Samuel Hawthornthwaite (1857) As a Hostile Witness to 19th-century Latter-day Saint Belief in Baptismal Regeneration

Samuel Hawthornthwaite, a former Latter-day Saint, in his 1857 book written against "Mormonism" acts as a hostile witness to early Latter-day Saint belief in baptismal regeneration (a doctrine many modern Church members seem to be embarrassed of):

No sooner was my head above water, and I felt my feet again, than I made a rush from the watery element to terra firma, leaving my companion to get out as best he could. The Saints struck up a Mormon hymn, while two or three of the brethren gathered round me, and gave me an extraordinary good rubbing with a rough towel, which in a few minutes transported me from the torrid zone to a tropical climate. Before I went into the water I was a Gentile and an alien, but now, being born again, I entered into the brotherhood in first-rate style; the consequence was, they flocked round me in groups, to wish me happiness on my advent into the new family.

 

. . .

 

On the Sunday afternoon following my water baptism, I attended the meeting of the Saints in the Hall of Science, Manchester. This was a large square room, well filled with brethren and sisters, who had assembled for the purpose of receiving the sacrament of bread and wine, and holding their usual Church meeting. I no sooner entered the room than I became the "observed of all observers," all eyes being fixed upon me as their new-born brother. I seated myself in the most obscure part of the room I could find, in order to screen myself from the scrutiny of my too inquisitive relations. After singing and prayer, the presiding Elder gave out the notice, that if there were any persons present who had been baptized and had not had hands laid upon them for the gift of the Holy Ghost, they must sit on a certain form placed near the stand. A person led me to the top of the room, where I sat myself down on the form; the three principal Elders came down from the platform and surrounded me; they then put their hands on my head, and one of them delivered the following speech in a very solemn and distinct tone:

 

"Dearly beloved brother, we, the servants of the Most High God, lay our hands upon your head in the name of Jesus Christ, and by virtue and authority of the Priesthood invested in us, to confirm you a member in the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter- Day Saints; and, inasmuch as you have been baptized for the remission of sins, we say unto you, that your sins are all forgiven you. And also, by the same authority, we give and confer upon you the gift of the Holy Ghost, which shall be in you as a well of water springing up to eternal life; it shall show you things past, things present, and things to come, and guide you into all truth. Which blessing we seal upon you in the name of the Father, the Son, and the Holy Ghost, and by virtue and authority of the Priesthood invested in us. Amen." (Samuel Hawthornthwaite, Mr. Hawthornthwaite’s Adventures Among the Mormons as an Elder, During the Last Eight Years [Manchester, UK: Samuel Hawthornthwaite, 1857], 84, 85-86)

 

Maurice E. Vellacott on "the perfect" (τὸ τέλειον) in 1 Corinthians 13:10

  

CHAPTER 13 AND VERSE 10

 

1 Corinthians 13:10 indicates that “when the perfect (teleion Greek) comes, the partial will be done away.”

 

This clause is amplified by Paul’s words, before and after, in 1 Corinthians 13: 9–13. After stating in verse 8 that various manifestations of the Spirit would be rendered inoperative or cease, he explains in 1 Corinthians 13:9 and 10: “For we know in part (“in” is the Greek ek meaning “from” or “out of”), and we prophesy in part; but when the perfect comes (Greek to teleion, “attaining an end or purpose, complete” “meeting the highest standard”—BDAG, s.v. τέλειος, §1; “brought to its end, finished; lacking nothing necessary to completeness”—Thayer, s.v. τέλειος, §1), the partial will be done away (Greek brought to an end).” The sense of the word points to the ultimate, not to some intermediate state. Therefore, the phrase “when the perfect comes” (τέλειον/teleion), likely refers to entering the eternal state—the new heavens and the new earth (Rev. 21:1; cf. Isaiah 65:17–25).

 

There has been lots of debate on the precise meaning of the Greek word teleion. Thomas Edgar (1996:246) sums up his conclusion in the following insightful words:

 

If, as seems apparent in the passage, the teleion [“perfect”] refers to the individual’s with the Lord, this passage does not refer to some prophetic point in history. These factors mean that this passage does not teach when gifts will cease or how long they will last. It serves to remind the Corinthians of the abiding nature of love in contrast to the gifts, which by their inherent nature are only temporal, only for this life.

 

Put succinctly, Edgar (1996:246) believes that the “perfect” (teleion) occurs when the individual believer enters into the presence of the Lord, whether that be at the Lord’s return or the believer’s passing on to heaven, whichever first. When the believer meets the Lord Jesus face-to-face, there will be no need for the spiritual gifts, because “then I shall know fully just as I also have been fully known” (1 Cor 13:12; cf. 2 Cor 5:8–9). Calvin (1573:360), in answer to when that “perfect” will come, says, “It begins, indeed, at death, for then we put off, along with the body, many infirmities; but it will not be completely manifested until the day of judgment.” Note that Calvin (1573:360) says that the “perfect” begins at death, but its full application is not to that intermediate state.

