently seek him in his Son, in whom only he is to be so found. And since heathens are without any knowledge of him or faith in him, as such; for, how shall they believe in him of whom they have not heard? And how shall they hear without a preacher? (Rom. 10:14). It follows, that this passage of Scripture proves the reverse of what it is brought for; namely, that it is impossible for heathens to come to God aright, to serve him acceptably; or to do what is well-pleasing to him, because they are destitute of faith; and whatsoever, is not of faith, is sin (Rom. 14:23). Moreover, there is no such thing as coming to God through Christ, he is the only way of access to God, for Jews and Gentiles; for through him we both (Eph. 2:18), Jew and Gentile, have an access by one Spirit unto the Father. But since the heathens, destitute of divine revelation are without Christ, and the knowledge of him, as the way to the Father, they must be without hope, and without God in the world (Eph. 2:12), and know not how to come to him, nor can they come to him aright; nor indeed, are they capable of seeking and finding him as the God of grace, or as a God gracious and merciful: since he is only to be sought and found as such in Christ Jesus our Lord. It is true, indeed, that they may and should, by the light of nature, seek after God; and they may find him, as the God of nature, and should glorify him as such, yea, they may do many things materially good, which, though they may not be thoroughly well-pleasing to God; the circumstances of a good work being wanting in them, and also being without a Mediator to render them acceptable to God; yet may be so far approved of by him, as to avert temporal judgments from them, and to lessen their future punishment; so that the heathen world, according to our sentiments of them, is not, as is suggested, exempted from all obligations to seek God, or deprived of any motive to do what appears, by the light of nature, to be the will of God. From the whole, it follows not that heathens may have that faith in God which is the substance of things hoped for, and the evidence of things not seen; for how should they who are strangers from the covenant of promise hope, look for, and expect those things of which they have no revelation, no promise, on which to ground their faith, hope, and expectations?"

Dr. Gill denies the Hardshell view of "faith." The "faith" that is connected with "regeneration," say the Hardshells, is a "germ" or "seed" that lies "dormant" in a person and does not become visible till "exercised" in a belief of the gospel revelation and a conscious embracing of Christ. But, according to Dr. Gill, the faith of Hebrews chapter eleven, the "faith of God's elect," is absolutely connected with a mental and conscious faith in the "record that God gave of his Son." He also says that "believing is absolutely requisite to coming to him." This absolutely refutes everything that Hardshells say about the so-called faith that heathens possess.

He also repeats the statement of Paul that says all heathen, who are without divine revelation of the gospel, are "without God" and "without hope." That is the Bible teaching on the state of the heathen, the teaching of Dr. Gill, and the teaching of the Baptist Church.

Dr. Gill continues:

"We also say, that those actions of the heathens which are materially good, are yet formally evil, because they are not done out of love to God as the principle, and to God’s glory as the end; and indeed how should they do any thing out of love to God, and with a view to his glory, when they know him not? For though they have means of knowing the being and perfections of God, yet they know not who the true God is; but being left to the mere light of nature, fix upon that which is not God, to be so; and consequently can have no true love to the only true God, nor true faith in him, nor a true regard to his glory. And we say the same of the works and actions of all men in a state of nature, before conversion, who are destitute of love to God, and faith in Christ..."

He states that the heathen do not "know God," and a man cannot be thought to be "regenerated" if he does not "know God."

Dr. Gill continues:

"It is urged, that "it cannot be consistent with divine equity and goodness, to make that a condition of any man’s happiness, which he cannot know to be his duty, or knowing, cannot do. Hence it is evident, that the knowledge of any revelation made to Jew or Christian, cannot be necessary to the happiness of heathens in general, much less the practice of any purely Christian duty; and therefore faith in Jesus Christ cannot be necessary to the salvation of as many of them as have never heard of him."

Well, well! What a proposition! - "the knowledge of any revelation cannot be necessary to the (eternal) happiness of heathens"! Who believed and advocated it? Was it Dr. Gill? No! He rebuts it, as we will see.

But, one must ask himself - "Is this not the proposition of the Hardshells?" And - "Is this not the argumentation of the leading Hardshell debaters and apologists?"

Listen to Dr. Gill's powerful rebuttal and denial of the proposition and argumentation.

