Spurgeon Misunderstood Calvinism

I believe in predestination, yea, even in its very jots and tittles. I believe that the path of a single grain of dust in the March wind is ordained and settled by a decree which cannot be violated; that every word and thought of man, every flittering of a sparrow’s wing, every flight of a fly…that everything, in fact is foreknown and foreordained. But I do equally believe in the free agency of man, that man acts as he wills, especially in moral operations — choosing the evil with a will that is unbiased by anything that comes from God, biased only by his own depravity of heart and the perverseness of his habits; choosing the right too, with perfect freedom, though sacredly guided and led by the Holy Spirit…I believe that man is as accountable as if there were no destiny whatever…Where these two truths meet I do not know, nor do I want to know. They do not puzzle me, since I have given up my mind to believing them both.(Metropolitan Tabernacle Pulpit, vol. 15, 458).

I think most Calvinist do not (if there’s any that) believe in free agency of man and act of free will.
Yet, I think most General Baptist also believe in predestination because it’s plainly written in the scripture.

The question is what is the meaning of predestination Calvinism talk about?
According to Calvin’s Institutes of the Christian Religion, Book 3 Chapter 23

When he is pleased to save, there is no free-will in man to resist.

What Spurgeon really believe on 1 Timothy 2:3-6,

What then? Shall we try to put another meaning into the text than that which it fairly bears? I think not. You must, most of you, be acquainted with the general method in which our older Calvinistic friends deal with this text. ‘All men,’ say they that is, ‘some men’: as if the Holy Ghost could not have said ‘some men’ If he had meant some men. ‘All men,’ say they; ‘that is, some of all sorts of men’: as if the Lord could not have said ‘All sorts of men’ if he had meant that. The Holy Ghost by the apostle has written ‘all men,’ and unquestionably he means all men. I was reading just now the exposition of a very able doctor who explains the text so as to explain it away; he applies grammatical gunpowder to it, and explodes it by way of expounding it. … My love of consistency with my own doctrinal views is not great enough to allow me knowingly to alter a single text of Scripture. I have great respect for orthodoxy, but my reverence for inspiration is far greater. I would sooner a hundred times over appear to be inconsistent with myself than be inconsistent with the word of God.(Metropolitan Tabernacle Pulpit, 26: 49-52)

Spurgeon managed to understand the Bible, but failed to understand Calvinism.
Calvinism believe damnation is God’s will, Spurgeon believe it’s man’s will alone.

The Calvinist has said, and said right bravely, that salvation is of grace alone; and the Arminian has said, and said most truthfully, that damnation is of man’s will alone, and as the result of man’s sin, and of that only. Then they have fallen out with one another. The fact is, they had each one laid hold of a truth, and if they could have put their heads together, and accepted both truths, it might have been greatly for the advantage of the Church of Christ. These two doctrines are like tram lines that you can travel on with safety and comfort, these parallel lines—ruin, of man; restoration, of God: sin, of man’s will; salvation, of God’s will: reprobation, of man’s demerit; election, of God’s free and sovereign grace: the sinner lost in hell through himself alone, the saint lifted up to heaven wholly and alone by the power and grace of God. Get those two truths thoroughly engraven upon your heart, and you will then hold comprehensively the great truths of Scripture. You will not need to crowd them into one narrow system of theology, but you will have a sort of duplicate system. (Metropolitan Tabernacle Pulpit,41:500.)

Actually, it doesn’t really matter what Spurgeon thought, even if he’s true Calvinism, i still believe the Bible alone.

But, it feels so great to know not only he fought well but he also understand the Bible as well.