 

In other words, without fear of being contradicted, we know that various “spiritual ministries” will fade into complete irrelevance, at a different time for me than my grandchildren, assuming they outlive me and that the Lord doesn’t return before I depart this present earthly scene. (Maurice E. Vellacott, The Earliest View of New Testament Tongues: Understood as Non-Supernatural, Learned Earthly Languages [Eugene, Oreg.: Wipf & Stock, 2024], 227-28)

 

Arthur A. Tiger on the Pastoral Implications Concerning the Debate Among Protestants Concerning Arminian vs. Reformed/Calvinistic Theology

  

The pastoral implications of TULIP create both comfort and controversy. The assurance that salvation depends entirely on God’s sovereign choice, not human performance, provides deep security for believers. The teaching that God ordained everything for His glory gives meaning to suffering and providence. However, critics argue this system undermines evangelism (why share the gospel if God already chose?), promotes fatalism (why strive if everything is determined?), and makes God author of evil (if He ordains all things). These practical concerns, not merely theological abstractions, fuel ongoing resistance to Calvinist soteriology. (Arthur A. Tiger, The Encyclopedic Handbook of Protestant Denominations: Systematic Analysis of History, Theology, and Contemporary Challenges [His Story for Us Publishing, 2025], 438-39, emphasis in original)

 

Arthur A. Tiger on the Debates Among Protestants Concerning Soteriology

  

The doctrine of salvation stands at the heart of Protestant theology, yet no area generated more passionate disagreement among orthodox believers than the precise nature of how God saves sinners. These soteriological debates, involving questions about divine sovereignty and human responsibility, the nature of faith, the security of salvation and possibility of apostasy, represent not merely academic theological disputes but fundamental differences in understanding God’s character, human nature, and the very essence of the gospel. With hundreds of millions of Protestants aligned with different soteriological systems—Reformed, Arminian, Lutheran, Baptist, Wesleyan—these debates shape preaching, evangelism, discipleship, and Christian experience across denominational lines. (Arthur A. Tiger, The Encyclopedic Handbook of Protestant Denominations: Systematic Analysis of History, Theology, and Contemporary Challenges [His Story for Us Publishing, 2025], 437, emphasis in original)

 

 

These debates matter profoundly because they affect every aspect of Christian life and ministry. The Calvinist preaching God’s sovereign grace to totally depraved sinners, the Arminian calling for decisive faith response to prevenient grace, the Lutheran proclaiming objective justification through Word and Sacrament, and the Wesleyan pursuing entire sanctification through grace-empowered holiness each reflect different soteriological convictions with practical consequences. The contemporary resurgence of Reformed theology among young evangelicals, the growth of “Traditionalist” Southern Baptists opposing Calvinism, and the popularity of “Free Grace” theology demonstrate these ancient debates’ ongoing vitality and divisive potential. (Arthur A. Tiger, The Encyclopedic Handbook of Protestant Denominations: Systematic Analysis of History, Theology, and Contemporary Challenges [His Story for Us Publishing, 2025], 438)

 

Robert Alter on Psalm 45:13 (Hebrew: v. 14)

  

All the princess’s treasure is pearls. The Masoretic Text reads literally “all the princess’s treasure is inward,” which Jewish tradition has taken as a slogan for the virtuous wife’s conjugal modesty. But the immediately following word has a superfluous mem at the beginning. If one moves it back to the end of the previous word and inserts a second nun for the mem in the middle of the word, instead of penimah, “inward,” the consonantal text would read peninim, “pearls,” which makes more sense and a much better parallelism. There is also a syntactic problem here, because “princess” would have to be a vocative (“All the treasure, princess”), but because the royal bride is spoken of in the third person in the last half of the verse, the translation does not represent the vocative. (Robert Alter, The Hebrew Bible, 3 vols. [New York: W. W. Norton & Company, 2019], 3:120)

 

Robert Alter on Psalm 38:19 (Hebrew: v. 20)

  

my wanton enemies. The Masoretic Text reads ʾoyvay ḥayim, literally, “my enemies of life,” which some construe as “my mortal enemies,” though it is not a biblical idiom as it is worded here. A scroll of Psalms found at Qumran reads ʾoyvay ḥinam, “my wanton enemies” (that is, “enemies for no good reason”), which is nicely idiomatic and makes the parallelism in the two versets here exactly that of 35:19 (where sheqer, “unprovoked,” appears in the first verset and ḥinam in the second, rather than the other way around as here). (Robert Alter, The Hebrew Bible, 3 vols. [New York: W. W. Norton & Company, 2019], 3:105)

 

The BHS of this verse reads:

 

‎  וְאֹיְבַי חַיִּים עָצֵמוּ וְרַבּוּ שֹׂנְאַי שָׁקֶר

 

The verse in 4Q83 Psalms a (fragment 9, column ii, line 3), the text from Qumran Alter references, reads:

 

וֿאיב̇י ח֯נ̇ם

 

Arthur Weister on Psalm 38 and לְהַזְכִּיר (cf. εἰς ἀνάμνησιν [LXX: Psalm 37])

  

A Psalm. Of David. For the purpose of making a confession(?) (Arthur Weiser, The Psalms: A Commentary [The Old Testament Library; Philadelphia: The Westminster Press, 1998], 323)

 

 

Cf. the title of Ps. 70. Luther translates: for a memorial (l hāzkīr). Others relate the term to the’ azkārā, the offering of incense, which was part of the ‘meal offering’ (minḥā) and in the course of which the worship of late Judaism is said to have used the psalm as a prayer. (Ibid., n. 1)