Elder Robert G. Green

I am hoping/trying to identify Robert G. Green, who was involved in the organization of Union Baptist Church in 1838 near Nacogdoches, Nacogdoches County, Texas and Plum Grove (Hopewell) Baptist Church in 1839 near La Grange in Fayette County, Texas. Morrell mentions him three times in his book Flowers and Fruits from the Wilderness.

Flowers and Fruits, page 187

At the time of the organization of Union, Reed lived probably 30 miles north of Nacogdoches

Flowers and Fruits, page 141

In this Morrell is quoting from the letter of the church to the Union Baptist Association

Flowers and Fruits, pp. 200-201

This last mention of Green by Morrell is concerning Baptists ministers who were in Huntsville, Walker County, Texas around the time he was trying or organize a church there. It is certainly not complimentary, but perhaps instructive of both from whence he came (Tennessee) and the last-certainly-known place he was living in Texas. He was evidently around Nacogdoches early in 1838, and was living in or near Bastrop when he helped organize the church at Plum Grove. He may have only been passing through Nacogdoches. The Union Church was organized in May 1838, and at least as early as September 1838, Green was advertising as an attorney-at-law in Bastrop. Though Morrell describes Green in Huntsville, he evidently had still been a member of Providence in Bastrop County up to the time he was excluded for drunkenness. The Robert G. Green in the 1830 Tipton County, Tennessee census may well be him. (For example, an R. G. Green filed a Tipton County circuit court legal notice in 1832.) If so, his age range puts his birth between 1781 and 1790.

J. M. Carroll in A History of Texas Baptists (pp. 124-125), quotes from History of the Primitive Baptists of Texas, Oklahoma, and Indian Territory, by J. S. Newman (pp. 37-38, 1906). According to Carroll, Newman had access to the minutes of the Providence Baptist Church, which met on or near the Colorado River in Bastrop County, about 12-15 miles south of the town of Bastrop. The church was organized in 1834, in the district of Mena (Mina) of the State of Coahuila y Tejas – while this still belonged to Mexico. Both Asahel Dancer and R. G. Green were members of this church when they organized the Plum Grove Church. Newman writes:

“Elder R. G. Green joined by letter in December, 1838, and excluded for drunkenness in February, 1840.”

Green is not mentioned as a member of the Union (Old North) Church near Nacogdoches. He served on the organizational presbytery, prayed the organizational prayer, and served as moderator of the conference when the organized church adopted the name Union.

It seems easy to believe – though proof is not positive – that this could be the R. G. Green who briefly edited a paper in Lexington, Holmes County, Mississippi; who served on the Board of Trustees of the Judson Institute, while living in Choctaw County, Mississippi; and who married Mrs. Elizabeth Boren (or Bowen) in Warren County, Mississippi December 25, 1837.

Perhaps because R. G. Green disgraced himself with drunkenness, was excluded from his church, and left frenzied in the streets of Huntsville in Morrell’s history – no one has bothered to discover what happened to him. Additionally, he may have been estranged from wife and children (the former of which would seem to be suggested by Morrell). However, if he is found to be the R. G. Green, Esq. of Crockett, Texas, he may have recovered at least a modicum of respect.

A proposed outline suggesting a line for further research on Robert G. Green.

• 1781-1790. Birth; guess based on 1830 census.
• 1815. Possible marriage; guess based on 1830 census.
• 1830. Tipton County, Tennessee. (Census)
• 1831. Tipton County, Tennessee (A Commissioner).
• 1834. Ordained by or before 1835, when Z. N. Morrell left Tennessee.
• 1835. Lexington, Holmes County, Mississippi.
• 1836. Choctaw County, Mississippi.
• 1837. Warren County, Mississippi.
• 1838. Bastrop, Bastrop County, Texas.
• 1840. Bastrop, Bastrop County, Texas.
• 1842. Huntsville, Walker County, Texas (at least before September 1844).
• 1845. Crockett, Houston County, Texas.

With nothing obvious turning up for R. G. Green after 1845, perhaps his death occurred 1845-1850. The use of “Esquire” after the name R. G. Green in 1835 in Lexington, Tennessee and in 1845 in Crockett, Texas might suggest a man who was an attorney-at-law (which our R. G. Green was – though not necessarily. This Crockett R. G. Green seems to make a court filing in 1844. It would be good to discover that R. G. Green repentance and recovered respectability before the end of his life.

