A RESPONSE TO DAVID CLOUD'S ARTICLE
 "If you will attack my doctrine, why not at least show candour enough to quote my own language." John Calvin |
 Calvinistic literature, ranking among the best in the Christian world, has been blamed for the march of Calvinism. Internet Links for Reformed Publishers/Booksellers * BANNER OF TRUTH TRUST * MOURNE MISSIONARY TRUST * JOHN GOWAN'S BOOKSHOP * MONERGISM.COM * SPURGEON ARCHIVES * FIRE AND ICE - PURITAN SERMONS * JOHN CALVIN'S COMMENTARIES *OLD TRUTH |
|
It
seems that a spirit of near panic in setting among many Non Reformed
pastors and writers etc., among Independent Fundamental Baptists and
others over what David Cloud calls "Calvinism of the march"
[Update: Unable to locate this page. Cloud totally rearranged his site some time after this article was originally written and it seems that this particular page got dropped. I am letting my response remain here for two reasons. [1] Cloud continues to mercilessly attack Calvinism on other pages and this response exposes the shallowness of his attacks. [2] Cloud might in a future date put the old page back online again.]
Several reasons are attributed to this onward march of the Doctrines of Grace, not least Cloud's visit to the bookshop in Bob Jones University where he is "amazed" to see (horror of horrors!) the sale of many Puritan authors. The BJU bookshop did not put up any warning that these books contained Reformed theology. To be honest, very few bookshops (I know of none) sell books with health warnings attached. I have been in many Reformed Bookshops which sell books written by noted evangelical but Non Reformed authors and they don't start listing out the differences of interpretation in key areas. People (and especially Bible students) learn very quickly who is who and what is what among Christian authors. There are noted bookshops that sell anything that sells, while there are others from whom you would expect a lot more. None of the better ones I know contain any warning signs. The owner may judicially verbally comment on the author's stance on any issue if he saw the need to do so, but you can picture what a bookshop practically covered in signs warning against this man or that man's perceived theological aberrations would look like.
Another reason given is a publication circulated by a BJU graduate to many IFB people in Australia entitled "Why Read The Puritans Today" listing 10 reasons. Again, to Cloud's alarm, there was "no warning about Reformed Theology and its attendant Calvinism and Amillenialism" The fact is, though, Cloud himself has written articles and made favourable enough mention of the Puritans without giving any "warning" to all their faults. In this one here, [Update: Unable to locate the page again] he but mentions his disagreement with some prophetic matters, but no mention of their church government (i.e. anything non Baptist) or their dreaded Calvinism (which appears big time in the notes of the Geneva Bible which is under favourable discussion in the article.) If others played Cloud at his own game, then they would raise their hands in horror as he has chosen to do.
Cloud goes on to give a third reason: "And this is not something limited to those associated with Bob Jones. In 2005 an extensive survey was done of “young fundamentalists.” Entitled “Young Fundamentalists’ Beliefs and Personal Life,” the survey results are available online at http://www.sharperiron.org/ downloads/ 2005%20Young%20Fundamentalists%20Survey%20Results.pdf. For the purposes of the survey, a “young fundamentalist” is one who is under 35 years old. The survey contained 135 questions pertaining to life and doctrine, and roughly 1,100 surveys were completed. The vast majority of respondents identified themselves with three fundamentalist schools: Bob Jones University (29%), Maranatha Baptist Bible College (22%), and Northland Baptist Bible College (21%). When it comes to Calvinist views, an amazing 58% of the respondents hold a Calvinist view of sovereign election, with another 8% unsure. THUS ONLY ABOUT 35% OF THE RESPONDENTS TO THE FUNDAMENTALIST SURVEY REJECT CALVINISM. Some 14% of the respondents hold to either amillennial (8%) or postmillennial (5%) views, which goes hand in hand with Reformed theology. I believe we will see this percentage increase in coming days, with a growing rejection of the pre-millennial, pre-tribulation position."
In this latest article, Cloud publishes some of the responses he has had over this issue from several IFB pastors who share his same view. You can read them for yourself through the link above if you so desire. I don't need to repeat them here.
I want to offer you alternative reasons or throw light on their reasons, why there is a definite swing to the Doctrines of Grace among those whose home soil is not really fertile ground for it.
Naturally I don't expect Cloud and his friends to agree with me, but to be honest, that doesn't bother me too much. The Bible makes it clear that God is a sovereign God who ultimately achieves all that He sets out to achieve. If He didn't, then we can add other attributes like "Failure, disappointment and frustration" to the list. It teaches that He has a people whom He will infallibly bring to Himself, through the means of indiscriminate gospel preaching whereby the message of the Cross is presented to all men without distinction. It teaches that the sinner, although dead in trespasses and sins, cannot sin himself out of responsibility before God and so is to be urged to seek the Lord while He is to be found. Without going into distracting detail here, this is a long way from the supposed Calvinism which Cloud and those quoted in this article are seeking to expose and warn against.
