FSSL said:
Let's use YOUR favorite sources...
- Armitage who says: "he [Smyth] looked upon his baptism as defective, and withdrew from the Baptists..."
It must be very convenient to make up history. It becomes inconvenient when you are not supported even by your own favorite sources...
Convenience and inconvenience. Hmmmm... I know it is a bit demanding, probably inconvenient for a busy man such as yourself, but could you please document the source for your above Armitage quote? You see, I really do not want to insinuate that you are a liar or anything like that, but what I am finding is that your snippet above belongs to Armitage's writing about Roger Williams, not John Smyth.
[quote author=Thomas Armitage, A History of the Baptists: Traced by Their Vital Principles and Practices, page 660]
THE AMERICAN BAPTISTS
IV. THE PROVIDENCE AND NEWPORT CHURCHES
The hand of God appears to have led
Roger Williams to plant the good seed of the kingdom in that colony, and then to step aside, lest any flesh should glory in his presence. In that day there was a very respectable class of men, both in England and the older colonies, nicknamed 'Seekers,' simply because they were earnest inquirers after truth; and, concluding that it was impossible to find it then on earth, they looked for its new manifestation from heaven. They sought a visible and apostolic line of purely spiritual character, something after the order of the late Edward Irving, and not finding this, they waited for a renewal of Apostles with special gifts of the Spirit to attest their credentials.
When Williams withdrew from the Baptists he was classed with these. His theory of the apostolate seems to have been the cause of his withdrawal, and of his doubt concerning the validity of his baptism. A few years later, in his 'Bloody Tenet' and his 'Hireling Ministry,'
he denied that a ministry existed which was capable of administering the ordinances, for in 'the rule of Antichrist the true ministry was lost, and he waited for its restoration, much after John Smyth's view, in a new order of succession. Of course he looked upon his baptism as defective, and withdrew from the Baptists. His was not an unusual case at that period.[/quote]
Though Smyth is mentioned in the sentence, it is very obvious Armitage is talking about
Roger Williams' withdrawal from the Baptists. In fact, it is interesting how he is using Smyth in the context of a "new order of succession," but that is another issue. I am mainly concerned here about the validity of you applying this quote from Armitage to Smyth instead of Williams with your brackets.
So, where did you get it from? Can you provide documentation such as book and page #? I would like to see the entire quote in its initial setting to verify if Armitage perhaps did use the exact same wording to speak of Smyth as he did of Williams. I just want to make sure everyone is aware of how much confidence we can have in your ability to read and relate what is actually there, not twist and misapply or misquote like some do.
Thank You.