The Fishermen and the Academy

“The churches should care far more about the Bible says about them than what the Academy thinks and intimidates. Forsake any passion to be accepted by the Sanhedrin and join the ranks of Jesus’ fishermen. The Sanhedrin came to its end in AD 70 – the fishermen are still here, fishing.”

Peter Van Kleeck, Sr.

A Baptismal Hymn

Though I have not found a scan of the book, the hymn below on baptism is supposed to have appeared in Hymns and Spiritual Songs by Samuel Hall (Newport, RI: Samuel Hall, 1766). Hymns and Spiritual Songs, also known as “The Newport Collection,” is considered the first Baptist hymnal published in America.

The hymn appears in several publications, and what I post below is somewhat of a composite of those. The meter is 11s pretty much throughout, and could be sung to a tune like Bellevue/How Firm a Foundation. It’s only 16 stanzas!

This is Hymn XCVII (p. 74-75) in Divine Hymns: Or Spiritual Songs; for the Use of Religious Assemblies and Private Christians, by Joshua Smith and Samuel Sleeper, Portland: Printed for Thomas Clark, 1803. The heading contains this note: “A Hymn on Baptism, by Anna Beaman of Warren in Connecticut, composed about the time she was baptised.” (According to David Music in I Will Sing the Wondrous Story, p. 138, it appeared in Smith’s first printing of Divine Hymns in 1791.)

1. What think you, my friends, of the preaching of John?
Say, was it from heaven or was it of men?
We hear him declaring glad tidings of peace,
Proclaiming a jubilee year of release.

2. The Law and the Prophets continued till John,
Our Saviour hath told us when gospel began;
And since that God’s kingdom is preached faith the word
And all men press in, who have faith in the Lord.

3. The first of the gospel, the dawn of the day,
The voice of one crying prepare ye the way;
Bring forth your repentance, ye viperous breed,
And think not to say ye are Abraham’s seed.

4. A new dispensation to them he declares,
And preaches repentance to Abraham’s heirs;
The children of Abraham’s natural seed,
Found they had no right his baptism to plead.

5. But when he perceived that repentance was theirs,
Then he gave baptism to Abraham’s heirs;
For those who had been sealed to covenant things,
We find him baptising, confessing their sins.

6. He tells them their Saviour is already here,
And while he’s baptising our Lord doth appear
For to be baptised; and John shrinks at the thing,
And owns he has need to receive it from him.

7. But when he informed him it was his request,
He freely baptised him as he did the rest;
And this institution was owned from above:
The Spirit of God was sent down as a dove.

8. And his sweet example is left on record,
Whoever steps in, they will find a reward;
They’ll find peace of conscience and joy of the same,
When they are baptisèd in Jesus’ own name.

9. The Eunuch we find was in haste to receive,
His water baptism, when he did believe;
He went on his way full [then] rejoicing in God,
While those that rebel must be tasting his rod.

10. The friends of Cornelius who heard Peter’s word,
Believed and received soon the seal of the Lord;
The Holy Ghost fell, then their joys did arise,
And Peter commands that they should be baptised.

11. Saint Paul’s great conversion he found in the way,
The light which shone round him exceeded the day;
Then he was three days, neither drank nor did eat,
Yet he was baptised e’en before he took meat.

12. We read where three thousand believed in a day,
And that they were baptised without a delay.
The house of the jailer believed in the night,
And they were baptisèd before it was light.

13. Forbear then to censure by being in haste,
Or show me an instance where it was the case,
That primitive Christians deferred in the thing—
I answer my conscience to Jesus my King.

14. I’ll tell you how gospel appears unto me,
And pray to kind heaven that you all may see;
The wise and the prudent, ‘tis hid from their eyes,
While the babes of the kingdom rejoice in the prize.

15. Some call it baptism and think it will stand,
A few drops of water dropt from a man’s hand,
In the face of the infant under the curse—
But we find no scripture which proves such to us.

16. There’s no being “buried with Christ” in this case,
For Jordan or Enon was John’s chosen place;
Our Lord in a fountain, John did him baptise,
And Christ’s sweet example we honour and prize.

The author of the hymn, Anna Keeney, married Parke Beaman December 15, 1757 in Kent, Litchfield County, Connecticut. The book The Descendants of Thomas Beeman of Kent, Connecticut (Gwen Boyer Bjorkman, Bellevue, WA: 1982), lists nine children of this couple, but does not give the death of Anna. Parke and Anna are supposed to be buried in the Kent Hollow Cemetery.

Baptist Presidents

Connecting U. S. History and Baptist History: Baptist Presidents of the United States.

