Introduction to the Debate.
Custom renders it necessary, in offering to the public a new book, to give, by way of introduction, some reasons for its publication.The Baptist Church in Southwestern Indiana, as in many other places, is divided into two distinct bodies; the one called Regular Baptist, with which Elder Hume stands connected, and the other called General Baptists, with which Elder Stinson is connected.
The teachings of these two bodies, upon the doctrine of Atonement, differ materially, and as neither of them has a written creed or confession of faith, other than a few articles which are too brief to afford a satisfactory view of the doctrines they hold, the want of something more fully setting forth their views on the points of difference has been seriously felt.
The impossibility of conveying to the public a clear understanding of nice points of theological doctrine, in brief oral sermons, is known to all who are familiar with such matters.
Erroneous and conflicting views and frequent misrepresentations are the necessary results of the attempt to disseminate the peculiar doctrines of a religious denomination, without some standard book setting forth their understanding of the teaching of God's word, to which reference may be had.
The interest manifested by those who listened to the debate, as well as the earnest desire, expressed by many persons, that the debate might be published, is another reason offered for its production.
With a view to getting a correct report of the discussion, the services of Mr. William Leach, who was understood to be a competent reporter, were secured.
The debaters agreed that each of them should name one person, who, together with the Moderators, should constitute a committee to revise the report and have it published.
Elder Hume selected Rev. James Strickland and Elder Stinson, A.A. Polk.
Mr. Carnahan, owing to the inconvenience of his location, was, at his own request, excused from meeting with the committee.
The volume is submitted to the public, hoping that it will in some measure supply the deficiency so long felt, by giving the teachings of each and the objections to the teachings of the other of these Churches, in the form of a book, by those who are acknowledged to correctly represent their respective bodies.
CORRESPONDENCE.
Goshen Farm, January 5, 1863.
Elder Joel Hume:--
Dear Sir:-- Inasmuch as there seems to be a wide difference between the doctrines of your denomination and those of the one to which I belong, and as that difference is variously explained by different ministers of those denominations, I have thought that an investigation of the main points of difference might, if conducted in a Christian spirit, be satisfactory to the public.
Should the proposal meet your approbation, please inform me, after which we can settle the points and arrange the time, place, etc.
Yours, respectfully,
BENONI STINSON.
--------------
Poseyville, Ind., January 19, 1863.
Elder B. Stinson:--
Dear Sir-- Yours of the 5th instant is now before me, the contents of which have been carefully noted. You are disposed to believe that good would result to the people generally, from a public discussion between you and myself, upon those theological points upon which we differ. I am anxious to do all the good that I can, but I assure you that my combative propensities have been much weakened in the last few years. Nevertheless, if you and your friends think that the cause of truth can be promoted or advanced by such discussion, I will yield to your wishes, provided the propositions and preliminaries can be properly arranged. The propositions should fairly and fully embrace the points of difference between us, which you will please submit in your next to me.
Yours, with sentiments of respect,
JOEL HUME.
--------------
Goshen Farm, January 25, 1863.
Elder Joel Hume:--
Dear Sir:-- Yours of the 19th instant has been received and carefully read. I am not in the habit of debating, nor is my anxiety in this instance so great as to urge a debate upon an unwilling opponent, nor would I by any means be understood as wishing to force a debate upon you; hence, if there is any reluctance on your part, let the matter end, and we will remain friends. But if you are perfectly willing, and we can agree on the propositions, etc., all, I hope, may pass off friendly and profitably. But I think you require too much in asking me to submit the propositions on both sides.
I am willing, on my part, to affirm:
1st. An unconditional general atonement as the procuring cause of the world's redemption.
2d. That man is a moral agent, endowed with the volition of free will, capable of examining and comparing propositions, to choose one and refuse the other.
3d. And that personal salvation is free to all men, and offered to all men on conditions to be performed on his part, the performance of which results in salvation; the neglect of which exposes him to damnation.
All of these I will expect you to deny.
I will expect you, on your part, to affirm:
1st. That the elect, or church, was chosen in Christ before the foundation of the world.
2d. That Christ died or made an atonement exclusively for the elect, or church.
3d. That the sinner is saved unconditionally, or independent of anything that he can say or do.
If these propositions do not suit you, please point out, in your next, the changes that you wish made.
I remain, as ever,
With sentiments of esteem,
BENONI STINSON.
----------------
Poseyville, Ind., February 2, 1863.
