Baptist history on Ancestry

If you have an Ancestry subscription, are interested in Texas Baptist history, and especially if you are interested in the Anderson Baptist Church (formerly Antioch) of Grimes County, Texas, there are 29 pages of membership records here:

https://www.ancestry.com/search/collections/62267/records/3289

There are some records of five other churches that follow alphabetically (some, unfortunately, not that well labeled).

Or for broader searches, see HERE.

What we lose

As an old dinosaur, perhaps, I am particularly pained and puzzled by the move away from Bibles as books to Bibles on screens, phones, and computers. Now to be clear, I am not against using these resources when they can be a help – but, like Dustin Benge (a younger person and also an educator), overall, I see the switch is a loss rather than a gain.

What we lose when the Bible is only on a screen:

1. You remember where the verse lives on the page and aids memorization.

2. The page shows you much more at once. You see the context, not just a few verses at once.

3. The page keeps your notes. Years from now they will still be there, in your own hand.

4. The page cannot distract you with a notification. It only asks to be read.

5. The page is something your children watch you open and they know it’s the Bible.

The screen gives much. The page gives more.

- Dustin Benge

Household baptisms, reprise

In total there are three clear statements referencing “household baptism” in the New Testament (Acts 16:15, 33-34; I Corinthians 1:16), as well as two that may be considered implied (Acts 10:47-48; 18:8). Pædobaptists assert that “household baptism” are proof of “infant baptism.”[1]  However, the second (infant baptism) does not logically follow the first (household baptism).[2] In addition to the logical fallacy, contextual statements in each biblical case provide evidence against rather than support for infant baptism. 

Rather than infant baptism, the Bible teaches believers’ baptism. The command, precept, and example of the New Testament is that belief – faith in the Lord Jesus Christ – must precede baptism (immersion in water).

Below is a chart showing these five biblical “household baptisms.”

---

[1] “…when the NT merely says that Lydia believed and she was baptized and her household, it is far more natural to assume her children were included.” Derek Carlsen, Faith and Courage, page 374. “Pædobaptist” is a theological term for those who baptize infants. Most are more properly “pædorantist,” that is, they sprinkle (ραντιζω) rather than baptize (immerse, βαπτιζω) infants.
[2] Pædobaptists must assume that all households always have infants, which is incorrect. Notice that Carlsen must assume (1) Lydia is married, (2) Lydia has children, (3) Lydia has young children for whom she must stand proxy, and (4) the household in this needed case must necessarily include parents and children.

Jude 1:19 in the KJV & NKJV

Jude 1:19 gives another test case on whether the New King James Bible prefers a Critical or Majority Text reading over the Textus Receptus. First, remember their claim:

“While the New Testament scholars were free to consult any available Greek text, and they did so, each agreed to follow the Greek text developed by Dr. F. H. A. Scrivener. This text, originally published by Cambridge University Press, reconstructed as closely as possible the Greek text underlying the King James Version.” (“A New King James Version,” in “The History of the King James Bible,” Holy Bible, The New King James Version, p. 1234.)

Does the “they” of Jude 1:19 “separate themselves” or “cause divisions”? Compare the difference in the translations of the King James and New King James.

• AKJV: These be they who separate themselves, sensual, having not the Spirit.
• NKJV: These are sensual persons, who cause divisions, not having the Spirit.

Now also compare the printed Greek Critical Text, Majority Text, and Textus Receptus. The first two are the same and the Textus Receptus contains a word not found in those two.

• CT: Οὗτοί εἰσιν οἱ ἀποδιορίζοντες, ψυχικοί, πνεῦμα μὴ ἔχοντες.
• MT: Οὗτοί εἰσιν οἱ ἀποδιορίζοντες, ψυχικοί, Πνεῦμα μὴ ἔχοντες.
• TR: 19 οὗτοί εἰσιν οἱ ἀποδιορίζοντες ἐαυτούς, ψυχικοί, πνεῦμα μὴ ἔχοντες.

Finally, compare these pictures Greek text of the 1598 Theodore Beza, which the King James translators followed (first picture) and the Majority Text of Hodges and Farstad, which the New King James editors inadvertently suggest they followed.

The first picture is from the 1598 Novum Testamentum by Theodore Beza (p. 520).[i] The yellow highlighting shows the Greek word ἐαυτούς, which is not found in the Critical Text or Majority Text.