Thus far four men affiliated with Baptist churches have risen to become the President of the United States. Three were Democrats and one was a Republican. Two were northerners and two were southerners.[i]

1. Warren G. Harding (29th President. Republican from Ohio, 1921–23), Harding was a member and trustee of the Trinity Baptist Church, Marion, Ohio. He joined the church on May 6, 1883, when he was 17 years old and it was then still called the Free Baptist Church. Organized in 1824, Trinity was a Freewill or Free Baptist Church until joining the Northern Baptist Convention in 1911. Historians have generally ranked Harding as one of the worst Presidents. This is based on the idea that he accomplished little while in office, and for the corruption occurring during his administration – several of his appointees went to prison for various scandals. However, but I don’t think he was accused of improprieties beyond allowing it to go on.

2. Harry S. Truman (33rd President. Democrat from Missouri, 1945-1953), Truman is probably best known for following Franklin Delano Roosevelt, being plain-spoken, and authorizing dropping the atomic bombs on Japan. Some have called him a “cussin’ Baptist” (not an unique moniker). I know little about his presidency otherwise, or of his Baptist beliefs. At the age of 18, Truman was baptized at the Benton Boulevard Baptist Church in Kansas City, Missouri, where he was living at the time. In 1916 he later became a member of the First Baptist Church of Grandview, Missouri, (then called the Grandview Baptist Church). In 1945 Truman wrote, “I am a Baptist because I think that sect gives the common man the shortest and most direct approach to God.” (Source: Michael Devine, director of Harry S. Truman Library and Museum)

3. James Earl “Jimmy” Carter, Jr. (39th President. Democrat from Georgia, 1977-1981). Carter is often remembered for speaking of being born-again (and by some for giving away the Panama Canal). His presidency is by many thought of as ineffective, and after one term the American people replaced him with Ronald Reagan. At the time of his presidency, he was a Southern Baptist, but his church is now also affiliated with the more liberal Cooperative Baptist Fellowship. He was a popular Sunday School teacher at Maranatha Baptist Church, Plains, Georgia. My in-laws once traveled to visit his Sunday School class. As a Baptist he would be considered on the liberal end of the spectrum. No questionable moral dealings or improprieties are associated with his presidency.

4. William Jefferson “Bill” Clinton (42nd President. Democrat from Arkansas, 1993-2001). He was baptized by Park Place Baptist Church in Hot Springs, Arkansas. One of the most remembered acts of this Southern Baptist president is the Monica Lewinsky sex scandal. Though a Baptist, the president and his family attended the Foundry United Methodist Church in Washington, D.C. while he was president.

Honorable mention.

Abraham Lincoln was raised by Baptist parents. They were members of the Little Pigeon Baptist Church, near Lincoln City, Spencer County, Indiana. Lincoln himself, however, was never baptized nor a member of any church.

Baptist preacher John Gano is supposed to have baptized George Washington (1st President) during the Revolutionary War. This is a matter of controversy (i.e., some historians believe it happened and some do not). Two of John Gano’s grandchildren claimed in an affidavit that their aunt, John Gano’s oldest daughter, told them that her father had baptized Washington. Nevertheless, it seems that Washington remained outwardly affiliated with the Episcopal Church.

Information about all the presidents can be found at https://guides.loc.gov/presidents-portraits/chronological.

---

[i] Missouri may best be considered a “border state” rather than “Northern.” However, I think Truman’s baptizing church may have been affiliated with the Northern Baptists. (This needs a more research; currently, First Baptist of Grandview is affiliated with Southern Baptist Convention.)

At James Talarico’s Church, and other links

The posting of links does not constitute an endorsement of the sites linked, and not necessarily even agreement with the specific posts linked.

