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

HOLDER’S SECOND NEGATIVE

Kind friends, Mr. Nichols, Brethren Moderators, Ladies and Gentlemen: I am happy to come before you this evening and make the closing speech of this discussion. I have enjoyed it very much. There have been no hard feelings—none whatsoever—by me. I never got angry in my life in a religious discussion. Now, I can be made mad; but this has been very pleasant. Elder Nichols has gone hard after me, and I have gone hard after him; I trust we are friends. We just simply differ, and the difference is great, and all of that. Now, I shall make my speech just as quickly as I can.

And I will say just here: I do appreciate and will say (concurring with what has gone before about the same thing): I do appreciate the splendid conduct, the unexcelled attention which has been given, and the quiet over the audience during these speeches which you have been listening to. It bespeaks your good training and your respect (which all should have) for such assemblies. Now may I say before I enter into the speech to which you have just listened: May we all go back home and open the pages of our family Bibles. And as you get this book and read it, and as you recall the things we have said, you open your Bibles and compare carefully my position and his position by that un-repealed truth which is eternally right. One thing a little peculiar claimed though by him—or peculiarly held or subscribed to—I will put it that way—by friend Nichols’ people, and by our people: if I preach anything in addition to what the Bible teaches, I preach too much. If I stop this side of what the Bible teaches, I do not preach enough. But we differ on the interpretation of the Bible, and the difference is great. We need to read again (as the Lord’s people) everything, and take the Bible as God’s written will concerning our conduct. As I mentioned about the nature of the law, law has its scope. Every given law has its scope. (I do not offer this as an argument, but I offer it as the nature of any given law.) Every given law has its scope. The moral government of God is over all his creatures. The law of the kingdom of Christ is over all his people as a rule of life—that is, his people who are of such age and intelligence, and rational in mind, to be taught the gospel of Jesus Christ—they stand in grace. (Rom. 5:1-2.)

Now coming to the things we have gone over, and the things you have been listening to in the speech he has just made: he said, “Why I could raise something about what the Catholics teach that you teach also: for instance, that babies are sinners.” Notice what your proposition says—your proposition says that babies are sinners! “That Christ died for all the sinful race of Adam.” Now I wonder if he believes that infants are part of the sinful race of Adam? You did the wrong thing when you worded that proposition that way, did you not? He has not opened his mouth and come out on that thing until this good hour. He goes down in total defeat upon it. Not one time has he mentioned how the infant is reached. He can not say it is not a sinner, because his proposition says it is. He can not say that it meets certain conditions, because he knows he ‘d render himself ridiculous. I can quote the text, and stay in the word of God, and feel at case. I quoted it last evening: “Whosoever shall not receive the kingdom of God as a little child, he shall not enter therein.” (Mark 10:15.) Then to offset my position, he goes to Matthew 18:1-4 where the question was asked by his disciples, Who is the greatest in the kingdom? Then he used the words “except you be converted and become as little children, you shall in no wise enter into the kingdom.” Who was he talking to? He was talking to his disciples and telling them how to he great in the kingdom. “he that humbleth himself, the same is the greatest in the kingdom.” But, over here he tells us how we receive the kingdom. He knew that; of course he knew it. This is his way of answering arguments!

I have noticed his position about “destroy”—and glad he noticed that also. He said the word “destroy” and the word “perish” was taken from the same Greek word. By the way, Elder: you said in your book with Weaver, that Holiness preacher, that the prodigal son was a backsliding child of God. Then, he said before he returned to the father, “I perish with hunger.” Well, he did not perish so badly but that he was still a child of God, and you said so! You said so, “primarily,” and I think primarily right.

Those who are “baptized into Christ”: now here is what I said in the little book: he will not quote it right! He has been hurting! I put him in the bottle when I made my first speech in this debate, and he has been suffering ever since! I will tell you why. (I am taking this much time.) I never told him: I got out of the bed sick the week before Elder Nichols and I had the other debate; I was a sick man, but because I had made a promise and I wanted to keep it, I went to Tallassee, Alabama, and I should have been in the bed half the time during the debate. I never told him—possibly it would have been manipulated on by him! I went to the doctor every day while I was down there. But I weigh one hundred and eighty pounds now, and am as sound as a dollar physically. And this thing fooled you, perhaps—and we won a victory down there! I think we did. I took care of the Old Baptists’ cause well enough they did not complain about it; but I was not a well man and admit it, and should have stayed at home.

