header image
Home arrow Writers arrow Nichols-Holder Debate arrow First Night: Holder's Second Affirmative
First Night: Holder's Second Affirmative PDF Print E-mail
Written by Holder/Nichols   



Mr. Nichols, Brethren Moderators, Ladies and Gentlemen:

I wish to notice some of the things he was able to present in his speech just made. Now, is this debate going to be a discussion of the issue, or a rubbing of noses on how many scriptures we may quote? I can talk fast, Mr. Nichols, and I am going to give you the opportunity to reply to my speeches. He has not answered an argument I made in my first speech, tonight. He is not answering arguments. He does not do that. He said, “Now it is true that Christ is the Saviour.” Why not deal with my proof? A conditional term must stand between cause and effect, through which the cause operates to reach an end. He does not believe that Christ is that which reaches the end. He believes the sinner does that which reaches the end. Now he wants me to follow his points.

“At the times of this ignorance God winked at; but now commandeth all men every where to repent.” (Acts 17:30.) All right, now he said right in the face of that: how in the world can a man repent unless Christ died for him? If Christ had not died, men could not have repented, that is his position. If Christ had not died for sins, men could not have quit their meanness. This is his position. But here is his predicament, and I challenge you, Friend Nichols (you are not on what I introduced; I introduced matter on the atonement): You get up here and tell this people that the heathen can repent before he hears what you preach. You do that. You have that fellow tied to a tree. He cannot believe until he hears you preach, and tell him to repent. He cannot confess until he has something to confess, and he cannot be saved until you dip him in water. Now if you want to put on a show, I have got enough Irish in me, I can put on one, and just smile at you, and pour it on us long as you want it. Let us debate, Sir, and quit putting on a show about this thing! It is not debating.

2 Thess. 1:8. Did Paul know God before Ananias preached to him? He does not notice that. “Those who know not God stud obey not the gospel,” is in that text he gave. Did Paul know God before Ananias preached to him? If so, he is not talking about him. He is talking about the man who knows not, God, but let me give you something here. The Saviour said in St. John 17:3, “This is eternal life that they might know thee the only true God, and Jesus Christ whom thou hast sent.” I will give you a big red apple if you will get up there and tell this audience you have eternal life. If you do not have, you do not know God. And if you do not know God, then “When the Lord Jesus shall come taking vengeance on them that know not God and obey not the gospel,” he tells us where they shall go. You have yourself in a tight on your own lesson. Wilt you get up here and tell this audience you have eternal life? There are no members in your church who have it, Sir! They are living on probation to get it. All right then, it was not talking about folks like Paul who knew God and had not obeyed the gospel. But he was talking about folks like Nichols who do not know God, and obey not the gospel. Those who know God have eternal life. Will he tell you he has eternal life—I know his position.

Rom. 6:1-3. “As many of you as have been baptized into .Jesus Christ have been baptized into death.” Now here is what I want you to do. If you are going to discuss the other part of the proposition, all right, we will go into it. It is just vice versa. I want the text—I challenge you, friend Nichols, to present it in this four-night’ debate—where the words “baptized into Christ” or ‘‘baptized into his death” or ‘‘baptized into one body” has the word “water” in it. Bring it out, Sir; bring it on up. Nichols, the very best you could do if you could baptize a believer, and be anyways scriptural at all is to take him and baptize him in water; you can not baptize into Christ, and you know you cannot. You cannot do this to save your life. You do not have the authority. I shall give you the lesson that teaches how this is done. “For by one Spirit are we all baptized into one body, whether we be Jews or Gentiles, whether we be bond or free; and have been all made to drink into one Spirit.” (1 Cor. 12:13.) And the Spirit did the baptizing. Are you a Spirit? The Bible says spirits do not have flesh and bones. I know he does not do the baptizing, for he has flesh and bones.

