Old Landmarkism: What is it?

by James Robinson Graves, D. Kris Minefee (Editor)

Old Landmarkism is a book that marked the watershed of the traditional Baptist conservative movement of the mid 1800s. The distinctives of the Baptist faith espoused by Graves sought to establish the true line of Baptist beliefs directly from the Bible to Graves time. The book though not as well read or know today is nonetheless very important to many Baptist denomination even today. Baptists like the American Baptists, the Independent Baptists, Missionary Baptists and many others still hold to the truths Grave defended in this landmark of a book.

Genres: History

194 pages, Kindle Edition

First published January 1, 1880

About the author

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/James_R...

Reviews

[Todd Bryant · Rating 3 out of 5]

J.R. Graves wrote this book in the midst of seeing Baptists move towards completely open communion. By his admission (several times), most Baptists of his day practiced what is commonly called today "close communion". But he felt there was a move towards open on the horizon. He was also frustrated with the pulpit affiliation with men of other denominations. It is to correct these two things he writes this book.

I read this book many years ago and had forgotten some of his thoughts. Honestly, these things still need to be talked about. Should Baptists allow unbaptized persons (i.e. Pedobaptists) to join them in communion? Should they allow those who believe in baptismal regeneration? Should they receive baptism from such groups? Graves wholeheartedly rejects those ideas primarily based on either a completely false gospel (ceremonialism) or a faulty mode (sprinkling). He doesn't go much farther on that.

I was reminded of his odd view of the kingdom which his theory is foundationally based on. Graves believed the kingdom is currently on Earth and is made up of churches. Thus, Baptist churches are the visible kingdom of Christ here on Earth now. I honestly struggle to see how this is much different than the Catholic view of the universal visible church, other than terminology. Graves missed the mark here - and, sadly, much of his view of church succession is based on that premise. That is, since the kingdom was promised that the gates of hell will not prevail against it, there have been true churches since the days of Jesus's ministry. I think most would agree that there have been true churches since Jesus's ministry. But, the church (at least for the premillennialist) didn't replace Israel and the visible kingdom is not made up of churches - it is future. He had much confusion on that point and it honest detracts from this book throughout.

I did find it quite interesting that Graves quoted the Emphatic Diaglott, an interlinear New Testament printed in 1864. It's based on an eclectic text making special use of Vaticanus. Hyper-church Landmarkers today are dogmatically KJVO. It is certainly telling that one of their "fathers" - one of their heroes - Mr. Baptist of the 19th Century - didn't mind using a Bible translation that utilized the work of Wescott and Hort.

[Jeff · Rating 3 out of 5]

Mostly good though a little heavy-handed. Graves is not a dazzling writer, but he is clear and passionate. This book is mostly a polemic against alien baptism, open communion, or inter-communion, and pulpit affiliations. Graves makes his case in a very logical argument. He draws from Scripture and history to support his assertions.

He deals here with issues of church polity that we rarely hear about today. It is not that the issues don't exist today, but few seem to be troubled at all by these questions. Ours is an age where it is not acceptable to scrutinize nor criticize another's views. Everyone is supposed to sit around the table equally. Of course that was not the approach of Jesus nor His apostles, and it shouldn't be ours.

This book was written in the heat of the day and you may or may not be familiar with the men, churches, and situations he refers to. I recommend reading it carefully and thoughtfully. Graves has been maligned over the years and many things attributed to him that he would be surprised to learn about. Read him yourself and find out what he actually wrote and believed.

[W. Austin · Rating 3 out of 5]

Good stuff to learn about Baptist and I am glad to be a Baptist. This a reaction to the bad actions of others that has brought much to play in our Baptist Churches today

[Daniel Ligon · Rating 4 out of 5]

In "Old Landmarkism", J. R. Graves put forward an array of biblical, logical, and historical arguments on the issues of taking communion with, exchanging pulpits with, and accepting members of non-Baptists. Landmarkism holds that while not all Christians are Baptists, only Baptist churches are true churches. Due to their incorrect doctrines (including but not limited to infant baptism), Graves argued that Pedobaptist (infant baptizing) churches are not true New Testament churches and that their members and ministers are unbaptized and unordained. To be consistent with that position, Graves promoted closed (local church only) communion and only accepted baptism and ordinations from other Baptist churches. In my opinion, the central idea of Landmarkism is the authority and independence of the local church. Graves denied the concept of the universal, invisible church and made an argument from the usage of the word "church" (ecclesia) in the Bible that "church" always refers to either a local church or the church in an institutional sense, but never as a worldwide body of believers. Graves also devoted four chapters to examining the history of ancient and early American Baptists. He concluded that the majority of Baptists have historically only accepted Baptist baptism and Baptist preachers.

I disagree with Graves in a few areas: he was a hyper-dispensationalist and a Calvinist, he used fermented wine in communion, and he defined the kingdom of God as the aggregate membership of true churches. However, the book overall makes a thorough and comprehensive argument for the basic principles of Landmarkism and is well worth the read for anyone interested in Baptist history or Baptist distinctives.

[Brenton · Rating 1 out of 5]

Fake history. One star is generous.