ORIGIN OF THE OLD LINE PRIMITIVE BAPTISTS

The Old Line Primitive Baptists originated from a complex historical process that took place within the Primitive Baptist movement in the 19th and early 20th centuries, largely as a response to internal divisions over issues like preaching authority, associational correspondence, doctrinal purity, and particularly Conditional Time Salvation (CTS).

---

🔹 Foundational Background

• Primitive Baptists emerged in the 1830s as a separation from the Missionary Baptist movement. They rejected innovations such as:

  • Mission boards

  • Sunday schools

  • Theological seminaries

  • Paid ministry
    These "innovations" were seen as unscriptural and as departing from the faith and practice of the early Baptists.

• Early leaders included Elder Gilbert Beebe, Elder Samuel Trott, and Elder Wilson Thompson, who helped establish the theological and ecclesiological framework for what would later be called Old School Baptists.

---

🔹 The Rise of Doctrinal Factionalism (Mid-to-Late 19th Century)

After the initial separation from the Missionaries, new doctrinal debates arose among Primitive Baptists themselves:

• Conditional Time Salvation vs. Absolute Predestination & Eternal Salvation Alone:

  • Figures like Elder Gilbert Beebe rejected Conditional Time Salvation as introducing Arminian ideas into Primitive Baptist theology.

  • Others, particularly in the Southern U.S. (e.g., Alabama, Mississippi, Texas), accepted a form of time salvation in which obedience could affect temporal blessings, chastisements, and fellowship.

• Progressive Sanctification:

  • Rejected by many Old School Baptists as contrary to the finished work of Christ and the once-for-all sanctification of the elect.

  • Others, particularly those influenced by Puritan or Reformed thought, embraced a view of practical or progressive holiness.

These divisions produced a schism between two broad groups by the early 1900s:

• "Absoluters" or "Old Line" Primitive Baptists

• "Conditionalists" or "Progressives"

---

🔹 Formal Emergence of "Old Line" Primitive Baptists

The term Old Line Primitive Baptists began to be used in the 1910s–1930s, especially in areas like Virginia, North Carolina, Kentucky, and Tennessee, to describe churches that:

• Maintained strict adherence to the doctrines of absolute predestination, eternal vital union, and regeneration as monergistic.

• Rejected the Conditional Time Salvation framework.

• Preserved old associational correspondence patterns, often withdrawing from associations that allowed CTS or permitted what they saw as creeping modernism.

• Held tightly to the original 1832 Black Rock Address principles and Beebean theology.

“Old Line” signified continuity with the unbroken doctrinal line of the original Old School Baptists, especially those who followed Signs of the Times and Beebe’s writings.

---

🔹 Key Features of the Old Line Primitive Baptists

Feature	Old Line Primitive Baptists View
Predestination	Absolute and unconditional
Time Salvation	Rejected as Arminian
Means in Regeneration	Denied—Holy Spirit alone
Church Practices	No Sunday Schools, no boards
Fellowship Boundaries	Strict—non-fellowship with CTS
Doctrinal Authorities	Beebe, Trott, Dudley

---

🔹 Major Conflicts and Split with Conditionalists

The key historical rifts occurred through association-level splits:

• Ketocton Association (Virginia) had internal disputes that led to divisions over doctrinal purity, with Old Line Baptists separating.

• In Tennessee, the New Salem Association was a major body of Old Line churches that maintained traditionalist stances.

Many Old Line Primitive Baptists ceased correspondence with associations that harbored or tolerated CTS or progressive sanctification views, viewing them as “off the line.”

---

🔹 Leading Figures and Publications

• Elder F.A. Chick, Elder Silas H. Durand, Elder John R. Respess, and Elder R.H. Pittman were strong proponents of Old Line thought.

• Publications like:

  • Signs of the Times (NY)

  • Advocate and Messenger

  • The Remnant (modern continuation)

helped shape and preserve the identity of the Old Line branch.