"I answer; that the heathens will not be condemned and punished for their ignorance of that revelation which was never vouchsafed to them, (I disagree with this to some extant - SMG) nor for the non-performance of and purely Christian duty, such as baptism and the Lord’s supper; nor for not believing in Christ (I disagree with this too, for the reason I showed in a previous chapter, i.e., because even the heathen are obligated to seek out the gospel, all obligation not being on the gospel evangelist or missionary), of whom they have never heard, only for those sins which they have committed against the law and light of nature; but inasmuch as they are without any true knowledge of the way of atonement for sin, and without any revelation from God of the method of salvation from it, they must be considered as destitute of the means of grace, and as far from true happiness and felicity."

"When this author says, "This I think certain, that God will only judge men at the last for sinning against the means he hath vouchsafed them to know, and to perform their duty, and only by that law which he hath given them. Hence it must follow, that those heathens to whom the law of nature only hath been given, can be judged only for the violations of that law." This will be readily allowed as agreeable to what the apostle says, As many as have sinned without law, shall also perish without law (Rom. 2:12). But then, this observation is no proof of their having any means of grace; this leaves them without any, and discovers the equity and justice of God in their condemnation."

"What secret methods (of which the Hardshells have created many!) God may make use of to impart his grace to heathens, to afford them the aid that is requisite to perform their duty acceptably; to communicate his mercy to them, and apply the meritorious performances of Christ; are, indeed, secrets to us; and secret things belong to the Lord our God, but those things which are revealed, belong, to us and to our children (Deut. 29:29). It is only according to the revelation God has made we are able to judge of things, and beyond that we cannot go (which is what John Spilsbury, if you recall from a previous chapter, said to Blakewell, in his argumentation on the regeneration of infants - "we can only go by the Bible and cannot address hypotheticals or secret methods not revealed" - paraphrase); and according to that revelation, it appears that Christ is the way, the truth, and the life (John 14:6); the true way to eternal life; that no man can come to the Father but by him; that there is salvation is no other; that there is none other name under heaven given among men, Jews or Gentiles, whereby we must be saved (Acts 4:12); that the heathens, destitute of revelation, know not God (1 Thess. 4:5); are without Christ, strangers to the covenants of promise, without hope and God in the world (Eph. 2:12); and consequently, according to all the views of things we are capable of taking from hence, must be without any means of grace and salvation."

"It cannot well be thought that the actions of heathens, which want the circumstances of a good work, such as love to God, faith in him, a view to his glory, and which have only the appearance of goodness in them, should, upon any consideration whatever, be more acceptable to God, than the actions of Christians done by the assistance of grace, in faith, from pure love to God, and with a single eye to his glory, and which are attended with, and are presented before God, through the sweet incense of Christ’s mediation. There must be as much difference between these actions, in point of acceptance, as between the most fragrant flower in the garden, and the most stinking herb of the field. The words of our Lord (John 20:29), do not compare Christians and heathens together, but Christians and Christians, and commend such who believe on Christ, without the sight of his person and miracles, before such who believed on him upon the sight of them...but the heathens are strangers to the covenants, of promise (Eph. 2:12); they have no such promise, and are incapable of having any, without a revelation..." (Part 3 - Section 8)

So, here is more conclusive evidence that John Gill did not "change his mind," but remained steadfast in his views that faith was necessary to salvation and that faith comes by hearing the word of God.

"Elder John R. Daily in a debate with W. P. Throgmorton in 1912 said: Men in heathendom are regenerated by the Spirit of God without the Gospel (Daily-Throgmorton Debate, p. 273).

Elder S. T. Tolly, editor of the Christian Baptist in Atwood, Tenn., wrote in the June 1971 issue of his paper: "We believe that there will be millions of the elect saved in heaven who have never, nor will they ever, hear the gospel of the Son of God."

The Hardshells are at odds with both Scripture and with Dr. Gill and the real Old Baptists.

Well did Elder Milburn Cockrell say:

"The Hardshell Baptists teach that God gives faith without the preaching of the gospel. They have an elect people with a faith not begotten and grounded upon the words of the apostles of Jesus Christ. They repudiate the words of Christ in John 17:20: "Them also which shall believe on me through their word." They have God with some people for which Christ did not pray. "Their word," meaning the words of the apostles (oral or written) and do not allow for a lot of fancy twisting and turning by which some try to make the Word the living Word, Christ."