Read more:

The Life of Muhammad: An Inconvenient Truth

Timeline of Muhammad’s Life (A.D)

570 – Born in Mecca
576 – Orphaned upon death of mother
595 – Marries Kadijah – older, wealthy widow
610 – Reports first revelations at age of 40
619 – Protector uncle dies
622 – Emigrates from Mecca to Medina (the Hijra)
623 – Orders raids on Meccan caravans
624 – Battle of Badr (victory)
624 – Evicts Qaynuqa Jews from Medina
624 – Orders assassination of Abu Afak
624 – Orders assassination of Asma bint Marwan
624 – Orders the assassination of Ka’b al-Ashraf
625 – Battle of Uhud (defeat)
625 – Evicts Nadir Jews
627 – Battle of the Trench (victory)
627 – Massacre of the Qurayza Jews
628 – Signing of the Treaty of Hudaibiya with Mecca
628 – Destruction and subjugation of the Khaybar Jews
629 – Orders first raid into Christian lands at Muta (defeat)
630 – Conquers Mecca by surprise (along with other tribes)
631 – Leads second raid into Christian territory at Tabuk (no battle)
632 – Dies

What if a man you knew began telling people that God was routinely speaking to him and only him – and that the “revelations” he claimed to be receiving were mostly about him and his relative importance to all other people? Say, for example, that this self-proclaimed prophet insisted that God had declared him to be the ‘excellent pattern of conduct’ for mankind (Quran 33:21) and that others were therefore to accord him with special privilege, unwavering obedience (Quran 4:80) , wealth and earthly desires, including all of the slaves and more women than his lust could handle.

Read more:

IN 1972, during the restoration of the Great Mosque of Sana’a, in Yemen, laborers working in a loft between the structure’s inner and outer roofs stumbled across a remarkable gravesite, although they did not realize it at the time. Their ignorance was excusable: mosques do not normally house graves, and this site contained no tombstones, no human remains, no funereal jewelry. It contained nothing more, in fact, than an unappealing mash of old parchment and paper documents—damaged books and individual pages of Arabic text, fused together by centuries of rain and dampness, gnawed into over the years by rats and insects. Intent on completing the task at hand, the laborers gathered up the manuscripts, pressed them into some twenty potato sacks, and set them aside on the staircase of one of the mosque’s minarets, where they were locked away—and where they would probably have been forgotten once again, were it not for Qadhi Isma’il al-Akwa’, then the president of the Yemeni Antiquities Authority, who realized the potential importance of the find.

Read more: The Atlantic Monthly, January 1999 edition.

Napoleon Bonaparte talk about Jesus Christ

The conversation at St. Helena very frequently turned upon the subject of religion. One day Napoleon was speaking of the Divinity of Christ, General Bertrand said :

I can not conceive, Sire, how a great man like you can believe that the Supreme Being ever exhibited himself to men under a human form, with a body, a face, mouth, and eyes. Let Jesus be whatever you please — the highest intelligence, the purest heart, the most profound legislator, and, in all respects, the most singular being who has ever existed. I grant it. Still he was simply a man, who taught his disciples, and deluded credulous people, as did Orpheus, Confucius, Brahma. Jesus caused himself to be adored, because his predecessors, Isis and Osiris, Jupiter and Juno, had proudly made themselves objects of worship. The ascendency of Jesus over his time, was like the ascendency of the gods and the heroes of fable. If Jesus has impassioned and attached to his chariot the multitude—if he has revolutionized the world— see in that only the power of genius, and the action of a commanding spirit, which vanquishes the world, as so many conquerors have done — Alexander, Caesar, you, Sire, and Mohammed with a sword.