But, now listen to what I said: here is what Holder said in the book—and I read it like it is: “The death, burial, and resurrection of Christ is a glorious fact, and is absolutely not a picture. Those who are baptized into Christ should put on Christ in the picture or likeness of his death and resurrection by being baptized in water. Gal. 3:26-27.” And I believe that, one hundred per cent. That is, baptism is a picture; and the death, burial and resurrection is a glorious fact. The preaching of the gospel does not make it so! The preaching of the gospel is the good news of it! the glad tidings of it! the publishing of the truth about it! Now, the believer, the penitent believer, you should show this in a picture, by being baptized in water. I believe I am right and not guessing about this matter.

Some more about the things he said in his last speech: “By faith Enoch was translated.” He never gets to his proposition! Gone blank and forgets it! His proposition is dealing with the alien sinner. And he has scarcely even referred to it all this evening. You know why he has not referred to it this evening? He climbed upon the rafter, and tied a rope around his neck, and jumped off, and broke his neck last night in the last question that came before us, when he said, “When I preach, I appeal to the spiritual mind.” When you say you appeal to the spiritual mind, you absolutely admit that the Primitive Baptist people are right on this question and you are one hundred per cent wrong so far as your gospel preaching is concerned. And he admitted it! When he got on his feet—you remember he was talking about violating the rules: I did not violate the rule after I was corrected, but you did. And I would just like to see you get me to rise up under a question from my seat. I would have taken my seat and kept quiet while you were speaking. You know you fell for it, Elder Nichols, and it killed you! You will never do it again so long as you live. And you will never get over having already done it!

“When were we saved?” Now, maybe I misunderstood him on that. If I did, I assure you it was not intentional. “When were you saved?” I am going to answer that, and not taking advantage of the last speech. (If he thinks so, I shall not say a word about it—I will not violate the rules intentionally.) Elder Nichols, I was about seventeen years old. I was a plow-boy, out in my father’s field, going up and down the rows, and it came to me as it did to you if you are saved— (Some in audience laughed.)

Holder: (to those who laughed): This is funny, is it boys; I would not laugh at it—I declare I would not! If I did not have the work of God in my heart, I would not pose as a preacher! I sure would not. I am sorry for you; I pity you, a man that does not have the presence of the Lord that can be felt in his heart, and does not have anything he can confess with his lips. Because “with the heart man believeth unto righteousness, and with the mouth confession is made unto salvation.” (Rom. 10:10.) This pointer in my hand, goes to or unto an object, and the object is there or this pointer could not go unto it. You know, the word “unto” is a great little word. There are lots of things you can hitch on to! “Unto”; how can I put the pointer “unto” this object, if the object was not there?

All right. God graciously revealed to me, in the work, the quickening power of the holy Spirit, the guilt of sins, and the light of life enabled me to see it. T got down on my knees, and as a beggar, prayed to God; and the sweetness of God’s rich grace gave me the sweet assurance that he had saved me by grace. I would not take a million dollars for it, whether you like it or not! Primitive Baptists do not believe and preach that people are saved from the foundation of the world! You heard me quote repeatedly: the choice was made in Christ before the foundation of the world. And we are chosen in Christ “unto” it, “unto salvation.” All of God’s people have the same experience—and if you laugh at that you are in poor business as a child of God—I am sure you are! You can not run over God’s people and get by. God fashions their hearts alike, and preachers come along and put poison in their minds, and they fail to “see” alike! That is the trouble.

But he wants me to answer Eph. 1:13, where they “were sealed with the Holy Spirit of promise.” What I could give him may be introducing new matter. I overlooked this while ago when I was reading those references. I frankly tell you: I overlooked a page that I intended to reply to here in my notes.

Nichols:  Go ahead.

Holder: I should not do it, perhaps.

Nichols:    Yes, go ahead.

Holder: I should not because you could not reply to my argument.

Nichols:    Yes, go ahead; that will be all right with me.

Holder:  If it will be all right; I shall not take advantage. But anyway, “the seal”—I have no reason not to answer any argument he made, so I will give him my time, if he wants to get up here, so far as that is concerned. “Sealed with the Holy Spirit of promise.” “Am I not an apostle? Am I not free? Have I not seen the Lord Jesus? Are ye not my work in the Lord? If I be not an apostle unto others, then no doubt I am unto you—for the seal of mine apostleship are ye in the Lord.” (1 Cor. 9:1-2.) Now you get somebody OUT OF CHRIST with this seal! Is that SEAL as strong as the other one? I dare the man to find an alien sinner having that seal of the Holy Spirit of promise! Talking to the saints at Ephesus, not alien sinners. Thank you, Brother Nichols; that was kind of you.