Elder B. Stinson:--
Dear Sir:-- Yours of 25th of January was received by due course of mail, which has been read with some care. I have no desire to court sympathy from the masses, believing that the truth, if properly presented, will commend itself.
Your first proposition will be acceptable with the following alteration:
Was the suffering and death of the Savior, or the atonement made be him, designed or intended by him to procure the future or eternal salvation of all the human race?
This proposition I will negative, which will be precisely the same as if I should affirm special or particular atonement. Your second proposition I will accept in the following order:
All men are moral free agents, having the power to accept or reject eternal salvation.
This proposition also I will negative.
Personal salvation, so far as relates to the future world, is the effect of the sovereign grace and mercy of God, bestowed upon sinners unconditionally, or without the agency of the sinner.
This proposition I will affirm. I will also affirm the following:
That all who are truly regenerated and born again, will be eternally saved.
Or, if you prefer it, I will affirm that the elect of God, or church of Christ, were chosen in him before the foundation of the world.
You can examine the foregoing and inform me of your objections, as I believe they fully embrace the points of difference between us, and whether we debate or not, I hope we shall remain friends.
Yours, in the good hope,
JOEL HUME.
P. S. My principal objection to the propositions as submitted by yourself is that they are too ambiguous, or not sufficiently definite.
-------------
Goshen Farm, February 9, 1863.
Elder Joel Hume:--
Dear Sir:-- Yours of the 9th instant came safely to hand, and after carefully examining its contents I hasten to reply. My third proposition seems either to have escaped your notice, or you thought it not worthy of attention, and as you thought the language of my propositions was too ambiguous, I will endeavor to be more definite.
1st. I will affirm that Jesus Christ, by his death and resurrection, made a full and complete atonement or satisfaction to the Adamic law for the whole human race, and also a possible salvation for all men from actual sin.
2d. I will affirm that man is a moral agent, endowed with the volition of free will capable of choosing of refusing eternal salvation as it is proposed in the Gospel.
3d. I will also affirm that personal salvation is free to all men and offered to all on certain conditions, to be performed by man, the performance of which results in his salvation.
The foregoing propositions fully embrace the doctrine of our denomination, on these great questions, and I shall expect you to negative each one.
Your first proposition is accepted with this amendment:
That personal salvation, so far as related to the future world, is the effect of the sovereign grace of God, bestowed upon sinners unconditionally.
Your second proposition is accepted with this addition:
That the elect of God, or church of Christ, was chosen in him before the foundation of the world, and that Christ died for them only, and that all that Christ died for will be eternally saved.
Both of the above I will negative, Your article on the final perseverance of the saints I think is fully embraced in the above, and is therefore superseded.
You can examine the foregoing, and if it meets your approbation we can proceed to settle other preliminaries as to time, place, etc.
I remain as ever,
Yours, in gospel bonds,
BENONI STINSON.
-------------
Poseyville, Ind., February 16, 1863.
Elder B. Stinson:--
Respected Friend:-- Your favor of 9th of February has been received and carefully examined; and after more mature deliberation I have arrived at the conclusion, that we have more propositions submitted than are necessary to present the real points of difference between us, the discussion of which would occupy more time than I have to spare to devote in that way; consequently I propose that we confine ourselves to the two following propositions, which will cover all the ground, in my judgment:
The elect of God, or church of Christ, was chosen in Christ before the foundation of the world, and that Christ died for them only, and all that he died for will be eternally saved.
Hume will affirm and you deny:
Personal salvation is free to all men, and offered to all on certain conditions to be performed by man, the performance of which results in his eternal salvation.
This you will affirm and I deny.
If these propositions suit you, the matter is settled so far as relates to propositions. All the preliminaries can be arranged, I have no doubt, without difficulty. Hoping to hear from you soon, I subscribe myself,
Yours, fraternally,
JOEL HUME.
---------------
Goshen Farm, February 22, 1863.
Elder Joel Hume:--
My Dear Friend:-- Yours of the 16th came safely to hand, and after reading and carefully examining its contents, I again hasten to reply. I feel sorry that you are in favor of narrowing down our proposed discussion to so small a basis as two single propositions. And you say you have not time to spare, etc.
I may attach too much importance to such an investigation, but I feel confident that I do not nor can not attach too much importance to the great truths taught in the Bible, the right understanding of which has been my study for more than forty years. And now, shall we in our old age allow ourselves to be so hurried as not to have time for important an investigation that may affect the well- being of souls unborn?