Napoleon replied :
“I know men, and I tell you that Jesus Christ is not a man. Superficial minds see a resemblance between Christ and the founders of empires and the gods of other religions. That resemblance does not exist. There is between Christianity and whatever other religion the distance of infinity. “We can say to the authors of every other religion, ‘You are neither gods nor the agents of the Deity. You are but missionaries of falsehood, moulded from the same clay with the rest of mortals. You arc made with all the passions and vices inseparable from them. Our temples and your priests proclaim your origin.’ Such will be the judgment, the cry of conscience, of whoever examines the gods and the temples of paganism.
“Paganism was never accepted, as truth, by the wise men of Greece ; neither by Socrates. Pythagoras, Plato, Anaxagoras, or Pericles. On the other side, the loftiest intellects, since the advent of Christianity, have had faith, a living faith, a practical faith, in the mysteries and the doctrines of the gospel ; not only Bossuet and Fenelon, who were preachers, but Descartes and Newton, Leibnitz and Pascal, Corneille and Racine, Charlemagne and Louis XIV.
“Paganism is the work of man. One can here read but our imbecility. What do these gods, so boastful, knew more than other mortals? These legislators, Greek or Roman, this Numa, this Lycurgus, these priests of India or of Memphis, this Confucius, this Mohammed? Absolutely nothing. They have made a perfect chaos of morals. There is not one among them all who has said any thing new in reference to our future destiny, to the soul, to the essence of God, to the creation. Enter the sanctuaries of paganism. You there find perfect chaos, a thousand contradictions, war between the gods, the immobility of sculpture, the division and the rending of unity, the parceling out of the divine attributes mutilated or denied in their essence, the sophisms of ignorance and presumption, polluted fetes, impurity and abomination adored, all sorts of corruption festering in the thick shades, with the rotten wood, the idol, and his priest. Does this honor God, or does it dishonor him? Are these religions and these gods to be compared with Christianity?
“As for me, I say no. I summon entire Olympus to my tribunal. I judge the gods, but am far from prostrating myself before their vain images. The gods, the legislators of India and of China, of Home and of Athens, have nothing which can overawe me. Not that I am unjust to them! No; I appreciate them, because I know their value. Undeniably princes, whose existence is fixed in the memory as an image of order and of power, as the ideal of force and beauty, such princes were no ordinary men.
“I see in Lycurgus, Numa, and Mohammed only legislators, who, having the first rank in the State, have sought the best solution of the social problem; but I see nothing there which reveals divinity. They themselves have never raised their pretensions so high. As for me, I recognize the gods and these great men as beings like myself. They have performed a lofty part in their times, as I have done. Nothing announces them divine. On the contrary, there are numerous resemblances between them and myself; foibles and errors which ally them to me and to humanity.
It is not so with Christ. Every thing in him astonishes me. His spirit overawes me, and his will confounds me. Between him and whoever else in the world there is no possible term of comparison. He is truly a being by himself. His ideas and his sentiments, the truths which he announces, his manner of convincing, are not explained either by human organization or by the nature of things.
“His birth, and the history of his life; the profundity of his doctrine, which grapples the mightiest difficulties, and which is of those difficulties the most admirable solution; his gospel, his apparition, his empire, his march across the ages and the realms—every thing is, for me, a prodigy, a mystery insoluble, which plunges me into a reverie from which I can not escape—a mystery which is there before my eyes—a mystery which I can neither deny nor explain! Here I see nothing human.
“The nearer I approach, the more carefully I examine, every thing is above me—every thing remains grand, of a grandeur which overpowers. His religion is a revelation from an intelligence, which certainly is not that of man. There is there a profound originality, which has created a series of words and of maxims before unknown. Jesus borrowed nothing from our sciences. One can absolutely find nowhere, but in him alone, the imitation or the example, of his life. He is not a philosopher, since he advances by miracles, and from the commencement his disciples worshiped him. He persuades them far more by an appeal to the heart than by any display of method and of logic. Neither did he impose upon them any preliminary studies, or any knowledge of letters. All his religion consists in believing.
“In fact, the sciences and philosophy avail nothing for salvation; and Jesus came into the world to reveal the mysteries of heaven and the laws of the spirit. Also, he has nothing to do but with the soul, and to that alone he brings his gospel. The soul is sufficient for him, as he is sufficient for the soul. Before him the soul was nothing. Matter and time were the masters of the world. At his voice every thing returns to order. Science and philosophy become secondary. The soul has reconquered its sovereignty. All the scholastic scaffolding falls, as an edifice ruined, before one single word—Faith.
“What a master, and what a word, which can effect such a revolution! With what authority does he teach men to pray! He imposes his belief. And no one, thus far, has been able to contradict him; first, because the gospel contains the purest morality, and also because the doctrine which it contains of obscurity, is only the proclamation and the truth of that which exists where no eye can see, and no reason can penetrate. Who is the insensate who will say No to the intrepid voyager who recounts the marvels of the icy peaks which he alone has had the boldness to visit Christ is that bold voyager. One can doubtless remain incredulous. But no one can venture to say, It is not so.