Gal. 3:26—but, Elder, do you baptize children of God by faith? I thought you baptized alien sinners. “For ye are all the children of God by faith in Christ Jesus. For as many of you “—you children of God by faith in Christ Jesus. “For as many of you as have been baptized into Christ have put on Christ.” (Gal. 3:26-27.) By the way, I am going to give you a demonstration: he says we put on Christ like I put on my coat. (Here the speaker puts on his coat.) Now that coat represents Christ, as he has it, the coat represents Christ. Look here, Mr. Nichols: look here: do you want to put on a show now? This coat represents Christ. What did it do? Not one thing in the world. Sir, I put that coat on myself, and it did not do a thing. Now that is his religion. Christ does not do a thing in the work of getting into Christ, the sinner does it himself! He says, “It is just like putting on my coat, the very act of putting the coat on, put me into the coat, and I put on the coat.” There it is.

Romans 5:1, he quotes it half; he is as much afraid of a period in a sentence as a mule is of a sink hole. “Therefore being justified by faith,” and those who are “justified by faith” and “have access by faith into this grace wherein ye stand, and rejoice—” (alien sinners?) “rejoice in the hope of the glory of God?” He will do more butchering of the language of this sacred Book in thirty minutes, than any man I ever listened to. Now, if you will get off that, I will just smooth down as smooth as a piece of velvet. But if you do not, here I come! And I am in the affirmative. We are going to stay in a good humor; I never got mad in one of these debates in my life.

Acts 17:30, 31. I have referred to that.

Mk. 16:16. Yes, I do believe that, but he does not. “He that believeth and is baptized shall be saved.” I believe that, but he believes some of them will fall from grace and go to hell. Eh? Eh? Now listen: I have your words, Sir, in cold print, where you said that does not mean salvation in heaven, but present salvation. All right, I will take it up with him. If it means present salvation it is not conditional and in order to be saved in heaven. See there? Will you deal with it? As far as the text is concerned—Mr. Nichols, I want you to look at me! you said I do not believe it: do you believe it? Why do you then teach that some of them will go to hell? The text says they “shall be saved.” I believe it; you do not.

Heb. 5:8-9, “Though he were a Son, yet learned he obedience by the things which he suffered: and being made perfect, he became the author of eternal salvation unto all them that obey him.” Brother Nichols, do you have eternal salvation? You are living to get it, aren’t you? Well, all right then. He did not become the author of your eternal salvation, because you have to die to get it. And suppose he is the author of it? He is not the co-author. If the sinner does part, and friend Nichols does part, and then Christ does part and the consummation is salvation. So Christ and the sinner accomplished the end and Christ is the co-author. He is not the author of eternal salvation of anyone, if what he teaches is the truth. So there you are.

Heb. 2:9, “But we see Jesus, who was made a little lower than the angels for the suffering of death, crowned with glory and honor; that he by the grace of God should taste death for every man. For it became him, for whom are all things, and by whom are all things, in bringing many sons unto glory to make the captain of their salvation perfect through suffering. For both he that sanctifieth and they who are sanctified are all of one: for which cause he is not ashamed to call them brethren, saying, I will declare thy name unto my brethren, in the midst of the church will I sing praises unto thee. And again, I will put my trust in him. And again, Behold I and . . .“All of Adam’s race which thou hast given me? No. He wants all of Adam‘s race in the context of Hebrews 2:9, and he will not quote it. He could not do it to save his life, and hold his position, because the word every “man” is not in the context, nor is the word “man” in the original, either.

All right, I want to get on Brother Judas now. He said now Brother Judas is one of the ‘sheep,’ and the Saviour said the ‘sheep’ shall never perish, yet Judas went to hell. Now you and the Saviour reconcile that. “They shall never perish.” Now if Judas went to hell, if he was one of the ‘sheep,’ aren’t you ashamed to stand up here and deny what the Saviour said? You still want to put on a show, I know what you are up to! This is ugly as it can be, pardon me!

Rom. 1:16. “I am not ashamed of the gospel of Christ: for it is the power of God unto salvation to every one that believeth.” I want the text that says the gospel is the power of God to save the unbeliever. The unbeliever is the one he wants. Paul says “every one that believeth.”

1 Jn. 5:1, “Whosoever believeth that Jesus is the Christ is born of God.” All right. Do you baptize a man who is born of God? If you baptize a believer, you baptize one who is born of God. If he says he does, his doctrine goes down, and if he says no, he denies the Bible. “I write unto you that believe on the name of the Son of God, that ye may know that ye have eternal life.” (I John 5:12, 13.) Do you baptize a believer? If he says, yes, then he baptizes one who has eternal life. If he says no, he denies the Bible.

