THE NOBLE LESSON

RECLAIMING THE BIBLICAL NEONOMIANISM OF OUR BAPTIST FOREFATHERS

e hear much today about the Old Paths, about reclaiming our heritage as Baptists. For some, it has become an obsession. Perhaps at no time in the history of the Church have Baptists gone to such great lengths in the name of preserving their heritage. The problem, however, with this current effort lies in the modern understanding of who our Baptist forefathers really were. Our Baptist forefathers have not been permitted to speak for themselves. Instead, we have read the testimonies of historians, have been satisfied that there have always been Baptists and have consequently assumed that the true Baptist of historical fact is simply the ancient prototype of the modern Baptist. Nothing could be further from the truth. First of all, second-hand testimony is never sufficient to encompass the entire portrait of the ancient men and women who carried the cross of Christ through bloody seas, through the Dark Ages, the Reformation and the Puritan Era, to pass on the bloodied baton to us today. You cannot understand the Baptist heritage simply because you read Roy Mason's weak little book, The Church That Jesus Built or watched a video about Obadiah Holmes being whipped by the Congregationalists in the Massachusetts Bay Colony. You must study! You must read them for yourself, you must listen to what they said in their own words - not in the words of some spin doctor whose sole purpose is to advance his Baptist Bride theology, to prove that all non-Baptists are outside of the Bride of Christ and outside of any true Church.

Secondly, the modern "Baptist" - speaking of the vast majority of individuals bearing that name - is not really a Baptist at all. His doctrine is not Baptist doctrine, but Plymouth Brethren doctrine. He has not received his theology from the words and writings of the ancient Baptists, but rather from the charismatic cult leader, the Plymouth Brethren pedobaptist and novice, John Nelson Darby, via C. I. Scofield, the divorced Congregationalist pedobaptist and lower critic who advocated the Critical Text, the Gap Theory and the Pentecost Birthday Theory, and who, according to Scripture was completely unqualified to hold his office of pastor. This is their source, the head of the river, and yet, even a cursory knowledge of who these man really were exposes the fact that no Baptist pastor should ever sit at their feet. Neither Darby nor Scofield had any business teaching anybody, much less influencing the body of divinity of entire generations of genuinely God-called Baptist pastors. We say then that our Baptist heritage has been compromised, and that by the very leaders of Fundamentalism who embraced the system that Scofield borrowed from the novice and pedobaptist cult leader, John Nelson Darby. So it is necessary to go back to our true source, to clear away the rubbish, and to renew our understanding of historic Baptist theology in all of its Biblical purism. We must segregate ourselves from the impositions of Dispensationalist pseudo-literalism with its hokey, sham theology and sit again at the feet of those men who held the torch aloft amidst the darkest hours of history when the blackest exhibitions of human depravity exposed the unspeakable rage of Satan against the Church of the Most High God.

Thankfully, we can do that. In fact we can do it with far greater ease than ever before in this age when vast libraries of previously unattainable documents are available to almost anyone with just a few clicks of a mouse. A simple Google search will bring up the text of the Waldensian Noble Lesson along with numerous other historic Waldensian, Anabaptist and Baptist Confessions of faith. Conybeare's English translation of the Paulician Key of Truth can be downloaded in its entirety as a free PDF which also includes his translation of the Cathari Codex of Lyons (but beware of Conybeare's subtle Adoptionist spin on the Paulicians). On top of all this, multitudes of other books and resources - some dating back to the twelfth century - can be ordered through Amazon.com or Barnes and Noble. In short, we no longer have any excuse for propagating the same worn-out facade of pseudo-Baptist theology, when our true heritage is quite literally at our very fingertips.

Thanks to its brevity, The Noble Lesson is an easy starting point. The poem itself can be read within minutes, yet we can learn some vital truths about our Baptist heritage from its simple outline of Scripture. We list a few of these below.

I. TRINITARIANISM

The Waldensians were Trinitarian Christians. The fifth section of The Noble Lesson speaks overtly of "the Holy Trinity". The Father, the Son and the Holy Ghost are said to be "one".

A. THE DEITY OF CHRIST

This of course asserts their faith in the deity of Christ. Christ is declared to be "one" with his Father, rather than either the first created being or God's Son by adoption. The fact that the ancient Waldensian Bible includes I John 5: 7, as evidenced by Codex Teplensis, reinforces this fact.

B. THE PERSONALITY OF THE HOLY GHOST

This also asserts their faith in the personality of the Holy Ghost. The Holy Ghost, being "one" with the Father and the Son could not have been understood as a mere force or influence. He was understood by the Waldensians to be the third person of the Trinity, co-eternal and co-equal with God the Father and God the Son.