It is my desire to have the debate (if we do debate) published, so that not only the present but future generations may read and judge for themselves. You will therefore pardon me for not agreeing to your suggestion of but one proposition on a side. I feel to adhere to my affirmative as you find them in my last, and prefer that you should to the two laid down on your part. I need not repeat them as they are all clearly stated in my last to you.
If when we meet we should both conclude to drop any proposition, all right; if not, let them remain as they are.
And now, Elder Hume, as our correspondence upon the propositions has been somewhat lengthy and you have in this my final answer, which I think you certainly will accept, let me suggest Owensville as a suitable place, leaving it to you to set the time and also the mode of discussion, President, Moderator, etc. Please let me hear from you soon.
Yours, as ever, in good hope,
BENONI STINSON.
--------------
Poseyville, Ind., February 26, 1863.
Elder B. Stinson:--
Dear Sir:-- Yours of the 22d instant came to hand this evening, which I have carefully read. I confess I can not see the necessity, or even the propriety, of my affirming what my negative of your proposition will as fully establish, as I shall be able to do. Nevertheless, let the matter remain as set forth in your last to me, at least until we meet, for I have no objections to the propositions as set forth by yourself, only as I believe, we shall travel over the same ground twice. If we meet at all, I desire our propositions and arguments to cover all the grounds of difference between us, which I believe the two propositions named in my last would fully accomplish.
I have no objections to Owensville as the place for the discussion, and I would suggest Tuesday after the fourth Monday in March as the time to commence. You choose one Moderator and I one, and they choose their own President. The rules by which the discussion is to be governed can be agreed upon after we meet. If the debate is published, we should have a good stenographer in attendance every hour. If the suggestions here meet your approbation, please inform me immediately; if not, please inform me in what particular you wish them changed.
Yours, as ever,
JOEL HUME.
---------------
Goshen Farm, March 5, 1863.
Elder Hume:--
Dear Sir:-- I received your last communication on Saturday. The arrangement is all satisfactory only I prefer that we should meet one week later, which will be the last day of March. If this suits you, we will consider the matter settled.
I have selected Elder T. M. Strain for my Moderator. You can select yours and they can either choose a President by correspondence or meet for that purpose.
I remain, as ever, your friend,
BENONI STINSON.
=======================
RULES OF DISCUSSION.
-----------------------------------------
1. The debate shall be held at the General Baptist Church in Owensville, Gibson County, Indiana, commencing on the 31st day of March, 1863, and continue until through.
2. Each disputant shall choose a Moderator and they shall select a third who shall act as President.
3. The President shall call to order; invite some person present to open each session with prayer, and close it with the benediction; see that the rules of decorum are observed by the debaters and the audience; decide all questions of order, and attend to such other duties as usually devolve on presiding officers.
4. In the opening of each new subject the affirmant shall occupy one hour, and the respondent the same length of time. Each subsequently shall alternately occupy half an hour until the subject is disposed of.
5. No proposition shall be discussed for more than one day nor less than a half day, unless by agreement of the debaters.
6. The debate shall open precisely at 10 o'clock A.M., and close at 12 M. each day, and in the afternoon commence at 2 o'clock and close at 4.
7. On the final negative no new matter shall be introduced.
8. King James' translation of the Holy Scriptures, generally known as the common version, shall be the umpire on all biblical questions, but either party may refer to other translations, commentaries and writings to prove the correctness of his interpretations.
9. The debaters shall confine their remarks strictly to the proposition under discussion, and shall refrain from all personalities and unchristian language.
10. The following propositions shall be discussed agreeably to the above rules:
Elder Stinson affirmed the three following propositions--Hume denied them:
1st. That Jesus Christ, by his death and resurrection, made a full and complete atonement or satisfaction to the Adamic law for the whole human race, and also a possible salvation for all men from actual sins.
2d. That man is a moral agent, endowed with the volition of free will, capable of choosing or refusing eternal salvation, as it is proposed in the gospel.
3d. That personal salvation is free to all men, and offered to all on certain conditions to be performed by man, the performance of which results in his salvation.
Elder Hume affirmed the two following propositions--Stinson denied them:
1st. That the elect of God, or church of Christ, was chosen in him before the foundation of the world, and that Christ died for them only, and that all that Christ died for will be eternally saved.
2d. That personal salvation, so far as relates to the future world, is the effect of the sovereign grace of God bestowed upon sinners unconditionally.
M.T. CARNAHAN, President.
S.M. HOLCOMB, T.M. STRAIN,
Moderators.
Copyright c. 2003. All rights reserved. The Primitive Baptist Library.