• 1926: A Look Back at America’s 150th Birthday Celebration -- “A century ago, the nation was flocking to Philadelphia for the Sesqui-Centennial International Exposition. What did a massive 1926 birthday bash look like?”
• Crash Course at Disaster City -- “In this town—population zero—first responders from across the globe hone lifesaving skills”
• Giant Footsteps -- “In 2016, at age 89 and buoyed by her faith, Opal Lee embarked on an ambitious campaign to make Juneteenth a national holiday by walking from her home in Fort Worth to Washington, D.C.”
• Go the Other Way -- “I want to suggest that you consider the other hill country, composed of a gentler, less dramatic topography...”
• Historical Reflections on Baptism and Church Membership -- “According to Booth, to allow unbaptized persons into the church on the basis of their convictions contrary to the congregation’s teaching threatened the very integrity of the church.”
• How Baptists helped end slavery in the United States -- “Many Baptists embraced, if not led, the anti-slavery campaign. That trend began to sweep Southern Baptists along with it until cultural momentum carried them in the opposite direction.”
• How can we protect vulnerable members from cyberfraud? -- “Protect your tools, trust your instincts, and never hesitate to verify. We are all safer when we look out for one another.”
• ICYMI: At James Talarico’s Church, Its Offensive To Respect God’s Pronouns — But Abortion is OK. -- “In the name of inclusivity, Talarico’s church avoids referring to God as ‘Father’ as Christians have done for thousands of years.”
• Josephus and Jesus: New Evidence for the One Called Christ -- “The present book authenticates Josephus’ authorship and then reveals a startling discovery.”
• Lex Talionis and the Human Fetus -- “As we observed at the outset, induced abortion was so abhorrent to the Israelite mind that it was not necessary to have a specific prohibition dealing with it in the Mosaic law.”
• Muffuletta -- “A briny olive spread combines with a smorgasbord of cold cuts and cheese to create a mouth-watering BIG bite of a sandwich, and I am in love.”
• Op Ed: How the SBC’s Newly-Discovered “Elder Plurality” Enables Women “Pastors” -- “Though these two streams often came from different theological instincts, they converged in practice.”
• Payday Someday -- “I introduce to you Ahab, the vile human toad who squatted upon the throne of his nation – the worst of Israel’s kings.”
• Power and Light -- “The Rural Electrification Act, enacted May 20, 1936, made available low-cost federal loans to rural landowners who had banded together in hopes of threading the countryside with electric lines.”
• Rethinking Doubting Thomas Jefferson -- “Thomas Jefferson’s views on Christianity are probably more complex than how he is used as a debate tool by partisans on opposite sides.”
• The Cowboy Life -- “If you met Charles Siringo in 1927 Los Angeles, you couldn’t have guessed that he was a legend of the Old West.”
• “The Texas Tornado:” J. Frank Norris—Baptist Renegade -- “Norris’ fight with Baylor spilled over into Baptist politics when he and his church were denied seats at the Baptist General Convention in both 1922 and 1923.”
• Walter doesn’t live here anymore -- “When World War 2 started, Clarence received permission to share the book with United States soldiers overseas.”
• Wet (West) Texas -- “Rivers, springs and even waterfalls are hidden across West Texas.”

The Bible and Women in Ministry

Review of A Baptist Reflection of The Bible & Women in Ministry and Leadership (ebook).

Stone, Meredith J. A Baptist Reflection of The Bible & Women in Ministry and Leadership, Waco, TX: Baptist Women in Ministry, 2023.

A Baptist Reflection of The Bible & Women in Ministry and Leadership is a brief 21-page booklet provided by the Baptist Women in Ministry organization, written by the organization’s executive director. Meredith J. Stone has a PhD from Brite Divinity School (TCU), is Executive Director of Baptist Women in Ministry (organized 1983 as Women in Ministry, SBC), and is author of Empire and Gender in LXX Esther (2018).

The book is an easy read to provide an overview of the approach taken by some Baptist women who promote full access for women in Christian and church ministry. The author seeks to address questions of women in church ministry, leadership roles, ordination, etc. She acknowledges, “These questions have been the source of conflict for decades, and the heart of the matter is how we interpret biblical passages related to women’s roles and leadership” (p. 1).

The booklet starts with an unlabeled “Introduction,” followed by eight sections: Women in the Bible (3-4); Women and Creation (5-7); Affirmation of Equality among Women and Men in the New Testament (8); Women as Wives in Submission to Husbands in the New Testament (9-10); Specific Limitations of Women’s Leadership and Speaking in the Church (11-13); Theological, Practical, and Historical Considerations (14-15); Conclusion (16-17); and Discussion Guide (18-21).

Stone initially inserts a misguided application of the priesthood of believers and the autonomy of the local church. This may appeal to unthinking Baptists, but lays a shifting foundation for the work. Just because some Baptists interpret the scripture on their own (which they are free to do), is no guarantee that the interpretation and resulting practice is correct. Just because a Baptist Church is free to govern itself and make its own decisions apart from the influence of any other church does not mean she should make decisions contrary to the word God. The priesthood of believers and the autonomy of the local church only function properly in submission to God and his revealed word. In this introduction, Stone signals early on that the authority of many biblical passages (at the least the ones that challenge “women in ministry”) will be dismissed on cultural and literary grounds (p. 2). These passages will be painted as complicated matters of interpretation which have been unshackled by “women in ministry” in recent years.