“Moreover, consult the philosophers upon those mysterious questions which relate to the essence of man, and the essence of religion. What is their response? Where is the man of good sense who has ever learned any thing from the system of metaphysics, ancient or modern, which is not truly a vain and pompous ideology, without any connection with our domestic life, with our passions Unquestionably, with skill in thinking, one can seize the key of the philosophy of Socrates and Plato. But to do this, it is necessary to be a metaphysician and moreover, with years of study, one must possess special aptitude. But good sense alone, the heart, an honest spirit, are sufficient to comprehend Christianity.
“The Christian religion is neither ideology nor metaphysics, but a practical rule, which directs the actions of man, corrects him, counsels him, and assists him in all his conduct. The Bible contains a complete series of facts and of historical men, to explain time and eternity, such as no other religion has to offer. If this is not the true religion, one is very excusable in being deceived; for every thing in it is grand and worthy of God. I search in vain in history to find the similar to Jesus Christ, or any thing which can approach the gospel. Neither history, nor humanity, nor the ages, nor nature offer me any thing with which I am able to compare it or to explain it.
Here every thing is extraordinary. The more I consider the gospel, the more I am assured that there is nothing there which is not beyond the march of events, and above the human mind. Even the impious themselves have never dared to deny the sublimity of the gospel, which inspires them with a sort of compulsory veneration. What happiness that book procures for those who believe it! What marvels those admire there who reflect upon it!
“All the words there are imbedded and joined one upon another, like the stones of an edifice. The spirit which binds these words together is a divine cement, which now reveals the sense, and again vails it from the mind. Each phrase has a sense complete, which traces the perfection of unity and the profundity of the whole. Book unique, where the mind finds a moral beauty before unknown, and an idea of the Supreme superior even to that which creation suggests. Who, but God, could produce that type, that idea of perfection, equally exclusive and original?
“Christ, having but a few weak disciples, was condemned to death. He died the object of the wrath of the Jewish priests, and of the contempt of the nation, and abandoned and denied by his own disciples.
“They are about .to take me, and to crucify me, said he. I shall be abandoned of all the world. My chief disciple will deny me at the commencement of my punishment. I shall he left to the wicked. But then, divine justice being satisfied, original sin being expiated by my sufferings, the bond of man to God will be renewed, and my death will be the life of my disciples. Then they will be more strong without me than with me; for they will see me rise again. I shall ascend to the skies; and I shall send to them, from heaven, a Spirit who will instruct them. The spirit of the cross will enable them to understand my gospel. In fine, they will believe it; they will preach it; and they will convert the world.
“And this strange promise, so aptly called by Paul the ‘foolishness of the cross,’ this prediction of one miserably crucified, is literally accomplished. And the mode of the accomplishment is perhaps more prodigious than the promise.
“It is not a day, nor a battle which has decided it. Is it the lifetime of a man? No! It is a war, a long combat of three hundred years, commenced by the apostles and continued by their successors and by succeeding generations of Christians. In this conflict all the kings and all the forces of the earth were arrayed on one side. Upon the other I see no army, but a mysterious energy; individuals scattered here and there, in all parts of the globe, having no other rallying sign than a common faith in the mysteries of the cross.
“What a mysterious symbol! The instrument of the punishment of the Man-God. His disciples were armed with it. ‘The Christ,’ ‘they said, ‘God has died for the salvation of men.’ What a strife, what a tempest these simple words have raised around the humble standard of the punishment of the Man-God! On the one side, we see rage and all the furies of hatred and violence. On the other, there is gentleness, moral courage, infinite resignation. For three hundred years spirit struggled against the brutality of sense, conscience against despotism, the soul against the body, virtue against all the vices. The blood of Christians flowed in .torrents.
They died kissing the hand which slew them. The soul alone protested, while the body surrendered itself to all tortures. Every where Christians fell, and every where they triumphed.
“You speak of Caesar, of Alexander; of their conquests, and of the enthusiasm which they enkindled in the hearts of their soldiers. But can you conceive of a dead man making conquests, with an army faithful and entirely devoted to his memory. My armies have forgotten me, even while living, as the Carthaginian army forgot Hannibal, such is our power! A single battle lost crushes us, and adversity scatters our friends.
“Can you conceive of Caesar as the eternal emperor of the Roman senate, and from the depths of his mausoleum governing the empire, watching over the destinies of Rome? Such is the history of the invasion and conquest of the world by Christianity. Such is the power of the God of the Christians; and such is the perpetual miracle of the progress of the faith and of the government of His church. Nations pass away, thrones crumble, but the church remains. What is then the power which has protected this church, thus assailed by the furious billows of rage and the hostility of ages? Whose is the arm which, for eighteen hundred years, has protected the church from so many storms which have threatened to engulf it?
“Alexander, Caesar, Charlemagne, and myself founded empires. But upon what did we rest the creations of our genius? Upon force. Jesus Christ alone founded his empire upon love; and at this hour millions of men would die for him.