“Verily, verily, I say unto you, he that heareth my word, and believeth on him that sent me, hath everlasting life, and shall not come into condemnation; but is passed from death unto life.” (St. John 5:24.) Do you baptize a believer? If yes, then you baptize a man who has passed from death unto life.

Acts 2:38. I want to give hint a strong argument, and he will not answer it during this debate. All right, I want to make him a strong argument on Acts 2:38. Here it is, and I want him to get it. He will not answer my argument. There is a reason why. Brother Nichols is a good debater I am told.

He is recommended as one of the very best debaters they have. I will tell you this: he is one of the most artful dodgers I have met, and I have met the very best men they have. Here is my argument: Matt. 26:28: “This is my blood of the New Testament which is shed for many, for the remission of sins.” The Greek phrase there is “Eis Ephesin Hamarteon.” All right, let me quote this, “Repent and be baptized every one of you, in the name of Jesus Christ for the remission of sins.” The phrase there translated from the Greek “for the remission of sins” is (eis ephesin hamarteon) the same. Now, the little preposition there, “eis,” is rendered under that Greek work in the New Testament seventy-nine times “with a view to.” Jesus shed his blood nearly two thousand years ago. Mr. Nichols says it did not remit sins. If he will say it did, I will apologize.

All right, now I am going to give you Acts 2:38. I have the Greek Lexicons over there—I know what I am talking about. (And he does too!) The word “Christ,” in Acts 2:38, is not a translated word. (You have my speeches on that; your brother came over and got them from the debate I had with Mr. Brewer. You should have every word I have said by memory, and I suppose you have.) All right, now listen: Friend Nichols, the word “Christ” is not a translated word. And to translate it and bring it over into the corresponding word in the English, it would read this way: “Repent and be baptized every one of you in the name of Jesus, the anointed one, for the remission of sins.” All right, now: if it read this way, “Repent and be baptized for the remission of sins,” the verbs would show action toward the remission of sins as we know, and you would have a point. Now, “repent and be baptized” for what? “For the remission of sins?” Listen, “Repent and be baptized every one of you in the name of Jesus, the anointed one.” “Repent and be baptized every one of you in the name of Jesus, the anointed one” for what? “For the remission of sins.” So the “anointed one” there shows action toward the remission of sins. If you say repentance and baptism there is what remits sins, I will say the blood of Jesus Christ is what remits sins. There is the issue. And when you take that position, Sir, I will show you where your faith is. I will stay with you from here on out on Acts 2:38. You know the old Primitives can run you, and the other fellow, off that. It has been done and it can be done again. I believe that covers it all.

Now, I believe he got 1 Jn. 2:2 and I am going over here right now and introduce some things on that particular point. Here we are. He says I go all out of proportion on the word “world.” Here it is. (You said you would ruin me; if you do you will ruin me by dodging! I tell you the truth; it would take a man with five eyes to stay up with your trickery. You are dodging! We are going to stay in good humor; I have had a debate with him before. I know how to rub him. You folks stay in a good humor.) Here it is: Heb. 12:6-11. Let us see what he gets into. “For whom the Lord loveth he chasteneth, and scourgeth every son whom he receiveth. If ye endure chastening, God dealeth with you as with sons; for what son is there whom the father chasteneth not? But if ye be without chastisement, whereof all are partakers, then are ye bastards, and not sons. Furthermore we have had fathers of our flesh which corrected us, and we gave them reverence: shall we not much rather be in subjection unto the Father of spirits, and live? For they verily for a few days chastened us after their own pleasure; but he for our profit, that we might be partakers of his holiness. Now no chastening for the present seemeth to be joyous, but grievous: nevertheless afterward it yieldeth the peaceable fruit of righteousness unto them which are exercised thereby.” How many are exercised thereby? Every one he loves. Now where do the “bastards and not Sons” come in? Eh? Nichols, I’ll get out of the debate and never hold another debate before I would meet a man, and cover up his arguments and run over them roughshod and pay no attention to them. That is not debating, never has been and never will be. I will meet a man‘s arguments head-on, if I go down in defeat—or not even assume the role of debater. This is not debating. You can fool people; that is what is the matter with the world today—that is what is the matter with people today. Men who stand behind the sacred desk should be the most honest and the most careful, and have that reservation and have the reluctance to venture into anything with premature judgment, or without some reservation in our thoughts and observation of things.