---

🔹 Modern Usage and Identity

Today, "Old Line Primitive Baptists" is still used by churches who:

• Trace doctrinal lineage directly to the Black Rock Address of 1832

• Reject all forms of Conditional Time Salvation

• Embrace strict predestinarianism and experiential regeneration

• Often meet in unincorporated, non-programmed local churches

They are distinct from:

• Progressive Primitive Baptists (many of whom now allow Sunday Schools or CTS)

• Two-Seed-in-the-Spirit Predestinarian Baptists (a hyper-Calvinist fringe group)

• Universalists and Spiritualizers (often separated entirely)

---

🔹 Summary Chart

Term	Meaning
Primitive Baptists	Baptists who rejected 19th-century innovations
Old School Baptists	The original name for the anti-mission movement
Old Line Primitive Baptists	Those who continued strict Beebean theology
Conditionalists	Accepted time-based conditional blessings
Progressives	Introduced Sunday Schools, relaxed theology

---

Origins and Editorial Positions on Absolute Predestination Among Primitive Baptists

---

Section I: Origins of the Old Line Primitive Baptists

The Old Line Primitive Baptists emerged as a conservative faction within the broader Primitive Baptist movement in the late 19th and early 20th centuries. Their origin lies in the reaffirmation of strict Calvinistic theology, particularly Absolute Predestination, and a rejection of Conditional Time Salvation (CTS) and other innovations perceived as doctrinal drift.

Primitive Baptists themselves were a breakaway from Missionary Baptists during the Black Rock Address of 1832, where leaders like Elder Gilbert Beebe and Elder Samuel Trott rejected mission boards, Sunday Schools, and other organized religious institutions as unbiblical.

As doctrinal differences within the Primitive Baptist movement deepened, those who refused to soften the doctrine of predestination or introduce conditional views of time salvation began identifying as Old Line Primitive Baptists—"Old Line" signifying continuity with the original, uncompromising Old School Baptist doctrine.

---

Section II: Key Doctrinal Divides

Doctrine	Old Line Position	Conditionalist/Progressive View
Predestination	Absolute of all things	Limited to salvation; excludes evil acts
Means in Regeneration	Denied	Often affirmed (gospel instrumentality)
Conditional Time Salvation	Rejected	Accepted as practical truth
Progressive Sanctification	Rejected	Often affirmed

Old Line Baptists considered Absolute Predestination a touchstone doctrine, meaning that any editor or elder who denied it was seen as departing from the faith once delivered.

---

Section III: Editor Positions on Absolute Predestination

A. Affirmers of Absolute Predestination (Old Line Standard-Bearers)

1. Elder Gilbert Beebe (Editor, Signs of the Times, 1832–1881)

• Position: Strongly Affirmed Absolute Predestination

• Quote: "We believe most unhesitatingly in the doctrine of the absolute predestination of all things." (Signs, 1855)

2. Elder Samuel Trott (Frequent Contributor)

• Position: Affirmed full predestination, including evil under God’s sovereignty

• Quote: “God’s predestination includes all things that come to pass... both good and evil.”

3. Elder Thomas P. Dudley (Editor, Cross Roads Papers)

• Position: Supralapsarian predestinarian; influential in Kentucky and Virginia

4. Elder Silas H. Durand (Co-editor, Signs of the Times, 1881–1905)

• Position: Defender of Beebe’s theology; opponent of CTS and conditionalism

---

B. Editors Who Qualified or Denied Absolute Predestination

1. Elder R.H. Pittman (Editor, Advocate and Messenger)

• Position: Moderated predestination; avoided fatalism

• Note: Signed the 1932 Fulton Confession, which retained predestinarian language but was viewed as compromise by Old Liners

2. Elder C.H. Cayce (Editor, Primitive Baptist, 1900–1940s)

• Position: Explicitly denied predestination of evil

• Quote: “We do not believe God predestinated sin... Predestination applies only to the elect and their salvation.”

• Impact: Seen as chief proponent of Conditional Time Salvation. Rejected by Old Liners.

3. Elder J.H. Oliphant (Editor, Signs of Grace, Indiana)

• Position: Softened view; emphasized God’s permissive will more than His determinate counsel

• Ambiguity: Popular among more progressive churches; avoided Beebean language

---

Section IV: Old Line Ministers Who Disagreed with Predestination of Sin

While the vast majority of Old Line Primitive Baptists upheld the absolute predestination of all things, including sin under divine sovereignty, a few ministers associated with Old Line circles expressed caution or qualified their view of predestination as it related to evil.

1. Elder W.T. Dalton (Kentucky, early 20th century)

• View: Rejected the idea that God was the author of sin but stopped short of denying that all events were predestinated.

• He preferred language that emphasized God's permissive decree concerning sin rather than active causation.