“In every other existence but that of Christ, how many imperfections ? Where is the character which has not yielded, vanquished by obstacles? Where is the individual who has never been governed by circumstances or places, who has never succumbed to the influence of the times, who has never compounded with any customs or passions? From the first day to the last he is the same, always the same; majestic and simple, infinitely firm and infinitely gentle.
“Truth should embrace the universe. Such is Christianity, the only religion which destroys sectional prejudice, the only one which proclaims the unity and the absolute brotherhood of the whole human family, the only one which is purely spiritual ; in fine, the only one which assigns to all, without distinction, for a true country, the bosom of the Creator, God. Christ proved that he was the son of the Eternal, by his disregard of time. All his doctrines signify one only, and the same thing, Eternity.
“It is true that Christ proposes to our faith a series of mysteries. He commands, with authority, that we should believe them, giving no other reason than those tremendous words, ‘I am God.’ He declares it. What an abyss he creates, by that declaration, between himself and all the fabricators of religion. What audacity, what sacrilege, what blasphemy, if it were not true! I say more; the universal triumph of an affirmation of that kind, if the triumph were not really that of God himself, would be a plausible excuse, and the proof of atheism.
“Moreover, in propounding mysteries Christ is harmonious with nature, which is profoundly mysterious. From whence do I come? Whither do I go? Who am I? Human life is a mystery in its origin, its organization, and its end. In man and out of man, in nature, every thing is mysterious. And can one wish that religion should not be mysterious? The creation and the destiny of the world are an unfathomable abyss, as also is the creation and the destiny of each individual. Christianity at least does not evade these great questions. It meets them boldly. And our doctrines are a solution of them for every one who believes.
“The gospel possesses a secret virtue, a mysterious efficacy, a warmth which penetrates and soothes the heart. One finds, in meditating upon it, that which one experiences in contemplating the heavens. The gospel is not a book; it is a living being, with an action, a power, which invades every thing which opposes its extension.
Behold it upon this table, this book surpassing all others (here the Emperor deferentially placed his hand upon it); I never omit to read it, and every day with the same pleasure.
“Nowhere is to be found such a series of beautiful ideas, admirable moral maxims, which pass before us like the battalions of a celestial army, and which produce in our soul the same emotion which one experiences in contemplating the infinite expanse of the skies, resplendent in a summer’s night, with all the brilliance of the stars. Not only is our mind absorbed, it is controlled, and the soul can never go astrav with this book for its guide. Once master of our spirit, the faithful gospel loves us. God even is our friend, our father, and truly our God. The mother has no greater care for the infant whom she nurses.
“What a proof of the divinity of Christ! With an empire so absolute, he has but one single end, the spiritual melioration of individuals, the purity of conscience, the union to that which is true, the holiness of the soul.
“Christ speaks, and at once generations become his by stricter, closer ties than those of blood; by the most sacred, the most indissoluble of all unions. He lights up the flame of a love which consumes self-love, which prevails over every other love. The founders of other religious never conceived of this mystical love, which is the essence of Christianity, and is beautifully called charity. In every attempt to effect this thing, namely, to mate himself beloved, man deeply feels his own impotence. So that Christ’s greatest miracle undoubtedly is, the reign of charity.
“I have so inspired multitudes that they would die for me. God forbid that I should form any comparison between the enthusiasm of the soldier and Christian charity, which are are as unlike as their cause. “But, after all, my presence was necessary; the lightning of my eye, my voice, a word from me ; then the sacred fire was kindled in their hearts. I do indeed possess the secret of this magical power, which lifts the soul, but I could never impart it to any one. None of my generals ever learnt it from me. Nor have I the means of perpetuating my name and love for me, in the hearts of men, and to effect these things without physical means.
“Now that I am at St. Helena; now that I am alone chained upon this rock, who fights and wins empires for me? Who are the courtiers of my misfortune? Who thinks of me? Who makes efforts for me in Europe? Where are my friends? Yes, two or three, whom your fidelity immortalizes, you share, you console my exile.
“Here the voice of the Emperor trembled with emotion, and for a moment he was silent. He then continued:
“Yes, our life once shone with all the brilliance of the diadem and the throne; and yours, Bertrand, reflected that splendor, as the dome of the Invalides, gilt by us, reflects the rays of the sun. But disasters came; the gold gradually became dim. The rain of misfortune and outrage with which I am daily deluged has effaced all the brightness. We are mere lead now, General Bertrand, and soon I shall be in my grave.
“Such is the fate of great men! So it was with Caesar and Alexander. And I, too, am forgotten. And the name of a conqueror and an emperor is a college theme! Our exploits are tasks given to pupils by their tutor, who sit in judgment upon us, awarding us censure or praise. And mark what is soon to become of me; assassinated by the English oligarchy, I die before my time; and my dead body, too must return to the earth, to become food for worms. Behold the destiny, near at hand, of him who has been called the great Napoleon.
What an abyas between my deep misery and the eternal reign of Christ, which is proclaimed, loved, adored, and which is extending over all rhe earth. Is this to die? Is it not rather to live? The death of Christ! It is the death of God.

