This article is presented to illustrate the apparent intention of Elder Bradley to change the practices of the Primitive Baptist Church by his claim that some key Primitive Baptist practices are really man's traditions and not biblical. The article A visit to Black Rock written in 1996, his defense of  Cincinnati Preachers' meetings written in 1997 and this article written in 2002 show a remarkable contrast with his apparent feelings about Primitive Baptist Practices in a sermon he preached  in 1958  just prior to coming over to the Primitive Baptists. 

"Thus saith the Lord, Stand ye in the ways, and see, and ask for the old paths, where is the good way, and walk therein, and ye shall find rest for your souls." - Jeremiah 6:16.

This text is frequently quoted among our people. It seems to have a ring of assurance. If we are traveling in what we believe to be the old paths, then all is well. It is also used to sound an alarm. If anyone is viewed as departing from what is perceived to be the old paths, then whatever the issue may be, it need not be considered any further. If it is not what we have understood to be the "old paths," then it must be wrong. But does it necessarily mean that every time this text is quoted, either to give assurance to people that all is well because they are in the old paths, or to sound an alarm that someone is wandering from the old paths, that we have the correct interpretation of the text?

 John Gill makes these comments about the passage: "These are the words of the Lord to the people, whom he would have judge for themselves, and not be blindly led by the false prophets and priests; directing them to do what men should, when they are in a place where two or more ways meet, and know not which way to take; they should make a short stop, and look to the way-mark or way-post, which points whither each path leads, and so accordingly proceed. Now, in religious things, the Scriptures are the way-mark to direct us which way we should take."

 The fact is, then, that the text itself does not identify or describe the old paths; it simply says we should walk in them. The people had been "healed" by the prophets who were saying "Peace, peace: when there is no peace." Now they are told not to be lulled into complacency by their message, but to be looking for the way-mark. As Gill says, the Scriptures are the way-mark. The old paths cannot be identified by consulting traditions that are only fifty or a hundred years old; they can only be discovered by the study of the Scriptures. The Old Testament is valuable. The things written in it are for our learning and admonition, but when we want to find the pattern for the New Testament Church we obviously must go to the New Testament. To refer only to the Old Testament passage, which speaks of the old paths, does not in itself provide enough information to either condemn or support a practice or a teaching. The New Testament authority must be cited.

 We have known of people who had become strongly attached to a particular hymn book. When their church decided to purchase another one, objection was raised that this would be a departure from the "old paths." In some cases the old book contained only the words and since the new book also had notes this was considered a departure. No scriptural support for their preference was offered, but an emotional appeal was made that we must not depart from the old paths. In years gone by some objected to a church building being anything but white frame, because anything else would not be the "old paths." The fact is, however, that some of our oldest meetinghouses are made of brick and stone. And when we consult the New Testament we see that a meetinghouse is neither required nor condemned, so it is a matter that is left to the discretion of each local church body.

Over a period of time, if people attempt to defend their positions by claiming they are in the "old paths," but the way-mark of the New Testament Scripture is not consulted, there can be a serious drift from the original paths without even realizing it. For example, someone objects to ministers laboring in foreign countries because it doesn't seem to be the old way. But when we go to the biblical way-mark, we find these words: "Go ye therefore, and teach all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father, of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost: Teaching them to observe all things whatsoever I have commanded you: and, lo, I am with you always, even unto the end of the world" (Matthew 28:19-20). Some have argued that this command has already been fulfilled and is not binding on the church today, but where is the scriptural reference for such a view? If this instruction is not for us, where then do we get the authority to baptize in the name of the Father, the Son and the Holy Ghost?

 Paul asked the church at Colosse to pray that the Lord would open a door of utterance and that he might be able to speak, and to speak as he ought. In II. Thessalonians 3:1, he says, "Finally, brethren, pray for us, that the word of the Lord may have free course, and be glorified, even as it is with you." He was concerned that the gospel be circulated and was willing to spend and be spent that it might be accomplished. Elder James Oliphant wrote in his article on election, "We feel under obligations to do right in life, and feel duty bound to preach the gospel to every creature, and many of us are spending much time in trying to preach the gospel to sinners. I have marked the arguments of those who oppose us, and I am persuaded that they generally misunderstand our position." The Apostle Paul was devoted to preaching the gospel of Christ wherever the door was open. That was the old path. Elder James Oliphant, a well-respected Primitive Baptist minister in the 1800's, was still traveling that path. He believed we should preach the gospel to every creature. Thankfully there have been writers all through the years who have faithfully pointed the Lord's people to the "way-marks" of biblical truth.

 It is easy to assume that the way we've always done it is the old path. However, it may be that path is not really old enough to be the old path of biblical truth. Someone observes that our pastors have always worked at a secular job and were not dependent on the church for their support. They suppose that this must be the right way, and if a preacher is being supported by the church that he serves, he has become a hireling. But what is the scriptural way-mark? "Even so hath the Lord ordained that they which preach the gospel should live of the gospel." I. Corinthians 9:14. Paul acknowledges that he had not taken from the church at Corinth that to which he was entitled. He was dealing with a special situation and was therefore willing to serve without compensation. Any true minister of the gospel should be willing to do the same when circumstances require. However, he later acknowledged, "I have robbed other churches, taking wages of them, to do you service" II. Corinthians 11:8. So we learn that the Apostle was not establishing what he had done at Corinth as the pattern: it was the exception. The pattern is that the Lord has ordained that he who preaches the gospel should live of the gospel.

 Many of God's servants have through the years borne a heavy load as they worked long hours to support a family, and at the same time did the best they could to serve one or more churches. However, when this becomes the standard and any other arrangement is viewed as a departure from the old paths, there is a problem. A minister of the gospel needs time for study, and the distractions of a secular job make that very difficult. The first deacons were appointed because the twelve said, "It is not reason that we should leave the word of God, and serve tables" (Acts 6:2). Whatever the reason for not having enough time with the Word, the result is the same. The minister is unable to be as prepared as he would like, and the congregation may be deprived of hearing the whole counsel of God. In the book of Acts, when the deacons filled their role and freed the hands of the preachers, "the word of God increased; and the number of the disciples multiplied in Jerusalem greatly" (Acts 6:7).

As the number of disciples increases and the church grows, the pastor has even greater demands on his time. While studying and preaching the Word is a priority, much time is also required ministering to people on an individual basis. He is concerned for the welfare of the flock, which is his responsibility to shepherd, and he is concerned to reach those "that are without" (Colossians 4:3-6). When a church supports its pastor, it receives great benefits. One is the joy of giving, and the blessing of seeing this "fruit" of giving displayed by the congregation. The church further benefits by the more concentrated effort the pastor can give to his study, his praying, his preaching, his counseling - to every part of his labor in the gospel.

 The list could be quite long. You may ask yourself, What do I think about this issue? How do I feel about that teaching or that practice? Why does my church do things this way? Why is it we don't do things another way? Are you justifying your position by the one consideration of whether it is in the old paths? That question is valid if you understand that "old path" does not, in and of itself, provide the answer as to whether something is right or wrong. Have you looked at the way-mark? Have you examined your position by the one authoritative test, the Word of God? We cannot allow tradition, human sentiment, or personal preference to control our thinking. As for the good way, walk in the old path but make sure it is the old, old path, the one clearly marked out by biblical principle.
BW