St. Jn. 1:9, Christ lights “every man” that cometh into the world. Here it is. “In him is life; and the life is the light of men.” (St. John 1:4.) “That was the true light which lighteth every man that cometh into the world.” But I tell you the trouble; now here is how that thing rebounds: Mr. Nichols does not claim to have the life of Christ, therefore he does not have the light of Christ. If you will get up here and say “Yes, I have the life of Christ,” then I will say I just misunderstand your position. I do not wish to misrepresent him. Say, Elder, do you baptize a man who is dead in sin? Or, dead to sin? I will bring you out and show you do not have life, and that you do not claim to have it. All right if you have life, then that light springs from life. If that light springs from that life, here is the whole world that has the life of Christ.

St. John 14:17. Christ promises the Spirit of truth unto his followers whom the world cannot receive, “for it seeth him not, neither knoweth him.” (St. John 17:9.) He prays, not for the ‘world,’ the ‘world’ that would love its own; but “because ye are not of the world, but I have chosen you out of the world, therefore the world hateth you.” If the ‘world’ means all of Adam‘s race here, who are the people there in contra-distinction to the ‘world?’ St John 18:36. His kingdom is said to be not of the world: “For if my  kingdom were of this world, then would my servants fight, that I should not be delivered to the Jews.” I am coming right on down. There is not an intelligent business man, there is not a man who has dipped his mind in theological truth, and studied truth, but that he knows the word “world” is rarely ever used in its broader, or general, sense in the Bible, or as a commercial term either.

Let us go a little farther: 1 Cor. 11:32 God’s people are chastened that they “should not be condemned with the world.” There is the same chastisement again. “Whom the Lord loveth he chasteneth.” When you are judged of the Lord, you “should not be condemned with the world.”

2 Cor. 5:19. “God was in Christ, reconciling the world unto himself, not imputing their trespasses unto them.” Again, in Romans 4:6-8, it says, “Blessed is the man to whom the Lord will not impute sins.” That word “impute” means to not charge against. And here is the whole world, and he said God was in Christ reconciling the “world” unto himself, not imputing their trespasses unto them. Jas. 3:6 the tongue is said to be a “world of iniquity”—“world.” All right, 2 Pet. 3. The old ‘world,’ before the flood, was the “world of the ungodly” that was destroyed. The ‘world’ does not know God’s people because it knew him not. I Jn. 3:1, “Behold, what manner of love the Father hath bestowed upon us, that we should be called the sons of God: therefore the world knoweth us not, because it knew him not.” But let us go a little further. I want about two or three minutes here.

1 Jn. 5:19, “The whole world lieth in wickedness.” Then I am coming to 1 Jn. 2:2. You misrepresented. “He said—.” “He said—,” well now go ahead and say what I said and quit putting words into my mouth; do you hear me? You quit doing that! That is a violation of the rules. I have not said one thing in the world about 1 Jn. 2:2—not one word, did not even introduce it.    He said I said the Jews are the saved. That is where John says “He is the propitiation for our sins”—that is the saved. But he said it means more than the saved. “Not for our sins only but also for the sins of the whole world.” My position, is it means to appease, and it means to make reconciliation. It means about the same thing as the old Hebrew word atonement. he is the satisfaction, he is the propitiator, he is the one that propitiates, or expiates before God for his people. Not for his people among the Jews only, but also for his people among the (Gentiles. That is simple, isn’t it? But suppose it is all of Adam’s race, as per Nichols’ position? If it is all of Adam’s race, and some of them go to hell, then they go to hell after Jesus had propitiated or satisfied for their sins, and they pay their sin-debt twice—here, and in hell—when they do that. All right: Rev. 12:8. Satan is said to deceive the “whole world.” Heb. 11:3, “The worlds were framed by the word of God.” Heb. 1:2, he said, “By him the worlds were made.” The worlds were framed by the word of God, the only two places the word “worlds” (in the plural) appears in our Bible.