“For a moment the Emperor was silent. As General Bertrand made no reply, he solemnly added,
“If you do not perceive that Jesus Christ is God, very well, then I did wrong to make you a general.”

— Harpers New Monthly Magaizine, By Making of America Project, Page 177-181, Harpers & Brothers
Publishers, New York, New York, 1855


A Brief History of the Baptists

When someone says, “I am a member of a Baptist church,” they are saying more than that they belong to some local church. It ought to mean that they have trusted the Lord Jesus Christ as Savior, that their sins have been forgiven, and they have peace in their soul. It also means they have been obedient to the commands of Christ in following Him in scriptural baptism and uniting with His church. It also means they have found a new relationship and fellowship with other believers. Church membership should be taken very seriously and looked upon as sacred.
— Dr. Edward Watke Jr.

The “tenets” of our faith are laid squarely at the feet of the one who laid the foundation for Jesus Christ to build His church upon (Matthew 16: 18). The “tenets” or doctrines of our faith did not come from John Smyth in 1607, but rather came from the first Baptist preacher whose name was also John. The first Baptist, John the Baptist, had a name given to him by God Himself (Matthew 3:1). This very first of the Christian preachers taught the deity of Christ (John 1:29). He taught the pre-existence of Jesus (John 1:15). This NT. Baptist’s first public words were the warning of repentance (Matthew 3:1-2). John the Baptist taught the Sovereignty of God (Matthew 3:9). He taught about the Holy Spirit (Matthew 3:11). John stressed the confession of sin (Matthew 3:6). He refused to baptize unbelievers (Matthew 3:7-8). And this great man’s baptism was by immersion, not sprinkling, and this baptism was not for salvation, but rather to “make Christ manifest” (John 1:31). John the Baptist also preached the absolute certainty of judgment (Matthew 3:12). He taught individual responsibility in the matter of salvation, rather than a salvation by proxy (Matthew 3:9). He emphasized clean living and Christian conduct (Luke 3:8). He held to the substitutionary atonement( John 1:29,36). He believed in the total depravity and helplessness of man (John 3:27). He had a close fellowship with God and walked with Him (John 1:33). And the world’s first Baptist preacher believed in witnessing and winning the lost to Christ (John 5:33,35).