II. CREATIONISTS
The Waldensians were Biblical Creationists in the traditional and orthodox sense of the word. In the seventh and eighth sections of The Noble Lesson, God is referred to as "the Creator". He is seen as infusing man at creation with a "noble law", in accordance with Romans 2: 14 - 16 (a verse apparently overlooked by Dispensationalists who claim that there was no Law until the Decalogue was given to Moses from Mount Sinai). This distinguishes them sharply from the Manicheans who taught that the creator of the material world was evil. Nor is anything is stated that may imply any sort of Day-Age Theory. In addition to this, the tenth and twelfth sections refer directly to the doctrine of a global deluge, the Noahic flood.

III. THE PERSONALITY OF SATAN

The Waldensians believed in the personality of Satan. The Devil is seen as tempting man in his original created state, and the personal pronoun "his" is used in connection with him. In other words, the Waldensians did not accept the modernist idea that the Jews borrowed the idea of Satan from the Babylonians during the Babylonian captivity. They accepted the traditional view of Genesis and the resultant doctrine of Satan as being given to us by the Jews, not the Babylonians.

IV. THE FEDERAL HEADSHIP OF ADAM

The Waldensians believed in the Federal Headship of Adam as described in Romans 5. The seventh section begins with:

"How came this evil to enter into mankind? Because Adam sinned at the first beginning, By eating of the forbidden Apple. And thus the grain of evil seed taking root in others, He brought Death to himself and all his Posterity..."

In other words, the Waldensians were not Pelagian in their theology. They taught that Adam's sin corrupted the entire human race, making the New Creation, with a new Federal Head, the Second Adam, our Lord Jesus Christ, absolutely essential for the salvation of mankind.

V. THE ETERNAL STATE OF MAN

The Waldensians believed in an eternal state. They did not believe in the annihilation of the soul upon death. Moreover, their view of the eternal state of man was the traditional and orthodox dualist view that segregated "all men" into two categories, the wicked and the Elect. The Waldensians identified themselves as "the Elect", "Pilgrims", "Christians" and "Brethren" and made use of the old Cathari term (derived from Scripture - see Titus 1: 8, etc.) "Good Man", while the lost are repeatedly referred to as "the wicked". Accordingly "all men shall pass two ways. The good to glory, and the wicked to torment..."

That the Waldensians denied the doctrine of Purgatory is obvious, both from this passage and from their twelfth century treatise entitled The Dream of Purgatory.

VI. BELIEVER'S BAPTISM BY IMMERSION

The question of whether the Pre-Reformation Waldensians practiced believer's baptism exclusively is more difficult to ascertain from The Noble Lesson itself, and must be settled more finally from other sources. However, it is noteworthy that the thirty-eighth section of The Noble Lesson specifically refers to the baptism of believers, while saying nothing whatsoever of their children. If their children were also baptized with them, one would expect some statement to that effect. But there is not a syllable that would indicate that they understood the children of believers to be proper candidates for baptism. Believers are mentioned in the most explicit manner, while nothing at all is said of baptizing infants. In contrast, when Scripture describes the circumcision of Abraham in the Old Testament, care is taken to point out that his entire household was circumcised with him.

VII. ELECTION
The Noble Lesson identifies believers as "the Elect". Some have pointed out that the Roman Catholic Church viewed the Waldensians and John Calvin in the same light. Others have stated that the Waldensians believed almost the same thing that the Calvinists believed. Without question, they held to the doctrine of Election on some level.

Unfortunately, these are vague and inconclusive statements. To say that they believed almost the same thing as the Calvinists is also to say that they did not believe exactly the same thing as the Calvinists. In other words, statements like this can only go so far. They indicate some similarities. But what are those similarities? Simply believing in justification by grace alone through faith alone apart from works may be said to be the same thing that the Calvinists believe, but it does not settle the question of how election works in relationship to time, to God's foreknowledge or to man's will. It does not settle the question of free will as opposed to the bondage of the will. We know that the Waldensians were influenced by Augustinian theology, that they accepted the Federal Headship of Adam and the consequential doctrine of universal human corruption through Adam. We know then that, like Augustine, they opposed Pelagianism. But Augustine never went as far as Calvin,

Beza or Owen, so we cannot say from this that the Waldensians were Calvinistic. On the other hand, we know from the Waldensian pastor Monasteir that the Waldensians believed in election in relationship to God's foreknowledge, rather than election independent of God's foreknowledge as the Calvinists would have it. It seems safest to associate the Waldensian view of election with the Baxterian or Neonomian view advocated by Richard Baxter and many of his fellow Puritans during the Puritan Era in opposition to the Calvinist views of Beza and John Owen. But this question cannot be settled from The Noble Lesson alone, and must be resolved in another discussion. Drawing exclusively from The Noble Lesson, we can only say that the Waldensians did hold to the doctrine of Election.