(http://www.bereabaptistchurch.org/banner/PDFs/June2007.pdf)

Elder Lee Hanks wrote:

"The Lord has never deputized Mr. Rice or any other man to save the heathen." ("The Church of God," page 118, Christian Baptist Publishing Co. Atwood, Tenn. 1982)

But, Hanks won't find that sentiment in either the scriptures, nor in the Old Baptist Confessions of faith, nor in the writings of the leading apologists of the Baptists, till the "rise of the Hardshells." He certainly is in oppostion to the words of Christ to Paul (and which I have already dealt with extensively):

"But rise, and stand upon thy feet: for I have appeared unto thee for this purpose, to make thee a minister (a tool or instrument) and a witness both of these things which thou hast seen, and of those things in the which I will appear unto thee; Delivering thee from the people, and from the Gentiles (heathen), unto whom now I send thee, To open their eyes, and to turn them from darkness to light, and to from the power of Satan unto God, that they may receive forgiveness of sins, and (may receive) inheritance among them which are sanctified by faith that is in me. " (Acts 26: 16-18)

In his "Debate on Foreign Missions (Chapter 2), with Elder Yates (Presbyterian), Elder Potter said:

"My opponent says in this question is involved the temporal and eternal destiny of millions of the human race now living, and no doubt, countless numbers of unborn generations. Now, that is one objection I have always had to this plea for Foreign Missions, that its advocates preach the universal damnation of all the people where there is no Bible. I object to that doctrine. It is contrary to God’s word. It is the plea that gets your half-dollar from your pocket in mission work, that the heathen are going to hell unless they get the Bible."

How strange that this highly esteemed "apologist" of Hardshellism would teach the salvation of the heathen and then claim, in his debate with Elder Throgmorton, at the close of his last speech, that Dr. Gill "was our man"!

Elder Potter continues in his debate with Elder Yates (Presbyterian):

"There are three classes called by the Spirit of God, and regenerated and saved by Christ—idiots, infants, and those who cannot be called by the ministry of the word.

If the Spirit of God reaches down and saves an infant without preaching to him, or his having knowledge of the Bible or gospel, it can reach to the idiot and save him in the same way; and I believe it will. If it does that, it reaches to the heathen in the same way; and I say it will..."

Again, as at other times, Elder Potter did not bring any scripture to prove any of his propositions, but only used his perverted use of human logic, arguing that if infants are regenerated without the truth being applied to their minds (a premise that itself was never proven), then so can and must many heathen. When will the Hardshells realize that they are against scripture, the Old Confessions, and Dr. Gill, and the Baptists almost universally prior to the 1800's and the "rise of the Hardshells"?

Potter's 4th Speech

"Let us hear what another missionary has to say. I now refer you to the circular letter of the Philadelphia Baptist Association, of 1806, page 426. They say:

“The following principles have given rise to Christian missions, and swayed the conduct of faithful missionaries. First, a deep conviction of the fallen state of the human race. Once, indeed, man was made in honor, but now he is in disgrace. Woe unto us that we have sinned. In our common father we have all sunk in the abyss of original defection, and are all actual offenders against the righteous God. Many have endeavored to extenuate the offenses of the heathen world. Idolaters have been represented as the untaught children of nature, whom the Supreme Being would rather pity than punish. But such are not the representations of the Holy Scriptures, the oracles of divine truth. That they who have sinned without the law will be judged without the law is admitted; but it is expressly declared that The wrath of God is revealed from heaven against all ungodliness and unrighteousness of men; that such as change the glory of the incorruptible God into an image are without excuse, and that the judgment of God is that they who commit such things are worthy of death. Who will dare to oppose his judgment to the judgment of infinite wisdom and righteousness? or who can be negative when he hears the Bible proclaim indignation and wrath, tribulation and anguish, upon every soul of man that doeth evil, to the Jew first, and also to the Gentile.”