In 1894, Edward T. Hiscox wrote the New Directory for Baptist Churches. In this book, which for over 100 years has been a standard among Baptists, on pages 492-493, Mr. Hiscox wrote, “Baptists have a history of which they need not be ashamed–a history of noble names and noble deeds, extending back through many ages, in which the present generation well may glory. From the days of John the Baptist until now, a great army of these witnesses for the truth, and martyrs for its sake, has illumined and honoured the march of Christian history. The ages since Christ have known no purer, nobler lives, no braver, more faithful witnesses for the Gospel of Christ, no more glorious martyrs for its sake, than many of those who honour us by being called our “fathers in the faith”.

In 1880, the great Baptist historian, author, lecturer, theologian and preacher, J. R. Graves, wrote in the foreword and dedication to his monumental work, Old Landmarkism, “This little work is dedicated and it’s dissemination throughout the denomination committed to every Baptist brother and sister and especially my brethren in the ministry and of the press in America, who love those principles for which our Baptist Fathers for 18 centuries suffered cruel mockings, bloody stripes, imprisonment, and martyrdoms. . .” Dr. Graves edited a denominational paper, The Tennessee Baptist for many years. He at one time was pastor of the First Baptist Church in New Orleans. He authored eleven books and was generally considered the most eloquent preacher in the entire South at that time.

Even the principal Lutheran historian, Johann Laurenz von Mosheim, wrote, “Before the rise of Luther and Calvin, there lay secreted in almost all of the countries of Europe persons who adhered tenaciously to the principles of modern Dutch Baptists.” and “The first century was a history of the Baptist.

And the Edinburgh Encyclopedia, a Presbyterian publication, states, “It must have already occurred to our readers that the Baptists are the same sect of Christians that were formerly described as Ana-Baptists. Indeed this seems to have been their leading principle from the time of Tertullian to the present time.” Tertullian was born just fifty years after the death of the Apostle John.

Other renowned scholars and writers, some knowingly, some cluelessly, have lent their support to the notion that the original church of Christendom was a Baptist church. Such men as Heinrich Bullinger (1504-1575), the aide and successor to the reformer Zwingli admitted that as contrary as the doctrine was, this doctrine of the Baptists persisted from the days of the Apostles.

Even famed English scientist, Sir Isaac Newton, wrote, “The modern Baptists formerly called Anabaptists are the only people that never symbolized with the Papacy.” He thus admits that the beginning of this illustrious group of Christians began sometime before the Roman Catholic system itself.

Testimonies to this fact can also be extracted from the writings of such great minds as those of Professor David Masson of Edinburgh University (1822-1907); William C. King, editor of Crossing the Centuries; Robert Barclay the Quaker theologian (1648-1690); Alexander Campbell, founder of the Churches of Christ; and respected American educator and historian, John Clarke Ridpath, a Methodist. Mr. Ridpath, professor for sixteen years of what is now known as De Pauw University said, “I should not readily admit that there was a Baptist Church as far back as A.D. 100, although without doubt there were Baptists then, as all Christians were then Baptists.

Dr. John T. Christian (Baptist): “I have no question in my own mind that there has been an historical succession of the Baptists from the days of Christ to the present time” (History of Baptists, p.5).

Also note that the well-respected Baptist apologist, J. M Carroll, whose book The Trail of Blood has been printed continuously since it was copyrighted in 1931, and whose numbers now reach well into the millions, says simply that it is “The History of Baptist Churches from the Time of Christ, Their Founder, to the Present Day”.

In 1912, D. B. Ray authored the coveted treasure, Baptist Succession, a Handbook of Baptist History and in the preface, Dr. Ray wrote, “Baptists have, with one voice denied any connection with the Roman apostasy, and claimed their origin, as a church, from Jesus Christ and the apostles“.

David Benedict, pastor of the Baptist church in Pawtucket, Rhode Island, wrote his classic “A General History of the Baptist Denomination” in 1813. All throughout the over 1200 pages of his monumental work, Mr. Benedict asserts that the Baptist denomination of his day was most assuredly the same as the church started by Jesus Christ Himself while He was on earth. He is most emphatic to state that the original church was a Baptist church.