Women in the Bible. In this section Stone highlights certain women in the Bible that seem to fit her agenda – Deborah, Huldah, Esther, Mary, Anna, Lydia, Priscilla, Philip’s daughters – noting, “While some women in the Bible exist in submissive roles to men, other women have authority and are prominent leaders” (p. 3). While all these women have an important place in the Bible, the author primarily throws their names out and hopes the reader will come down on her side – rather than, for example, dealing with why none of the prominent women in the New Testament are ordained officers in the church.[i]

Women and creation. Without attacking the creation account directly, Stone delivers a dose of doubt by calling Genesis 1 and Genesis 2 two different creation accounts – rather than clearly affirming the second is giving the details of the same creation account.[ii]  She renders Adam amorphous by claiming a better translation of “man” in Genesis 2:4-25 is “person.”[iii]  A silly illustration of the animals created before the woman is made – trying to side line any discussion of the order of creation of Adam and Eve as ridiculous. That Eve was created to be a helper (Genesis 2:20) is dismissed because the Hebrew word is also used in reference to God (pp. 5-6). 1 Timothy 2:13-14 is pitted against Romans 5:12-19 without resolution, beyond in her own mind simply impeaching 1 Timothy 2 (p. 6). Genesis 3:16 becomes merely “descriptive” rather than “prescriptive” (p. 6).[iv] 

Affirmation of Equality among Women and Men in the New Testament. Galatians 3:28 is not exegeted for meaning, but simply given as a prooftext of equality of ministry (p. 8). 1 Corinthians 11:11-12 and 11:4 provides cover for women praying and prophesying, while the head covering is lifted as merely a respectful temporary item of the cultural context. Stone grabs on to a controversial passage that even liberals dispute the meaning of, that Paul supposedly “calls” Junia an apostle, so that supports the position of the author. Meanwhile, almost no one actually thinks Junia was an apostle.[i] Notably, when Jesus chose the twelve, he did not appoint any women.

Women as Wives in Submission to Husbands in the New Testament. Stone mentions Colossians 3:18; Ephesians 5:22; Titus 2:5; and 1 Peter 3:1-6. The teaching of these texts may be set aside since they are in the epistle genre (p. 9) – a communication between two parties which a third party will not understand. This denies the perspicuity of most of the New Testament. Yet oddly, a third party like Stone is able to figure out that it does not mean anything in our culture today. This was only for particular wives in particular congregations in this particular time. The author writes, “A decision must be made as to how to interpret the passages in light of each other” (p. 10). However, no real decision is made other than that no interpretation is needed for the passages since they should not have to obey them in modern times.[v]

Specific Limitations of Women’s Leadership and Speaking in the Church. Often Stone uses a “double down” technique. First, the instructions in 1 Corinthians 14:34-35 for women to be silent are contextual and not universally applicable (p. 11). Further! verse 36 should be considered a refutation of the command in verses 34-35, making “you” mean “you male Corinthians.” So, it means that only women in this very specific context at this time in Corinth were to remain silent, but wait … it actually means Paul was not telling them to be silent! The author plans to have her cake and eat it too. In 1 Timothy 2:11-15, the author focuses on “assume authority” (αὐθεντέω) as a hapax – a word used only once in the New Testament. She thinks it can only mean inappropriate power, and just in case, also limits it to a particular congregation (pp. 12-13). To be carefully complete, Stone rejects other matters in the context as irrelevant in “modern practice in worship” (p. 13). For a general principle, the author extracts that it means they were to act “in a way that is appropriate to one’s culture” (p. 13).[vi] To throw in the kitchen sink, Stone mentions that verse 15 is not consistent with salvation by grace through faith (making this a troublesome passage, without offering any explanation of it beyond simply using it to bolster her case for women in ministry). She feigns disbelief that such a passage exists, since women having children is not the cause or means of salvation.

Theological, Practical, and Historical Considerations. A careful observer should notice a plan of action in A Baptist Reflection of The Bible & Women in Ministry and Leadership. Stone accepts any “favorable” mentions of women in the Bible as prescriptive – promoting the idea that women should be in leadership. Stone rejects any “unfavorable” mentions of women in the Bible as descriptive – literary, cultural, and not teaching anything concerning women in leadership. It is “shocking” how it all works out in a way that is always consistent with what she is promoting! Nevertheless, we should again be reminded that the exceptions prove the rule. 