The second picture is from The NKJV Greek English interlinear New Testament (Nashville: Thomas Nelson, 1994, p. 838), edited by Arthur Farstad and others. The red arrow shows the word ἐαυτούς is missing in this text.

This interlinear uses The Greek New Testament According to the Majority Text, by Hodges and Farstad (2nd Edition, 1985, Thomas Nelson). This tacitly shows that the translation of the New King James Bible in this place matches the Majority Text (and in effect the Critical Text, which is the same) rather than the Scrivener TR as promised by the editors.[ii] The translation matches more closely modern translations rather than the King James Bible because the translators were influenced by a different underlying Greek text. There is a difference here. It is not just a translation decision.

Jude 1:19 presents another case in which the NKJV editors and translators say one thing and do another. If you wish to use the New King James Version that is your prerogative – but don’t keep telling us that it is a faithful modern update of the King James Bible.

---

[i] Beza adds this note about verse 19:
Qui seipsos segregani, οἱ ἀποδιορίζοντες ἐαυτούς. Addidimus ἐαυτούς ex Veteris interpretis & trium vetustorum codidum fide: quanquam etiam possimus non inepte hoc referre ad alios quos isti a verae Ecclesiae coetu abducant. Hi sunt inmirum quos Paulus ἰτεοδιδασχαλυῶ τας & αἰοεποκοις vocat, id est qui peculiarem doctrinam docent, & sectas instituunt. 
Who separate themselves, οἱ ἀποδιορίζοντες ἐαυτούς. We have added ἐαυτούς (themselves) from the faith of the Old Interpreter and the three ancient codices: although we can also not inappropriately refer this to others whom these lead away from the assembly of the true Church. These are the ones, no doubt, whom Paul calls ἰτεοδιδασχαλυῶ τας & αἰοεποκοις, that is, those who teach a peculiar doctrine, and establish sects.
It is not clear to me to which old interpreter Beza is referring. In his commentary on this text, John Calvin noted that “Some Greek copies have the participle by itself, other copies add ἑαυτοὺς, ‘themselves’.” His conclusion was that the meaning “is nearly the same,” and that Jude means those that separated from the church. That meaning would be gathered from ἑαυτοὺς.
[ii] In this case, supporters can declare that the NKJV is following a different TR, such as the 1550 Stephanus. However, while this is correct, remember that the editors themselves claimed they were following “the Greek text developed by Dr. F. H. A. Scrivener.” In The NKJV Greek English interlinear New Testament the editors state, “The word-for-word interlinear English is the first translation of the Majority Text.” So clearly they understand that the NKJV translation they have matches the Majority Text over the TR in this place.

The Prayer of Cyrus Brown

Cyrus Brown and his advisers, on the posture of prayer:

THE PRAYER OF CYRUS BROWN

“The proper way for a man to pray,”
  Said Deacon Lemuel Keyes,
  “And the only proper attitude
  Is down upon his knees.”

“Nay, I should say the way to pray,”
  Said Reverend Dr. Wise,
  “Is standing straight with outstretched arms
  And rapt and upturned eyes.”

“Oh, no, no, no,” said Elder Snow;
  “Such posture is too proud.
  A man should pray with eyes fast closed
  And head contritely bowed.”

“It seems to me his hands should be
  Austerely clasped in front.
  With both thumbs pointing toward the ground,”
  Said Reverend Dr. Hunt.

“Las’ year I fell in Hodgkin’s well
  Head first,” said Cyrus Brown,
  “With both my heels a-stickin’ up,
  My head a-p’inting down;

“An’ I made a prayer right then an’ there;
  Best prayer I ever said;
  The prayingest prayer I ever prayed;
  A-standin’ on my head.”

– By Samuel Walter Foss (1858-1911)

The castle of the human heart

“The heart taken” is Hymn 101, Book One in Olney Hymns – on the text [Luke] “Chap. xi. 21, 22.”[i]

When a strong man armed keepeth his palace, his goods are in peace: but when a stronger than he shall come upon him, and overcome him, he taketh from him all his armour wherein he trusted, and divideth his spoils.

The hymn emphasizes the depravity of man, with native sin and Satan set up in the human heart. However, praise God, the strong man Satan is routed by the stronger man Jesus Christ, who rescues from sin and darkness, translating the delivered into his kingdom! The hymn ends with the rebel soul now subdued and rejoicing to be all in for Christ.

1. The castle of the human heart
Strong in its native sin,
Is guarded well, in ev’ry part,
By him who dwells within.

2. For Satan there, in arms, resides,
And calls the place his own;
With care against assaults provides,
And rules, as on a throne.