All right: Now he calls my attention to some points on baptism. Elder Nichols, were you afraid to risk it? Failed to get to it, did you? Would you fail to get to as important a subject as that which you can not go to heaven without??? Would you fail and neglect the most important thing? Here is a man: If be only believes, he will go to hell; if he just repents, he goes to hell; if he believes and repents and confesses, he is still out and goes to hell; Friend Nichols will take him down into the water and when he is knee-deep, if he dies with a heart stroke he dies and goes to he]l. If he wades down waist-deep, if he has a stroke in the heart, he will die and go to hell. If he pushes him over until the end of his nose is out of water, he still dies without being hurried,—and I tell you frankly: anything short of a burial is not “baptism!” — but wait: that man will land in hell! But my friend just puts his candidate a little deeper, now, there you have it! I DID IT! THE SINNER did it! and he seems to be happy about it! God is not in it! Faith in the Lord Jesus Christ is not a matter of concern! It‘s what you do, or go to hell! That is the thing in his doctrine; his faith is in water, not Christ!

 “Baptism of repentance for the remission of sins.” “John did preach the baptism of repentance for the remission of sins.’’ Well, if the preposition means “unto” or “in order to,” then John had to preach it in order to remit sins. See there? “Baptism of repentance for the remission of sins.” (Luke 3:3; Mark 1:4—same thing.) Luke 7:30 “Rejected the counsel of God, not being baptized.” Somebody rejected the counsel of God, not being baptized. Well, were they commanded to be baptized? You know John said, “0 generation of vipers!” and he was talking to the same people, “who hath warned you to flee from the wrath to come?” Why did John not baptize that generation of vipers, Nichols, to remit their sins?

Let us see a little further Mark 16:15-16. “He that believeth and is baptized shall be saved, but he that believeth not shall be damned.” “Go ye into all the world and preach the gospel to every creature. He that believeth and is baptized shall be saved, but he that believeth not shall be damned.” Now listen to me (do not let these men palm their position off on you) that is a statement of a fact. I believe that fact. If a man dies impenitent in unbelief, he shall be damned. The work of regeneration enables the individual; by breaking up the heart, it works penitence. (2 Cor. 7:10.) “Repent” is a verb; “repentance” is a noun. First “repentance” and then “repent.” Mark 16:15-16: I believe it and you do not. Some of them fall from grace and go to hell, says Nichols! But the text says ‘He that believeth and is baptized shall be saved.” I believe the text!

Acts 2:38, “Repent and be baptized every one of you” unto, or “for the remission of sins.” As he has it here on the chart, “unto.’? All right: here is what I gave him: and it has not been answered. I debated with one of the very best men they have. And I have given him that name—I shall gladly give him that name this evening, Brother G. C. Brewer (I call him “brother” because he addressed me as “brother,” and I believe he has grace in his heart. Maybe that is more than Nichols would say about Holder!) There was not an unkind word, not a personality, used during the four days of that debate. That gentleman agreed with me on the terms: I laid them down before I made my arguments on Acts 2:38—and I would not have been afraid of the man if as big as the side of a house—when he agreed with me on the terms of Acts 2:38. I said, “Brother Brewer, the word ‘Christ’ is not a translated word.” (This is not new matter. I presented it to Brother Brewer and to you also.) The word “Christ” is not a translated word. If you were to translate it as the Greek lexicons do and give it to us, it means “anointed,” or “the anointed One.” And it would read this Way in the English translation of the word: “Repent and be baptized every one of you in the name of Jesus the anointed One for the remission of sins.” Now, here is the difference between Nichols and me: every time he picked up that book (and the book we are going to get before the readers will show it) he did not read those lexicons correctly! And, Brother Nichols, it will go down on the printed page for the careful reader to inspect. Those lexicons tell us that the word there IS NOT A PROPER NAME! George Ricker Berry says it is a verbal adjective. All right: here is the way it works: (you Gentlemen can wear the Missionaries out with this, but you cannot meet the Primitive Baptists with it! You just can not do it!) Here it is: if it were to read this way: “Repent and be baptized, every one of you, for the remission of sins,” these verbs would show action toward the remission of sins. And you could read it this way—now watch it: “Repent and be baptized”—for what? And I could not answer without getting in a tight place. “This is my blood of the new testament which is shed for many for the remission of sins.” The very same Greek phrase: Eis aphesin hamartion. “Repent and he baptized every one of you in the name of Jesus Christ for the remission of sins.” (Eis apehsim hamartion.) Now I read it as it would read translated: “Repent and be baptized every one of you in the name of Jesus, the anointed, “—now, I ask the question: “the anointed” for what? And you cannot answer without getting into it, because it shows action toward the remission of sins. Brother Brewer did not, and you have not, because it ruins you !—Just like that question did last night. Now, going on to Acts 22:16, “Arise and be baptized and wash away thy sins, calling on the name of the Lord.”