• No known printed sermons directly quote him on this matter, but oral tradition in Kentucky churches noted his reservations.

2. Elder C.B. Teague (Alabama, early 1900s)

• View: Affirmed predestination broadly but expressed discomfort with attributing sin's origin to divine decree.

• No full printed statements are presently available, though his writings appeared occasionally in local association minutes with softened terminology.

However, these figures were never editors of major Old Line publications and their more cautious expressions were generally tolerated only so far as they did not deny the broader doctrine of God's sovereign decree.

Some churches and associations eventually severed correspondence when such caution was seen as too close to the views of Cayce and other Conditionalists.

---

Section V: Doctrinal Documents and Confessions

1. Black Rock Address (1832)

• Affirms sovereign grace and rejection of modern institutions

• Silent on predestination explicitly but foundational for Old Line standards

2. Fulton Confession of Faith (1932)

• Retains language of predestination

• Accepted by both factions but interpreted differently

• Old Line Baptists often viewed it as a compromise document when read alongside Cayce’s influence

---

Section VI: Summary Table of Editorial Positions

Editor	Paper/Role	Predestination View	Alignment
Gilbert Beebe	Signs of the Times (NY)	Strongly Affirmed (All)	Old Line
Samuel Trott	Contributor	Affirmed	Old Line
Thomas P. Dudley	Cross Roads Papers	Supralapsarian	Old Line
Silas H. Durand	Signs of the Times	Affirmed	Old Line
R.H. Pittman	Advocate and Messenger	Modified/Ambiguous	Moderate
C.H. Cayce	Primitive Baptist (Tennessee)	Denied (especially evil)	Conditionalist
J.H. Oliphant	Signs of Grace (Indiana)	Qualified	Progressive

---

Section VII: Distinction Between Old Line and Absoluters

While often overlapping, the terms Old Line Primitive Baptists and Absoluters are not strictly synonymous.

Old Line Primitive Baptists refers to a historical faction that emerged from the Primitive Baptist tradition and adhered to a strict doctrinal and ecclesiastical identity. These churches emphasized not just absolute predestination, but also experiential regeneration, the rejection of means, and separation from modern religious innovations.

Absoluters, by contrast, is a theological label applied to those Primitive Baptists who assert the absolute predestination of all things, particularly including sin and evil. The term was often used polemically by opponents (such as Conditionalists) and was not always claimed as a self-designation.

Feature	Old Line Primitive Baptists	Absoluters
Definition	A historical and ecclesiastical identity	A doctrinal/theological stance
Scope	Broad—includes church order, regeneration, CTS	Narrow—focuses on predestination
View on Predestination	Affirms Absolute Predestination	Affirms Absolute Predestination
View on Predestination of Sin	Usually affirms or tolerates it	Dogmatically affirms it
Association/Fellowship	Specific lineage and correspondence	Doctrinal affinity
Usage	Internal label among traditional PBs	Often applied in debate/dispute

In essence, all Absoluters are Old Liners, but not all Old Liners are dogmatic Absoluters. A few Old Liners expressed caution regarding the origin of sin in God’s decree while still affirming His total sovereignty.

---

Section VIII: Why Some Absoluters Avoid the Term "Old Line"

Although many Absoluters are in full doctrinal agreement with what Old Line Primitive Baptists teach, they do not always adopt the term "Old Line" for several reasons:

1. Ecclesiastical vs. Doctrinal Identity

• "Old Line" refers to a specific ecclesiastical lineage and set of church correspondences, especially with the Signs of the Times, the New York churches, and the Black Rock tradition.

• Some Absoluters are independent of these historical correspondences and prefer not to identify institutionally.

2. Avoidance of Controversial or Sectarian Overtones

• Some Absoluters view "Old Line" as associated with specific controversies or church divisions, and prefer to emphasize doctrine rather than labels.

3. Regional Variation

• In some areas, "Old Line" has fallen out of use as a self-description, while in others, it retains specific institutional meaning.

• Absoluters outside of the northeastern U.S. may emphasize predestination but avoid the historical terminology tied to the Mid-Atlantic/Northeastern Old Line churches.

4. Simpler Identity

• Many prefer simply "Primitive Baptist," believing it to encompass all faithful doctrine without requiring further label refinement.

As such, while the two groups often align theologically, the term "Old Line" carries historical and associational implications that not all Absoluters accept.