Conclusion. The conclusion reminds the reader that the book is intended to offer a perspective so “more women will be able to embrace and embody their callings…” (p. 16). In other words, the book did not set out to see what were the most valid interpretations of various passages of scripture, but to interpret them in way to fulfill the book’s purpose. For example, Stone highlights Joel 2:18-32 and Acts 2:14-18 and we are supposed to just accept it as meaning women should be in leadership roles in the church without any dealing with the prophecy, fulfillment, and its context. Apparently only the context should be noted when it can be used to nullify a command. One simple thing to note about Acts 2:14-18 is that Peter believed everything he preached on this day of Pentecost, including what he referred to from the prophet Joel. Yet he and none of the other apostles ever interpreted that as a reason to engage in the ordination of women.

Discussion Guide. The book concludes with a “Discussion Guide” with discussion questions. These are divided into general discussion questions, followed by specific questions related to each section of the book. The questions are more oriented toward feelings – “what does this text mean to you” than facts – “what does this text actually say.”

This book can be “recommended” as a good example of the application of a particular hermeneutic (the theory and methodology of the interpretation of biblical texts) that will support and promote the leadership of women in church ministry.[vii] Of this type of hermeneutic, former feminist Rosaria Butterfield states:

“Ordaining women is the gateway to gay theology. There is no denomination that ordains women that will not eventually ordain homosexuals. I’m not a prophet. I don’t need to be. You just have to read your church history. The reason it is the gateway is that it is the same hermeneutic – different Bible passages, but the same hermeneutic – that is used to ordain women is used to ordain homosexuals.” (“How Parachurch Ministries have Failed to Stand against the LGBTQ Movement.” You can start listening about 32:00 for context, and the quote is at about 35:14 in the video.)

I didn’t find this book existing in print. The book seems somewhat obscure, in that if you do not know of BWIM and their website, you probably won’t be aware of it. I only discovered it because someone promoting ordination of women and rebuking me for citing Rosaria Butterfield mentioned the BWIM site as providing valuable information about the calling of God on women’s lives to allay my ignorance on the subject. And thus, I came to give this review of the booklet.

As an example of what to not believe, I can point readers to A Baptist Reflection of The Bible & Women in Ministry and Leadership. A cruise around the Baptist Women in Ministry site will demonstrate Rosaria Butterfield’s observation about hermeneutics and the ordination of women. BWIM does not just support women in ministry, but “is committed to supporting and advocating for any individual who identifies as a woman…to celebrating and supporting LGBTQ+ women and open and affirming congregations,” as well as “non-binary persons.” The book displays interpreting scripture in a way that fits the changing moods of society while rejecting the rather consistent historical interpretation of the churches for 2000 years. If the hermeneutic of this book is applied to homosexuality, it brings about the same approving results for ministry and ordination of homosexuals as it does for women.

As a valid exposition of biblical truth, A Baptist Reflection of The Bible & Women in Ministry and Leadership gets “0” stars, and no recommendation. It is not Baptist. It is not biblical.

---

[i] Stone will later (p. 8), claim that Paul calls Junia an apostle (and inferring that Junia is a woman, this part probably correctly). This hangs a lot on a passage over which there is much dispute. Paul says, “Andronicus and Junia…are of note among the apostles,” not that they are apostles (though some people do receive it with that meaning).
[ii] Most (if not all) of these “Baptist Women in Ministry” supporters exist in the plain of liberalism, since conservatism is inconsistent with their views.
[iii] Most translators disagree, even moderate to liberal ones. For example, of the nearly 60 translations on Bible Gateway, only the idiosyncratic Complete Jewish Bible, the work of a single translator, David H. Stern, uses person in Genesis 2:8 –while all the rest use man.
[iv] One consistent theme is that commands that are inconsistent with the views of Baptist Women in Ministry are always the ones that are “descriptive.”
[v] Stone also used the proximity of the instructions to women to the instructions to servants and masters to further diminish the authority of the instructions (p. 10). She does not bother to explain that 1 Peter 3 has no such context and still exhorts wives to be subject to their husbands.
[vi] An uncomfortable conclusion of accepting this principle is that, at some point, women in the churches in the United States ditched not only the text, but the simpler principle as well, by starting to break out of the cultural norms that we had in place. As far as biblical church order, ordained ministers have a calling and an office, but are not of greater importance than everyone else in the church. Men who are not preachers have their gifts. Women have their gifts. All are a part of the church body (cf. Romans 12:4-8; 1 Corinthians 12). All have differing gifts for the edification of the body. “If the foot shall say, Because I am not the hand, I am not of the body; is it therefore not of the body?”
[vii] Some women in leadership have dubbed their biblical interpretations “her-meneutics” as opposed to “his-meneutics” – a focus on women’s interpretation of the Bible. “Her.meneutics” is the Christianity Today blog for women.