VIII. NEONOMIANISM
One conclusion that is inescapable, however, is that the Waldensians were most certainly Neonomian in the broad sense of the word. We can only go so far from The Noble Lesson in relationship to how that applied to Soteriology, but in the broader sense of the word, Neonomianism is the very essence of the poem. In other words, the Waldensians believed something entirely opposite of the Dispensationalist. While the Dispensationalist chops the Bible to pieces and arbitrarily calls one section "The Age of Promise" and another section "The Age of Grace" and another section "The Age of Law", the beauty of The Noble Lesson is seen in the unfolding unity of its progression. The Waldensians did not turn different sections of the Bible against one another, creating the ridiculous, lurching shifts that Scofield, Darby, Chafer, Ironside, Pentecost, Ryrie, Stauffer and Ruckman advocate. Instead, they saw God's Word progressively revealed through three stages of divine Law: The Law of God written on the heart (Romans 2: 14 - 16), the Law of God written on tables of stone (II Corinthians 3: 3) and the Law of Christ given in the Sermon on the Mount (Galatians 6: 2).

We may well ask, "How does Waldensian theology align with God's Word, especially with the New Testament, as opposed to the modern views advocated by Darby, Scofield, Chafer, Ironside, Pentecost, Ryrie, Stauffer and Ruckman?" Does the New Testament teach that the Law remains in effect and in a more fully revealed form, or does it teach that we are in the "Age of Grace" and that the Law has been made void? Let's hear how the Apostle Paul understood that question and what he had to say about it in Romans:

"Do we then make void the law through faith? God forbid: yea, we establish the law."

What about the James? What did he believe about this question? We turn to James 1 and 2 for the answer:

"But whoso looketh into the perfect law of liberty and continueth therein, he being not a forgetful hearer, but a doer of the work, this man shall be blessed in his deed."

"If ye fulfil the royal law according to the scripture, Thou shalt love thy neighbour as thyself, ye do well: But if ye have respect to persons, ye commit sin, and are convinced of the law as transgressors. For whosoever shall keep the whole law, and yet offend in one point, he is guilty of all. For he that said, Do not commit adultery, said also, Do not kill. Now if thou commit no adultery, yet if thou kill, thou art become a transgressor of the law. So speak ye, and so do, as they that shall be judged by the law of liberty."

But doesn't the Bible say that the Christian is "not under the law"? Taken its rightful context in the sense of obtaining salvation, the answer is "Yes". But that passage must not be ripped out of context and made to suggest that in terms of moral obligation, the Christian is exempt from the demands of God's Law. The Apostle Paul leaves no room for doubt about this when he says the following:

"To them that are without law, as without law, (being not without law to God, but under the law to Christ,) that I might gain them that are without law."

"I thank God through Jesus Christ our Lord. So then with the mind I myself serve the law of God; but with the flesh the law of sin."

"Bear ye one another's burdens, and so fulfil the law of Christ."

CONCLUSION

But for the traditionalists who exalt the ideas of men above the clear statement of Scripture, the proof of the pudding is in the eating. Come, sir, tell me how your antinomian Dispensationalist church fares today? How has your new theology, your antinomianism, your Dispensationalism helped it? Are your church members more robust and vigorous in their faith than were the ancient Waldensians? Are they less carnal and worldly? Are they zealous of good works? Are they shaking this continent for Christ? Is your missionary activity gaining momentum the way that the Waldensian mission program did? Should persecution come tomorrow, should a Crusade be called to wipe out churches of your stripe, would your church members stride boldly to the stake? Would they kiss the executioner's blade? Would they lift their voices in jubilant psalm even as the flames enveloped their bodies? I leave you to answer those questions in the secrecy of your own heart.

One thing is certain: the Neonomianism of the Waldensians succeeded where Dispensationalism has fed us nothing but failure, disaster, defeat, and shame for nearly a century. It courageously and publicly named the Roman Catholic Church for the Babylonian Harlot that she is, sowing the seed and paving the way for the mighty iconoclasts - Jan Hus, Martin Luther, William Tyndale, Patrick Hamilton, Menno Simons, Belthasar Hubmaeir, and many others - that would pull her down her alters and break in pieces her idols. It led the way to a new era of human history that would enlighten the world with the Gospel and proclaim the Grace of God in Christ Jesus to the uttermost parts of the earth. May God give us many more such Neonomian Baptists.