Nichols:    (Passes Berry’s Lexicon with his definition of “Christos” marked to the preachers on the front seats.)

Holder: You can show it to this audience if you wish. My dear Sir, I am not misrepresenting you; and any one wishing to do so may come down here at the close of this debate and I will show you he misread it, if you want to see it.

Acts 22:16, “Arise and be baptized and wash away thy sins, calling on the name of the Lord.” I asked him repeatedly, “Did Paul actually wash away his sins?” He does not answer that question! If he says, “Yes,” he has Paul‘s sins washed away before he reaches the blood—because baptism is “unto” it, he says. Do you see? If he agrees with me, “Did Paul actually wash away his sins?” he has Paul washing his sins away, then he reaches the blood too late for the blood to wash away his sins. If he says it is a picture, it ruins his theory! So he does not answer it either way. That‘s the reason why he lets it alone.

Now, I am going to take the rest of the time talking to you. And I am not going to violate any rule—not going to say anything harder about him than I do anyone else. As far as my debating or this discussion is concerned, it is soon to end, and I am going to take the rest of my time talking to you. Friends, may I tell you This (I am not debating now; it is off the record, if you want it that way; however, it will go in the book): the trouble with this country, the trouble with this nation, the trouble with the people of God in this nation, we are being swept off our feet by hurtful things, by the modernistic theories which come in our pathway, crowd into our lives, our minds, and our interests in the solemnity of Dad and Mother’s church life, and of the Christian religion of our Lord. When you resolve to do this one thing, study the Holy Bible, study and meditate, I pray to the Lord to give me light and understanding. Whoever may hold the truth, whoever today is preaching the truth, that people, that congregation, that church (regardless of where it is) will get the benefit of my presence. As the Lord turns his people in the light of his truth and in the light of instruction, to the door of the house of God, nothing but good comes. I am proud this evening that I believe that I can reach finally across the mystic gloom when Jesus Christ will leave heaven with a shout and with the voice of the arch-angel, and with the power of endless life will speak to these bodies which are sleeping in the graves, and those that are alive at his coming and will be caught up, and will meet the Lord in the air, and then shall we ever be with the Lord. The Lord in the morning of Creation, who threw the mountains to their lofty peaks today; and there imbedded in the rock you see the sea-shell, you see the mysteries of nature, too high to say that it was there by the hands of men. If he can do this, he can save a sinner, and he does save sinners irrespective of what your enemies say about it. I am going to preach it if I have to stand alone. The Lord went in the garden of Gethsemane alone. The Lord bore the guilt of the sins of his people alone. The Lord died faithfully filling his mission in the world, in the midst of the jeers and the mocks and the scoffing of sinful mankind. And the very same people that did such things, and Saul of Tarsus who showed his vent to the extent of his wicked zeal—yet the blood of Jesus Christ with its penetrating effect, and with the everlasting love of God, brought him (and this is no new matter) brought him from a persecuting Saul to a praying Paul, saying, “Lord, what will thou have me to do?” That is the question in the mind of every child of God. It ought to be the question in the mind of every child of God. And when you get the answer to it, by the gospel, step out on the promises of God. There awaits you the promises of God which are fraught in the path of duty as a child of God. You will not find them anywhere else. You then will have the sweetness of the earnest of your inheritance while you walk in the service of God. And finally, when time is no more, you shall live as an heir of promise and as a joint-heir with the Lord and Savior Jesus Christ. And then it can be said, “All mine are thine and thine are mine and I am glorified in them.” The Savior‘s prayer.


Moderator:    Rapped for time up.

Holder: Thank you, Ladies and Gentlemen.

 

END OF DEBATE

Last Updated ( Thursday, 15 March 2007 )
< Previous

Purpose

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.