Yet another author, Charles B. Stovall, in his book, Baptist History and Succession, says, “It will be seen that the Baptists claim the high antiquity of the commencement of the Christian church. They can trace a succession of those who have believed the same doctrine and administered the same ordinances directly, up to the Apostolic Age.”

M. M. Munger, in his book, “Baptist Churches From Jerusalem to North America”, wrote, “The intention of this little work is to show that from the time of Christ, beginning while He was on earth, the church of Christ has not failed to exist down to this present year of 1926. We have chosen this line of history as being the most simple and direct; Jerusalem, Rome, Britain (now Wales), to the North American colonies. Baptist church perpetuity is a proven fact.

And, of course, the testimony of the venerable G. H. Orchard, the great English Baptist wrote prior to 1855, “A Concise History of Baptists from the time of Christ their Founder to the 18th Century. “

Perhaps W. A. Jarrel said it best when he wrote in his book, Baptist Church Perpetuity or History in 1894, “the Baptist movement in history has always been back to the New Testament … then it was about 150 A.D. that the first Baptist protest was raised by the Montanists”.

Alexander Campbell (Founder of the Disciple, or Christian/ Church of Christ): “The Baptists can trace their origin to Apostolic times and can produce unequivocal testimony of their existence in every century down to the present time” (Debate with walker).

“Hence it is, that the Baptist denomination in all ages and in all centuries has been as a body the constant asserters of the rights of man and liberty of conscience” (Baptism, p. 409).

John C. Ripath (Methodist): “I should not readily admit that there was a Baptist church as far back as 100 A.D.; though without a doubt, there were Baptists as all Christians were then Baptists.” (Clarrel’s Church Perpetuity, p. 59) COMMENT: If all Christians were then Baptists, what kind of churches did they form? Baptist churches, of course.

To further prove that the German Baptists sprang from, or rather were, the same people as the Ancient Waldenses, we introduce the statement made by a committee appointed by the King of Holland to write a history of the Dutch Reformed Church. In this history there is a chapter devoted to the Baptists. This history was published at Breda, 1819, by Dr. Ypeig Professor of Theeology at Gronigen, and Rev. I. J. Dermout, Chaplain to the King, learned Pedobaptists. These men had access to all of the libraries and archives of Germany and Holland. After a careful study of the Baptists they made this statement: “We have now seen that the Baptists who were formerly called Anabaptist, and, in latter times, Mennonites, were the original Waldenses; and have long, in the history of the church receive the honor of that origin. On this account Baptists may be considered the only Christian community which has stood since the days of the Apostles, and as a Christian society, which has preserved the pure doctrines of the gospel through all ages.

They further state that the Reformation was unnecessary, because the Baptists, then known as Anabaptists, Waldenses and other names, were preaching the Gospel in its simplicity, long before Luther; yea, even from the days of the Apostles. They further state that the existence of Baptists through all the ages since Christ “refute the erroneous notion of the Catholics that their communion is the most ancient.” Rel. En., p. 786. This is not the language of narrow Baptists, but of learned Pedobaptists, and is worthy to be embalmed in the memory of every lover of the truth. Baptists have a succession back to Christ!

To the above statement by the learned Pedobaptist historians as to Baptist origin, Newton Brown, editor of the Religious Encyclopedia says: “This testimony from the highest official authority in the Dutch Reformed Church, is certainly a rare instance of liberality toward another denomination, conceding all the Mennonites or Baptists claim.”

Nam & alterius Principis edictum non ita pridem legi, qui vicem Anabaptistarum dolens, quos ante mille ducentos annes haeretisos, capitalique supplicio dignos esse pronunciatos legimus, vult, ut audiantur omnino, nec indicta ca usa pro condemnatis habeantur. (The letters of Cardinal Stanislaus Hosius, Liber Epistolarum 150, titled “Alberto Bavariae Duci” in about 1563 A.D.)
Translation of Quote:
For not so long ago I read the edict of the other prince who lamented the fate of the Anabaptists who, so we read, were pronounced heretics twelve hundred years ago and deserving of capital punishment. He wanted them to be heard and not taken as condemned without a hearing.
(by Carolinne White, Ph.D, Oxford University, Head of Oxford Latin)