Things New and Old

Ancient truths revealed in the Scriptures are often forgotten, disbelieved or distorted, and therefore lost in the passage of time. Such ancient truths when rediscovered and relearned are 'new' additions to the treasury of ancient truths.

Christ showed many new things to the disciples, things prophesied by the prophets of old but hijacked and perverted by the elders and their traditions, but which Christ reclaimed and returned to His people.

Many things taught by the Apostles of Christ have been perverted or substituted over the centuries. Such fundamental doctrines like salvation by grace and justification have been hijacked and perverted and repudiated by sincere Christians. These doctrines need to be reclaimed and restored to God's people.

There are things both new and old here. "Consider what I say; and the Lord give thee understanding in all things"
2Ti 2:7.

Thursday, October 9, 2025

Old and New PBs - How things have changed!

 

How things have changed!

For example, I have a copy of "The Primitive Baptist Confession of Faith of 1900 - Fulton, Kentucky" before me. It has the title, "Those Things Most Surely Believed Among Us."

You can find a copy here:
http://www.puritanboard.com/.../primitive-baptist.../

It is basically the original unabridged 1689 CoF, with Footnotes added. At the said Convention at Fulton in 1900, more than 60 Primitive Baptist ministers of the gospel put their names to that Baptist Confession.

Do remember that the RBs who have hijacked that Confession did not begin to exist until the early 1960's. So, it is anachronistic to label it as a 'reformed confession', as some lacking common sense do.

Times have changed. The same Confession is today despised or shunned by many younger PBs. Such say that the PB CoF 1900 teaches serious errors, for example, gospel regeneration! Whatever has happened?

Perhaps those at the Fulton Convention were wrong and most surely believed some serious errors, and the younger PBs saw the errors that the older PBs didn't!

(For the record, I affirm that the Confession is a human document, and so is not infallible nor inerrant.)

Why would supposedly wise people cast away precious family heirloom? Grown smarter?

---------

Comments

Suzanne 
Bro. Sing, this is not far from where we grew up.

Sing
You mean you recognize the place???
So, you haven't move on then!!! Where is the place?

Suzanne
David and I were talking about this the other day. I'll have to get him to tell me and the next time I am there, I'll post a picture.

Travis
Bro. Sing I lived for 8 years about 15 miles from Fulton, and no, I didn't sign it.

Sing
Brother Travis, you were already too old to hold a pen in 1900! <LOL> How are you? Do you still go to the Tagalogland?

You are unique... being the first PB in the world I have ever met, and spoke to us here in Malaysia.

Travis
I look back upon that visit with fondness. I'm doing great, my wife has a few challenges. My regards to sis Alice. I guess all of the kidos have left the nest except one? It has been a year since my last PH visit, how about you?

Mark Thomas
There is at least 1 PB who stands with the signatories of the Fulton for as long as I live and breathe.

Charles
Fulton Footnote: We understand this section to teach that all persons dying in infancy are of the elect, and will therefore be saved.

Sing, do you hold this view? "all persons dying in infancy are of the elect" I am inclined to believe "all elect persons dying in infancy will be saved."

John MacArthur holds this view that all deceased infants are elect due to God's foreknowledge. So that Adults who believe were foreknown to believe and therefore elect!

Sing
My understanding of 1689.10.3 is very simple: ONLY the elect are under consideration, and no one else.

1689.10 deal with the effectual calling of those predestinated unto eternal life.

The CONTEXT, CONTEXT, CONTEXT!

Charles
One of the Reformist (Sproul or MacA) suggested that the infants get a second chance after death to make a decision and thereby evidence their election!

Yet people ridicule me for advocating purgatory!

I would never even hint to speculate about anyone getting a second chance after death!

Sing
Isn't RCC's purgatory different from what you are saying?
Why do your opponent just conveniently associate it with the Romish idea?

Linda
There are NO second chances. God foreknew us all and so because of this He knows who the elect are. BUt I still believe that infants dying will be with the Father.

Charles
absolutely different! Hell is about justice, not purgative nor redemptive as the Catholic teach.

For many Catholic comparisons are mere ad hominem attacks. It only serves to congeal others against you without any serious inquiry as to what you are proposing! Appeal to scripture is useless against ad hominem attacks! They won't listen and won't be rational.

Charles
Linda, all who die return to the Father, their creator! Their physical and visible part goes to the grave. all the elect go to heaven. God exercised foreknowledge not foresight in our election. Foresight is NOT a cause of election.

Linda
That's what I said Charles. God Foreknew. He knows everything. He is the all-knowing God. And then so, where do these babies go? So then election is before life?

Charles
Linda, everybody goes to be with the Lord when they die. You are asking do they go to the lake of fire or to streets of gold.

That is determined by election and takes place after the bodily resurrection. My assumption is that not all babies are elect.

Sing
Linda, "foreknow" as in God foreknowing is God setting His electing love upon a specific and definite people BEFORE the foundation of the world. God foreknowing is NOT God knowing BEFOREHAND, although God knows all things.

Sing
Charles, thanks for the neat answer...