“First” Baptist Baptist Church

A little humor at the expense of Baptist church names: Underachieving Christian Settles for Third Baptist Church.

In theory, “First” Baptist should mean the first Baptist Church established in a place – to distinguish it from other churches that were organized later. In the 1800s in Texas, a Baptist Church in a town was often simply called the Baptist Church of [name of town]. When other churches were organized it seems that the trend developed from calling the Baptist Church of [name of town] to calling it the first Baptist Church of [name of town]. And then this developed into the name First Baptist Church. (I can’t speak for how this occurred in other places, but I would expect it to be much the same.) Nowadays, the name “First Baptist” seems to have a different sort of connotation.

This morphed historical practice creates some odd situations, when the “First” Baptist Church isn’t the first Baptist Church. I won’t mention names, but these are some actual situations in the area where I live.

I know of one church named “First Baptist Church” which is the oldest existing Baptist Church in that particular town, but it is not the first Baptist Church. The first Baptist Church organized in the town died out, ceased to exist, but I suppose “Oldest Baptist Church” is not a very appealing name for a church.

I know of two different churches in neighboring counties in which the “First Baptist Church” was organized later than another church in the town – meaning they certainly are not the “first” Baptist Church. Both of these cases are cases of historically white churches not recognizing (at least in their naming) historically black churches that are older, and evidently first.

I know of two churches in a place that both used “First” in their names. They existed because of a church split. The churches added modifiers after “First” to distinguish which “First Baptist” was which. Eventually, the older church (the one really first) died out, ceased to exist, and the other church dropped the modifier to simply be “First Baptist Church” – but it still is not the “first.”

We Baptists sometimes are quite odd ducks.

I am in a strait betwixt two

A political post that will likely be disliked by the majority of readers on either side. In Texas in November, we will make a choice for U. S. Senator, predicted to be either Ken Paxton or James Talarico.

Almost three years ago I wrote the following about Ken Paxton:

The Republican Party platform says, “We affirm God’s biblical design for marriage and sexual behavior between one biological man and one biological woman, which has proven to be the foundation for all great nations in Western civilization” (p. 29). For some members of the Republican party, this may only be a generic plank to show a reason for the opposition to the marriage of people of the same gender. It certainly is and should be that, but it is more than that. It affirms “God’s biblical design for marriage and sexual behavior” – which Attorney General Ken Paxton has flaunted. All have sinned and come short of the glory of God, and we could forgive him for the sin of adultery. However, after this sin he multiplied sin upon sin. Attorney General Paxton lied to his wife, lied to his supporters, lied to Texas, continued to pursue the adultery he promised to put behind him, and used his position as Attorney General of the great State of Texas in his doing so! I do not and cannot trust liars.

Recently, I compiled the following about James Talarico:

As bad, and probably worse, is the religious ignorance—and deliberate misrepresentation—from an oleaginous seminarian aspiring to be a slick politician. James Talarico is a very liberal member of a very liberal PCUSA church in Austin, Texas. He does not accept the inspiration, infallibility, and authority of the Bible. The biblical positions he presents are biblical nonsense (though probably having wide appeal among those who like to pick and choose the parts of the Bible they like and don’t like). Talarico’s bizarre “biblical” claims include: God is nonbinary, there are six biological sexes, transgender men need abortion rights, Jesus was a feminist, Mary was a revolutionary and a poster child for “bodily autonomy” (demonically using the virgin birth to promote murdering babies), the teachings of Jesus do not cover homosexuality or abortion, the Gospel of Thomas was “later omitted from the Bible,” and salvation is not only through Jesus Christ, but all faith traditions lead to salvation (though we Bible believers know Jesus said, “if ye believe not that I am he, ye shall die in your sins”).[i] James Talarico cloaks his political beliefs in spiritual rhetoric. The problem is that his spiritual rhetoric is of the worst kind, departing from two thousand years of general understanding about what is the orthodox teaching of the churches from Scripture. Over and over again, James Talarico’s views, judged by the Bible, are heretical! Summed up – like others he charges with being Christian nationalists, James Talarico also wants a “Christian nation” – just so long as it implements his version of “Christian.” It is a version of Christianity that many Bible-believing Christians will not recognize. I do not and cannot trust heretics. (And in this case, the religious heretics is also a liar, as can be seen in his attempts to rehabilitate his views for the statewide race.)

