Primitive Baptists

[satz]

Does anyone have any idea what the term 'primitive baptist' means? i have heard reference to churches called this in various articles i have read, but don't know exactly what these churches believe. How do they differ from other baptists? Are they reformed?

 

[LawrenceU]

In the middle of the 1800's the Baptist churches in the United states began to divide over the outworking of theology and how that impacted evangleism. It is more complex that what I am going to write, but here goes:

The Particular (read reformed) baptists did not believe that congregations should lump their funds together for the sending of missionaries. The baptists who were becoming Arminian did. The divide ended up with new names being applied. Primative Baptists - Reformed / Missionay Baptists - Arminian or Almyridan.

 

[satz]

hmm...thanks lawrence

so if i understand you correctly, primitive simply = reformed?

Well, just a side note then...how come all the members on this board belong to churches that denote themselves as 'reformed baptist'? why not primitive baptist then? i suppose reformed just sounds better than primitive...but any other reason?

 

[doulosChristou]

The Primitive Baptists are still around here in the South. Many if not most of them have fallen tragically into hyper-Calvinism. One thing that certainly sets them apart from today's Reformed Baptists is their belief in three ordinances: baptism, communion, and foot washing.

 

[Ianterrell]

Haha I was so tempted to insert a joke here, but I won't. But yeah...are there any Primtive Baptist speakers, or writers that are noteworthy?

 

[doulosChristou]

Not to my knowledge, Ian. The PBs do not believe in seminary education. Their elders are suppose to be "self-educated" men in the Scriptures. I know of no PB who is published. As for speakers, the PBs tend to keep to themselves. Like I said, they've fallen into hyper-Calvinism. The following FAQ may be helpful:

http://www.pb.org/pbfaq.html

[Edited on 10-1-2005 by doulosChristou]

 

[VirginiaHuguenot]

That FAQ was extremely interesting to me. I was all set to launch into a joke at the Primitive Baptists expense, but after reading the questions and answers I was shocked to find how much I have in agreement with them. That being said, they also have some pretty strange teachings too, In my humble opinion.

 

[pastorway]

The Primitive Baptist churches that still exist are an association of like minded churches. I don't think they call themselves a denomination as each church is independent but they are mostly all closely related to one another.

Yes they do tend strongly toward hyper-calvinism, but they do have noteworthy preachers (Elder Lasserre Bradley is the foremost PB preacher that comes to mind) and a few of their elders have published works. Several of the most able preachers I know in America today are or were at the onset of their ministry Primitive Baptists.

They do have foot washing as an ordiance, are usually KJV Only, are Landmark requiring baptism in one of their churches in order for membership, and sing without instruments.

For more see these links:

Periodicals and Publishing - http://www.pb.org/pbpapers.html
Sermons - http://www.pb.org/audio.html

On a personal note, I discovered several years into my own ministry that my great uncle was a Primitive Baptist circuit riding church planter in West Texas. One of my best friends (the man who brought me to the doctrines of grace when we were in our early teens) and his dad have both pastored churches that my uncle planted.

Phillip

 

[yeutter]

Elder Lassarre Bradley, Jr. not hyper-Calvinist

Many years ago the US Army sent me to central Virginia for the summer. I became aquainted with the Primitive Baptists rather then tolerate the liberalism of the local Presbyterian and Episcopal Kirks.
Primitive Baptists seem to be divided into four camps. The first division is sadly along racial lines. The second divide is those who are truely hyper-Calvinist and those like elder Lassarre Bradley Jr. who are no more Calvinist then John Gill or Homer Hanko, or Herman Hoeksema

 

[VirginiaHuguenot]

Originally posted by yeutter
Many years ago the US Army sent me to central Virginia for the summer. I became aquainted with the Primitive Baptists rather then tolerate the liberalism of the local Presbyterian and Episcopal Kirks.
Primitive Baptists seem to be divided into four camps. The first division is sadly along racial lines. The second divide is those who are truely hyper-Calvinist and those like elder Lassarre Bradley Jr. who are no more Calvinist then John Gill or Homer Hanko, or Herman Hoeksema

Whereabouts in central Virginia?

 

[RamistThomist]

I too, was also temtped to joke when I first read of them, but I can almost appreciate them in some ways. If anyone can find the 4 volumes of the Encyclopedia of Protestantism (?) look for the article on them, it is quite worth the read.

 

[doulosChristou]

Originally posted by yeutter
Primitive Baptists seem to be divided into four camps. The first division is sadly along racial lines. The second divide is those who are truely hyper-Calvinist and those like elder Lassarre Bradley Jr. who are no more Calvinist then John Gill or Homer Hanko, or Herman Hoeksema

I don't know enough about those other men, but I've read enough of John Gill to know with certainty that, contrary to the claims of some of my reformed Baptist friends and professors, he was a hyper-Calvinist. Webmaster has a good critique of the hyper error here:

http://www.apuritansmind.com/PuritanWorship/McMahonABriefCritiqueOfHyper-Calvinism.htm

Hyper-Calvinism remains a tremendous danger today and must be guarded against.

 

[satz]

Thanks for all the help guys...

I got the passage below from the FAQ that was posted; (err..how DO you use the qoute function?!)
.
.
There are cases where former baptisms are obviously in gross error (e.g. infant baptisms, sprinklings, etc) and therefore necessitate rebaptism; however, the scriptures offer few guidelines as to the exact point at which rebaptism is required; consequently, the safest and most objective policy is to rebaptize as a general rule.
.
.

Would anyone like to comment on this? Specifically their well, almost casual attitude to rebaptism. The pasage almost seems to imply 'rebaptize everyone, just in case!'. What is the 'orthodox' view on this?

 

[Scot]

http://www.olpbc.com/

 

[yeutter]

The definition of hypercalvinist used by many on this board includes anyone who denies the free well meant offer of the gospel. The trouble with this definition is it does not make a distinction between those, on the one hand, who believe the Gospel should be preached to everyone and those who avoid preaching the gospel promiscuously. The position of Elder Lassarre Bradley, Jr. is that the Gospel should be preached to everyone without distiniction.

The question that I think best distinguishes hyper calvinists from the reformed is "Does Scripture teach that God employs the preaching of the Gospel as a means of grace in the regeneration of sinners?"

I would answer yes. So would have Gerstner, Hoeksema and, I think, Bradley. True hypercalvinists would deny that proposition.

 

[ConfederateTheocrat]

Originally posted by doulosChristou
One thing that certainly sets them apart from today's Reformed Baptists is their belief in three ordinances: baptism, communion, and foot washing.

That's great .

 

[turmeric]

Originally posted by doulosChristou One thing that certainly sets them apart from today's Reformed Baptists is their belief in three ordinances: baptism, communion, and foot washing.

Footwashing? Rebaptizing? What is this thing with Baptists & water?

 

[ConfederateTheocrat]

Originally posted by turmeric

Originally posted by doulosChristou One thing that certainly sets them apart from today's Reformed Baptists is their belief in three ordinances: baptism, communion, and foot washing.

Footwashing? Rebaptizing? What is this thing with Baptists & water?