"That is missionary doctrine. Now, notice these texts of Scripture are used to prove the damnation of the heathen. They would not accept the idea that God would rather pity the poor heathen than punish them. They say that is wrong, and quote these texts to prove it. I say that is the missionary doctrine. I want to say that it limits the salvation of God; it binds him up; it shuts him out from that portion of his elect that he said should bless all nations of the earth where the Bible is not. If none are to be saved in heathen lands only on the condition that they hear, believe, and obey the gospel, then about three-fourths of the sons and daughters of Adam are sent to hell, to suffer eternal vengeance for what they are no more to be blamed for than I am because I was not born in England two hundred years ago. It shuts salvation out from a large majority of this world."

It is interesting that Elder Potter is willing to admit that the Philadelphia Association, in 1806, was a missionary body! They believed what Dr. Gill wrote on the heathen question. How can Elder Potter claim to be "primitive" when the oldest association in America, by his own admission, is against him and Hardshellism?

Elder Potter affirms that a belief (proposition) that says the heathen are lost without the revelation of God goes contrary to what Hardshells believe and yet he boastfully says "Dr. Gill was our man"! Sadly, others have repeated Elder Potter's and Elder Daily's falsehoods and distortions and have been too lazy to discover otherwise or else have been too dishonest to acknowledge their errors.

Elder Potter says that Dr. Gill's position, and the position of the Old Baptists of the Philadelphia Association, by their belief that the Lord used human means in saving sinners, "limits the salvation of God." But, he did not prove that was so! The scriptures too are against his reasoning, as I have already shown in earlier chapters on "Hardshell Logic." But, I will deal with it again in the next two concluding chapters on Dr. Gill and wherein I bring up some other Hardshell writers on the point that is now being heavily debated once again among the Hardshells, "will all the elect hear the gospel?"

Elder Potter's 5th Speech

"I have no fear that the Lord will not carry out his purpose in the salvation of his people without my assistance. I am not afraid of that. I am not uneasy about that. God is going to do that. He calls upon me to do my duty, and tells me what it is. He never called upon me to carry salvation or eternal life to anybody, that I know of. If he said so in the commission, I do not remember it."

Again, I suppose that Elder Potter, like Elder Hanks, should have been honest with what is taught in Acts 26: 16-18!

He said further on this point:

"Did he say, Go ye into all the world, and carry eternal life? Did he say, Go ye into all the world, and carry the Saviour? Did he say, Go ye into all the world, and carry the Spirit? Did he say, Go ye into all the world, and carry the God of heaven?"

Well, I guess again our great "apologist" forgot some of his scriptures!

"This only would I learn of you, Received ye the Spirit by the works of the law, or by the hearing of faith? Are ye so foolish? having begun in the Spirit, are ye now made perfect by the flesh? Have ye suffered so many things in vain? if it be yet in vain. He therefore that ministereth to you the Spirit, and worketh miracles among you, doeth he it by the works of the law, or by the hearing of faith?" (Galatians 3: 2-5)

That answers his question about "carrying (or "bringing") the Spirit"! The gospel minister brings "glad tidings" of the way of salvation through Christ, the "means of grace," as Dr. Gill and our Baptist forefathers called the gospel, and therefore, to those who receive the gospel minister and the glad tidings he brings, they receive Christ and his Spirit. Did not Jesus say - "whoever receives you receives me" and "whoever rejects you and the gospel you preach, rejects me"? Jesus repeated this message often.

"And whosoever shall not receive you, nor hear your words, when ye depart out of that house or city, shake off the dust of your feet. Verily I say unto you, It shall be more tolerable for the land of Sodom and Gomorrha in the day of judgment, than for that city...He that receiveth you receiveth me, and he that receiveth me receiveth him that sent me." (Matthew 10: 14, 15, 40)

I think these scriptures, along with a host of others that could be offered (and have to some degree in previous chapters), show that Elder Potter was opposing Christ and his way of salvation, preaching a message that does harm to sinners, putting stumblingblocks in the way of their coming to Christ.

Elder Potter stated further:

"And by his Spirit he can, and I will say he will, and does, quicken the benighted soul of the heathen and prepare him for heaven and glory. If that is not true, what mean all the Scriptures I have quoted here to you?"