Paul said he was in a strait betwixt two – dying to be with Christ or living to serve for Christ. Literally, there were only two options. He would either live or die. However, in the race for the U. S. Senate in November, there actually are more than two options. In addition to Paxton and Talarico, the following people will apparently be on the ballot for U. S. Senator from Texas, November 3, 2026: Ted Brown (Libertarian), David B. Collins (Green Party), Joshua Cain, Ronald Evans, Camencia Ford, Jade Simmons, and Hans Truelson (Independents).

We have no reason to be in a strait betwixt two. There are choices, surely (possibly? hopefully?) at least one of whom would be more in line with Christian values and principles than immoral Paxton or ungodly Talarico. We do not have to choose the lesser of two evils, but rather can chose to vote for someone else. Until we grow a backbone, we will never change. I know the tired old line about only voting for either the Democrat or Republican, because one of them is bound to win. I hate the two-party control system, but that latter assessment is probably right. If so, is it not likely a sign that we are under God’s judgment, if he should raise up one of these two sorry rascals to represent us? Then again, regardless, maybe a rascal representing rascals is absolutely appropriate! Will we believe God, humble ourselves, and repent? The admonition to the people of Israel in 2 Chronicles 7:14 was not only to humble themselves, and pray, but also to seek God’s face, and turn from their wicked ways.

---

[i] I have documented all the statements by Talarico, in context, and will eventually get around to posting a fuller exposure of his heresies. If you want to see it sooner, let me know.

Baptists and Evangelicals

While, as you know, I am not Southern Baptist, I believe this comment below by Malcolm Yarnell is worthwhile for general instruction for all of us who are Baptists. Many Baptists seem to think they are just evangelicals, but there are reasonable reasons to understand that we actually are not.

“...Southern Baptists must never compromise those beliefs which have made us Baptists: specifically, the drive for a regenerate New Testament church membership, founded upon the biblical and historical doctrine of the divine–human covenant, evidenced at first in the ordinance of believers-only baptism by immersion, continually expressed in the ordinance of the Lord’s Supper, lovingly maintained by the practice of local church discipline, and fervently expanded by the expository proclamation of the Word of God. Southern Baptists will endeavour to speak these and other non-negotiable truths in love, inviting evangelicals inter alia to join us in becoming consistent with Scripture, not only theologically but ecclesiologically.”

“Are Southern Baptists Evangelicals? A Second Decadal Reassessment,” Malcolm Yarnell III, Ecclesiology 2.2 (2005) SAGE Publications, page 212

inter alia: (adverb) among other things.

The Royal Invitation

The song The Royal Invitation (391, The Sacred Harp, 2012 Cooper Edition) was first published in The Sacred Harp in 1907. The tune was written by Daniel James Givens. The author of the words, below, is unknown. Perhaps Givens wrote them, or found them elsewhere and arranged to use with this tune. The text presents what Givens called “The Royal Invitation” for sinners to come to Jesus.

The chorus is sung after each stanza.

1. Come, sinner, come, and help bear the cross,
Jesus has suffered the great loss;
He will redeem you from all your sin,
If you will come, He will take you in.

2. Jesus so sweetly bids you to come,
He will receive you to His home;
Come to the fold, why do you delay?
Come to the Saviour, O! come today.

Chorus:
Come, sinner, come, without delay,
He is the truth, the light and the way;
He has the pow’r to save from all sin,
If you will come, He will take you in.

If anyone is aware of the author or origin of these words before the 1907 Sacred Harp, please let me know. So far, I have not found them anywhere else. D. J. Givens wrote six songs that are included in The Sacred Harp, and is credited with writing the words to The Crucified Saviour (p. 84). So, perhaps he wrote these words also and the original typesetter simply failed to put his name on the hymn side.

Daniel James “Jim” Givens (November 11, 1879–April 23, 1957) was born in Henry County, Alabama, a son of John Anderson Givens and Minerva A. R. Melvin. He married Lenora S. “Nora” Wiggins (1879–1950), a niece of W. M. Cooper’s stepfather Hopewell Wiggins. They had at least three children: Willie, Jewell, and Mavis. Jim and Nora are buried at the Webb Cemetery in Webb, Houston County, Alabama. His song, The Lamb of Calvary 508, was removed in 1992. Givens was primarily working as a farmer living in Houston County, Alabama.

84 The Crucified Saviour 

391 The Royal Invitation

490 Canaan’s Peaceful Shore

491 Closer Walk With God

541 I’m Going Home to Die No More

572 We Will Sing With the Angels There

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