Now, I want to give the definition of the word “world”—Webster’s definition: “The whole system of created things, the universe, any celestial orb or planet, the earth and all created things.” He does not respect those terms. He has no respect for these terms in debate. Did he die for some planetary body? Did he die for the earth and all created things? Now I am coming to the restricted sense. Don’t you say we are not ethical in saying the ‘elect’ world. Do you say we are behind the times? Did you know Old Baptists are modern and up-to-date? Why they are the most up-to-date people in the world; ought to be, they have the truth. Listen: “That portion of the globe known to any one; as the old world, the world to come.” Did he die for the old world? Did he die for the new world? Did he die for the world to come? Let us go a little farther. “A certain class or portion, section of mankind considered as a separate or independent whole.” Did he die for a certain class, and then to the exclusion of others? Now here is mine; here is what I add to it. This is not Noah Webster. There is the “religious world,” the “heathen world.” Now there is where Webster stops, or where I stop in giving his definition. But I add this, “the business world, the Eastern world, the Western world, the Catholic world, the Protestant world, the wicked world.” All those are terms, and Mr. Alexander Campbell (the founder of this man‘s church, de facto— and without question) even referred to “the Jewish world,” a number of times in his writings.

All right, I will introduce some more affirmative arguments. I believe I was dwelling on St. Jn. 11:41-42 where Jesus was at the grave of Lazarus, and there be prayed to the Father and said, “When I pray thou dost always hear me.” Now over here where it is said in his prayer in the seventh chapter of St. John—and let me say this, right here, to this audience; friend Nichols will agree with me . . . I have heard some of them say the same thing: in the expression where the Saviour taught his disciples to pray, when they said, “Lord teach us to pray,” that is not the Saviour‘s prayer. Here is the Savior’s prayer in the seventeenth chapter of St. John. He said, “I pray that they, those whom thou hast given me, may be with me where I am, and that they may behold my glory.”

All right, again, let us go on and introduce some lessons along the line. “And Jesus lifted up his eyes to heaven, and said, Father, I thank thee, thou hast heard me.” And now listen. “And I know that thou hearest me always.” (St. Jn. 11:41-42.) All who were given him of the Father shall come to him. (St. Jn. 6:37.) Those who are brought to him are drawn by God’s love. (Jer. 31:3.) “The Lord hath appeared of old unto me saying, I have loved thee with an everlasting love, therefore with loving kindness have I drawn thee.”

All right, again, those whom he loves, regardless of how many, shall never be separated from the love of God, in Christ Jesus. Now mind you, he gets up here and says, “He said.” I am not telling you what he said, but I am telling you what the inspired apostle said here. And I want him to respect it, whether be respects me or not. “Who shall separate us from the love of Christ? Shall tribulation, or distress, or persecution, or famine, or nakedness, or peril, or sword? As it is written, For thy sake we are killed all the day long; we are accounted as sheep for the slaughter. Nay, in all these things we are more than conquerors through him that loved us. For I am persuaded, that neither death, nor life, nor angels, nor principalities, nor powers, nor things present, nor things to come, nor height, nor depth, nor any other creature, shall be able to separate us from the love of God, which is in Christ Jesus.” Let me give you a good little talk here, and it is a part of gospel truth. We see the great generals and the great men in the present war. Some of them get killed and some of them fall by the enemy, and some of the boys that are under their charge are carried out here, and a little mound is put over them, and all that. The American wants to see the time when peace shall reign in our hearts, and the good news will come home that the American doughboy with his colors and his bravery (who died an honorable death) and the living came back with laurels of victory in their hands. But they cannot say they were “more than conquerors.” Because many of the boys fell on the foreign battlefields of war. But here is a perfect Captain who says in the language of Paul, be is more than conqueror for those whom he loves. Therefore they will all be saved for whom Christ died.

Moderator:    Rapped for time.

Holder: Thank you.

Last Updated ( Wednesday, 10 January 2007 )
< Previous   Next >


The Primitive or Old School Baptists cling to the doctrines and practices held by Baptist Churches throughout America at the close of the Revolutionary War. This site is dedicated to providing access to our rich heritage, with both historic and contemporary writings.