Yes, he may say it! Modern Hardshells may also say it. But, the Bible does not say it! Dr. Gill does not say it! The Old Baptists of the 17th and 18th century also did not say it! The Old Confessions do not say it (again, as I have shown in previous chapters, citing the London Confession that says the heathen are lost without the gospel), nor do most of the leading founders (1st generation) of Hardshells say it. But, what scripture did the great "apologist" bring forth to prove the Bible taught that many heathen are "regenerated" and "know God," and "know Christ," and have had the "laws of the new covenant written upon their hearts"?

Elder Potter says:

"Now, I want to make an argument upon the sheep. John x. 14—16 is the language of Jesus: “I am the good shepherd, and know my sheep, and am known of mine. As the Father knoweth me, even so know I the Father: and I lay down my life for the sheep. And other sheep I have, which are not of this fold: them also I must bring, and they shall hear my voice; and there shall be one fold, and one shepherd.” Now notice, he says “other sheep I have.” Hence when he speaks of the sheep, he does not mean his people among the Jews exclusively, but he speaks of those among the Gentiles—among the heathen. He says, I have them, they are mine, I must bring them—that is what I am here for, that is my mission in the world, and I must bring them. According to the covenant, I am under obligation to bring them; they shall hear my voice, and there shall be one fold. Isaiah lvi. 8: “The Lord God which gathereth the outcasts of Israel saith, Yet will I gather others to him, besides those that are gathered unto him.” It is evident from these passages that the Lord has sheep among the heathen."

“My sheep hear my voice, and I know them, and they follow me: and I give unto them eternal life; and they shall never perish, neither shall any man pluck them out of my hand. My Father, which gave them me, is greater than all; and no man is able to pluck them out of my Father’s hand.” That is what Jesus said concerning his sheep, at the same time claiming that he had sheep among the heathen.”

Elder Potter shows himself to not be worthy of being noted among the great Bible commentators with such argumentation and analysis of the sheep passage in John 10! I dealt with the passage at length in at least two earlier chapters and it completely overthrows Hardshellism.

First, Dr. Gill believed that the "voice" of Christ was heard in the gospel! He taught this in both his Commentary and in his "Body of Divinity." Yet, according to Elder Potter, "Dr. Gill is our man"!

The very idea that heathen, who worship idols, and are ignorant of the one true God, and ignorant of the Lord Jesus Christ, should be thought to have "heard" and "known" and "followed" this "voice"! I tell you friends, it is a form of blindness to believe things that are so blatantly against plain scripture!

It contradicts Romans 10! "How shall they believe in him of whom they have not heard? how shall they hear without a preacher?"

Besides, why does he deviate from Elder Watson (who preceded him in time) on this matter of "bringing" in those "other sheep" that are scattered among the heathen?

All throughout Elder Watson's book, "The Old Baptist Test," published in 1866, Dr. Watson kept harping on how many of the Hardshells, especially those of the "ultraist" and "Antinomian" faction, failed to see that the gospel was the Lord's ordained means for "bringing in" these "unbrought sheep" into the fold of salvation! He spoke too of how these "ultraist" brethren "showed very little concern about the unbrought sheep"!

As a former Hardshell, I can certainly appreciate the very "difficult spot" that Elder Potter found himself, when in debate on this point (and others too since his day), in finding scripture that clearly asserts their many unbiblical man-made propositions.

He must have been "hard pressed" to try to prove his Hardshell views from John 10 and from the words that Jesus said, about having "sheep" among the heathen, even when as yet the gospel had not been preached to them. This argument, I am sure, most Hardshells today will not accept. In fact, I have not heard it used since in debate. Apparently the Hardshells since Potter's day rejected his argumentation or else it would have been repeated often.

I intend to write a series of chapters on "Hardshell Proof Texts" wherein I will deal more fully with this type of argumentation and another text that Elder Potter used in his debate with Elder Yates. But, the argument made by Elder Potter is wrong because he equates the term "sheep" with "regenerated soul." But, this it absolutely cannot mean, and most Hardshells will acknowledge this is so. Rather, the term "sheep" is equated with the term "elect." People are elect before they are regenerated, and Hardshells admit this.

Besides, by the reasoning of Potter, the "bringing" of the sheep is not their regeneration! They were sheep before they were brought! So, if "sheep" is equated with being "regenerated," then one is "regenerated" even before he is brought!