3. Each traitor thought on him, as chief,
In blind obedience waits;
And pride, self-will, and unbelief,
Are posted at the gates.

4. Thus Satan for a season reigns,
And keeps his goods in peace;
The soul is pleas’d to wear his chains,
Nor wishes a release.

5. But Jesus, stronger far than he,
In his appointed hour
Appears, to set his people free
From the usurper’s pow’r.

6. “This heart I bought with blood” he says,
“And now it shall be mine.”
His voice the strong one arm’d dismays,
He knows he must resign.

7. In spite of unbelief and pride,
And self, and Satan’s art;
The gates of brass fly open wide,
And Jesus wins the heart.

8. The rebel soul that once withstood
The Saviour’s kindest call;
Rejoices now, by grace subdued,
To serve Him with her all.

I have not found this particular hymn used with any tune, though it likely has been. Written in Common Meter, it offers many tune prospects. I suggest the wonderful old hymn tune Mear. One might also consider New Britain, commonly used with Newton’s “Amazing Grace,” or the tune Avon by Hugh Wilson. Hymnary.org suggests the tune Wrexford by A. H. Mann (but I did not notice an example of the two paired together).

The life of John Newton is perhaps one of the best-known and widely circulated of English hymn writers – due to his dramatic deliverance from slaver to abolitionist, from reprobate to rector (minister). “Hymn of the Day” writes that John Newton’s “theological insights and pastoral care through his words are a dagger to my heart, a balm to my soul, and an encouragement in my race to press onto Christlikeness.” “Amazing Grace,” according to biographer Jonathan Aitken, is “the most sung, most recorded and most loved hymn in the world.” That hymn, titled “Faith’s Review and Expectation,” was prepared by John Newton for a New Year’s sermon on January 1, 1773. Newton was a prolific writer with amazing output –not only many hymns, but also for journals, theology, letters. and sermons.

John Newton was born in London August 4, 1725, the son of shipmaster John Newton. He married Mary Catlett in 1750. Mary died in 1790, and John died 21 December 21, 1807. They were originally buried in the vault beneath the St. Mary Woolnoth Church, where he had served as rector for 28 years. London’s progress could wait for no man, not even the author of the “Christian National Anthem.” Before they built a railway station beneath the church, the remains of John Newton and his wife Mary were removed in January of 1893 to the churchyard of St. Peter and Paul in Olney, where Newton had lived when he published Olney Hymns.

The Southern Echo, Monday, January 16, 1893, p. 4

---

[i] The “Book One” section of Olney Hymns contains hymn “On Select Texts of Scripture.”

All in me

“I have read the Bible and found many errors, all of which were in me.” Greg Mathis

I don’t know Greg Mathis. 

I began to read this – “the Bible…found many errors” – and I was shocked by the audacity! 

Then I read the punch line – “all of which were in me” – and I was shamed by the accuracy!

Baptists afraid of water?

A Little Humor in Baptist History: 

...Elder Hastings...had just returned from the ordination of Mr. Whelpley, a baptist minister, in Sandersfield, Mass. This young man was educated at Providence college, as I heard; studied divinity with Dr. Stillman, of Boston, and was quite in clerical fashion. As he had a college education, and was something like the clergy in Connecticut, several of the presbyterian clergy attended. Elder Hastings stated to us that Elder John Leland was appointed to preach the ordination sermon. He said that when the people came together, the meeting-house would not hold them. The people then went to a grove, near the house; erected a stage that the people might hear. Mr. Leland had not spoken long, before it began to rain a little, so that several people went to the meeting-house for a shelter. As they were going, Elder Leland said to old Elder Thomas Morse, “What shall I do, father Morse?” He replied, “Wait a little while; the rain will soon be over, and the people will return.” He sat a while; the cloud passed over, and the people returned. After they were all seated, ready to hear, Mr. Leland rose up, and after looking around, as though surprised, and wishing also to sting the clergy severely on account of their infant sprinkling, he said, “My friends, I am astonished to see baptists afraid of water! But when I come to think, it is sprinkling; and I do not wonder that you flee from it.” This was a severe stroke upon the Connecticut clergy, and very mortifying to Mr. Whelpley. Mr. Leland having said this, proceeded in his sermon as he had proposed before the shower.

From The Life, Conversion, Preaching, Travels, and Sufferings of Elias Smith, pp. 224-225