Audio Video Library
General Beliefs Site Search Time Line
E-Mail Us Web Links Home

Most of the articles on these WebPages have been written by godly men with a central belief in the Lord Jesus Christ. However as with most of us, they may have different beliefs concerning some particular doctrines. These articles have been made available for the purpose of “gleaning the good” where good can be found. I do not necessarily endorse all that is written by others, anymore than I expect others to endorse all that I write.

Identity of The Church

Debate at Perkins

Cayce - Craig

Reprinted in the Primitive Baptist January 15th 1900


Debate began at Perkins' Mill, twelve miles east of here, August 21st, and continued four days; subject, “Identity of the Church;”  each affirming two days; W. D. Craig of the Church of Christ, Bibby, Miss., and C. H. Cayce, of the Primitive Baptist Church, Martin, Tenn. Principal points discussed: Origin or Establishment of the Kingdom or Church; Conditionality of Salvation; Possibility of Apostasy; and Close Communion. Brother Cayce is a strong man and a very rapid speaker; a year communion and foot washing; but these points he would not try to defend. Elder Cayce was very indefinite as to the origin of the church, and was at times very rough towards Brother Craig, calling him names, “Campbelite,” “Little Pope,”  “Godfather,” “Ain't he a pretty looking Thing,”  etc. This was not argument, but sounded ugly, Let us hope that he will not indulge again in such methods. Elder Cayce is a strong man and a very rapid speaker. Brother Craig spoke in an earnest manner and with telling effect. He compared Baptist teaching with Bible teaching, and tried to get Elder Cayce to harmonize the two. Elder Cayce's failure to do so, I think, placed the cause of Christ in the front. I think the debate will do a great deal of good. One lady made the confession at the close of the debate. Tillatoba, Miss, Sept. 21, 1899. J H. HARRISON. REMARKS The above “item” was copied from the Christian Standard of October 7th, 1899, published at Cincinnati. O., and sent to me I am not surprised nor astonished. I don't know how the gentleman learned that I was “a year communion and foot washing,”  unless he learned it from Mr. Craig, his godfather, for I never said so. The people who were present know that I did defend our practice of feet washing, and that Mr. Craig did not refute the argument. He only made one very weak objection to its being a church ordinance. Mr. Harrison knows as well as all persons present-that I showed from the Scriptures just when and where the church was organized, and how many and who were the members, and traced the church on down to the present time by history. But what hurt so badly, was, I showed by an abundance of testimony that Mr. Craig's church was set up by Alexander Campbell, at Brush Run, Washington county, Pa., in May, 1811, with thirty members. Hence Mr. Craig is a Campbellite. Poor boy! he is ashamed of his father. If the father was living today, I believe he would be ashamed of his child. I did not use the term, “Little Pope” during the discussion, but I did call him by names that he assumed in his own arguments and assertions. Of course the whole thing “sounded ugly”  to Mr. Harrison and some others of the Campbellite persuasion when I was talking; but it would not “sound ugly” for Mr. Craig to say, “it's none of your business!”  and other like expressions, in answer to decent and pertinent questions! No; God bless his little sweet soul-he couldn't do ugly-no, no! not for the memory of his mother! Dear me, I wonder what he could do if it was not for remembering her! Yes; Elder Craig spoke with telling effect-and the affect was that the unbiased and unprejudiced persons present could, and did, plainly see the fallacy and rottenness of Campbellism, as championed by Mr. Craig. “Elder Cayce” harmonized Baptist doctrine with the Bible; but he was not required to harmonize everything with the Bible that Elder Craig might be pleased to call Baptist doctrine; and I would be a fool if I should undertake such a job, for he has very little idea of what Baptist doctrine is. And he was so bewildered in that discussion that when I would tell him, he did not seem to remember it long enough to make one speech. Yes; I think, too, that the cause of Christ was placed in the front, which is unmistakable evidence that the cause of Campbellism (which was championed by Mr. Craig) was left in the rear. Glad Mr. Harrison was honest enough to acknowledge it. So did Mr. Craig's moderator acknowledge his defeat. I took the train at Coffeeville for home. While I was there waiting for the train, I was in a store belonging to one Mr. Hall. Mr. Craig's moderator entered the room and began a conversation with me. In the conversation I asked him: “Now, be right honest with yourself and with me; are you not bound to acknowledge that your brother was not equal to the task?”  He replied that he was bound to admit it-that Mr. Craig was not equal to the task. I have witnesses that he made this admission. Yes; one lady “made the confession”  at the close of the debate. I had heard of the lady before the last day of the debate-so I was not surprised. But she was certainly mad when she “made the confession,”  for her countenance betrayed her feelings. I have heard that she was not baptized for some time after the debate; and it may be that she has not yet been immersed. Poor woman! according to Elder Craig's theory, if she dies without being immersed, she will go to hell after all! If Campbellism is true. Talmage was correct, sure enough, when he said, “Procrastination is hell's deception.”  Are you not glad that Campbellism is not true? I am. I, too, think the debate did good. I remained there for four days following the close, and held meeting each day. During the meeting seven were received into the fellowship of the church, and I had the privilege of baptizing them while there. Some of them said they were fully convinced during the debate that the doctrine believed by the Primitive Baptists was the doctrine of God our Saviour-the doctrine taught in the Bible. I learn that the Campbelites had been rather expecting one of the seven to join them, and they were very much disappointed and chagrined when they heard what had taken place. The reason the Campbelites were so badly defeated is simply this they have no solid ground (or rock) upon which to stand. They can't stand on water. One must have a stronger and more solid foundation-the eternal Rock of Ages, the Lord Jesus Christ-and that's what Old Baptists have. Mr. Craig doesn't want any more of it. He had thirty minutes time for his last speech, in closing the discussion. When he had been speaking about fifteen or twenty minutes, he said: “Well, I believe I am done; and, so far as I am concerned, the debate is over with!”  I don't blame him. If I had been in his position it would have been over sooner than that, I think, for every day's work only made it worse for him and his theory. I actually felt sorry for him sometimes-and so did others If the Campbelites want more, perhaps we can find some one to “pass the ham”  for them again. C. H. CAYCE.