Also, if this "bringing" of the "sheep" is not "regeneration," then what is the "bringing"? Is it conversion, that which, by Hardshell "logic," follows "regeneration"? Then how do they deal with the fact that Jesus said that he "must bring" all the sheep? Is Potter saying that all the sheep will be converted then?

"Then spake the Lord to Paul in the night by a vision, Be not afraid, but speak, and hold not thy peace: For I am with thee, and no man shall set on thee to hurt thee: for I have much people in this city. And he continued there a year and six months, teaching the word of God among them." (Acts 18: 9-11)

This verse is sometimes used by Hardshell apologists to show that the Corinthians were regenerated before the Lord sent Paul to preach the gospel unto them, for Jesus says he already has his people in the city, people who need to hear the gospel, however.

Does this mean that they were "his people" by regeneration or by election? Obviously, by election, so the argument from John 10 and from the above passage turns out to be no argument at all. Certainly God has elect among the untaught heathen. What Hardshells need to show, from the scriptures, is where one person was born again or regenerated who did not have faith in the true God, and trusted not in his Messiah, and who were ignorant of his word. This they cannot do, however.

Potter's argumentation not only forces him to make the "bringing" of the sheep something other than regeneration, but also to say that the "hearing" of the voice of Christ is also not regeneration! Are they not "sheep" even before he calls them by name? Potter has sinners regenerated even before they hear the voice of the Shepherd and before they follow him! Unbelievable! And this is one of the "great" apologists of the Primitive Baptist denomination?

Elder Potter's 7th Speech

"Here is question two: “If the heathen are in an unfortunate condition, as you claim in your speech, how can this be consistent with that part of them who are God’s elect from eternity?” Now, as far as my speech yesterday was concerned, I quoted from missionary authors to show their plea for missions. I quoted from the Minutes of the Philadelphia Association and Circular Letter, in which they tell us the very grounds for the Christian Missions. In that letter they go on tell us of the deplorable condition of the heathen, and preach their universal damnation.

"I did not say, every thing that was necessary so far as the eternal salvation of God’s people is concerned. I believe that depends upon the work of Jesus Christ, and not upon the work of any human being in the world, that is now, or ever was, or ever will be."

I dealt with this absurd notion in earlier chapters on Hardshell logic. I completely overthrew this unscriptural man-made propostion, one that is anti-Christian and anti gospel and anti Bible. According to this "logic," the crucifiction was not necessary to eternal salvation because it was human hands, yea even "wicked hands," human means, that put the Lord to death! But, I do hope to deal with this point further in an upcoming chapter when I deal with Elder David Pyle's article, on the internet, wherein he argues similarly to Elder Potter, saying that creatures cannot be a means in anything that God has "predestined," or has "made certain," for that would make it uncertain! Glorious Hardshell logic! According to Pyle's thinking, no acts of creatures are predestined by God! He believes he has no right to pray for anything that God has predestined! Stay tuned to the next two concluding chapters on Dr. Gill and the Hardshells!

I also plan, as requested by a Hardshell, to deal with Samuel Richardson's views on justification and its relation to faith; many Hardshells erroneously thinking that Richardson was upholding Hardshellism when he wrote on justification by faith. Is that so? or, are the Hardshells misreading Richardson as they do Dr. Gill?

Also, some Hardshells will cite from Dr. Gill on "Justification by Faith" and contend that he also upheld their views about faith and its relation to salvation. Is this also so? or do they again misinterpret Gill on justification and faith?

I have already given citations from Richardson showing that he believed in gospel means. He also signed the first London Confession of Faith, a confession that clearly upholds that position. The men with whom he was in close fellowship also held this same view.

So then why do the Hardshells come forth and try to make him (like Dr. Gill) into a believer in Hardshellism? Where is that concern about speaking reverently and accurately about the dead about which Elder Crouse warned the Missionary Baptists?

When I deal with these issues, and with Elder David Pyle's article on "The Extent of the Gospel," I will also deal with what Dr. Gill called "secret methods," ones of which the scriptures give us no revelation or knowledge.

Some of these inconsistencies and contradictions, within the Hardshell paradigm of the new birth and system of salvation, I will deal with also more fully in that series of chapters (upcoming) on "Paradigm Problems" (following the series on "The Great Commission" and on "Hardshell Proof Texts").