As people read the Bible, being enlightened by the illuminating rays of the Spirit of God, they come to see these things for themselves. I heard of one IFB pastor who came into the Doctrines of Grace after studying Matthew 11:20-30 where he realised that God had sovereignly withheld repentance from Tyre and Sidon etc. He realised that a Sovereign God owed no man anything, and that He can bestow different levels of mercy on different sinners (none of which, by definition, is deserved) and yet not bring them savingly to Christ. Many folk come to passages like Romans 9 and simply cannot explain away its teaching. This was my own experience. My background was fundamental but non Calvinist and I rebelled against this teaching when I first heard it. I blush now at some of the things I said back then. But I simply couldn't run away from what God said in His book. It hasn't and never did hamper my evangelism at any time. I was as evangelistic after I embraced these Doctrines as before and have since been led full time into the mission field. Have a look round this site, especially at the EVANGELISM ISSUES page for proof. And no, I am not the exception rather than the rule.
[Update: Unable to locate this page. Cloud totally rearranged his site some time after this article was originally written and it seems that this particular page got dropped. I am letting my response remain here for two reasons. [1] Cloud continues to mercilessly attack Calvinism on other pages and this response exposes the shallowness of his attacks. [2] Cloud might in a future date put the old page back online again.]
Several reasons are attributed to this onward march of the Doctrines of Grace, not least Cloud's visit to the bookshop in Bob Jones University where he is "amazed" to see (horror of horrors!) the sale of many Puritan authors. The BJU bookshop did not put up any warning that these books contained Reformed theology. To be honest, very few bookshops (I know of none) sell books with health warnings attached. I have been in many Reformed Bookshops which sell books written by noted evangelical but Non Reformed authors and they don't start listing out the differences of interpretation in key areas. People (and especially Bible students) learn very quickly who is who and what is what among Christian authors. There are noted bookshops that sell anything that sells, while there are others from whom you would expect a lot more. None of the better ones I know contain any warning signs. The owner may judicially verbally comment on the author's stance on any issue if he saw the need to do so, but you can picture what a bookshop practically covered in signs warning against this man or that man's perceived theological aberrations would look like.
Another reason given is a publication circulated by a BJU graduate to many IFB people in Australia entitled "Why Read The Puritans Today" listing 10 reasons. Again, to Cloud's alarm, there was "no warning about Reformed Theology and its attendant Calvinism and Amillenialism" The fact is, though, Cloud himself has written articles and made favourable enough mention of the Puritans without giving any "warning" to all their faults. In this one here, [Update: Unable to locate the page again] he but mentions his disagreement with some prophetic matters, but no mention of their church government (i.e. anything non Baptist) or their dreaded Calvinism (which appears big time in the notes of the Geneva Bible which is under favourable discussion in the article.) If others played Cloud at his own game, then they would raise their hands in horror as he has chosen to do.
Cloud goes on to give a third reason: "And this is not something limited to those associated with Bob Jones. In 2005 an extensive survey was done of “young fundamentalists.” Entitled “Young Fundamentalists’ Beliefs and Personal Life,” the survey results are available online at http://www.sharperiron.org/ downloads/ 2005%20Young%20Fundamentalists%20Survey%20Results.pdf. For the purposes of the survey, a “young fundamentalist” is one who is under 35 years old. The survey contained 135 questions pertaining to life and doctrine, and roughly 1,100 surveys were completed. The vast majority of respondents identified themselves with three fundamentalist schools: Bob Jones University (29%), Maranatha Baptist Bible College (22%), and Northland Baptist Bible College (21%). When it comes to Calvinist views, an amazing 58% of the respondents hold a Calvinist view of sovereign election, with another 8% unsure. THUS ONLY ABOUT 35% OF THE RESPONDENTS TO THE FUNDAMENTALIST SURVEY REJECT CALVINISM. Some 14% of the respondents hold to either amillennial (8%) or postmillennial (5%) views, which goes hand in hand with Reformed theology. I believe we will see this percentage increase in coming days, with a growing rejection of the pre-millennial, pre-tribulation position."
In this latest article, Cloud publishes some of the responses he has had over this issue from several IFB pastors who share his same view. You can read them for yourself through the link above if you so desire. I don't need to repeat them here.
I want to offer you alternative reasons or throw light on their reasons, why there is a definite swing to the Doctrines of Grace among those whose home soil is not really fertile ground for it.
1) CALVINISM IS ON THE MARCH BECAUSE MANY PEOPLE ARE
SIMPLY READING AND UNDERSTANDING THE MESSAGE OF THE BIBLE
SIMPLY READING AND UNDERSTANDING THE MESSAGE OF THE BIBLE
Naturally I don't expect Cloud and his friends to agree with me, but to be honest, that doesn't bother me too much. The Bible makes it clear that God is a sovereign God who ultimately achieves all that He sets out to achieve. If He didn't, then we can add other attributes like "Failure, disappointment and frustration" to the list. It teaches that He has a people whom He will infallibly bring to Himself, through the means of indiscriminate gospel preaching whereby the message of the Cross is presented to all men without distinction. It teaches that the sinner, although dead in trespasses and sins, cannot sin himself out of responsibility before God and so is to be urged to seek the Lord while He is to be found. Without going into distracting detail here, this is a long way from the supposed Calvinism which Cloud and those quoted in this article are seeking to expose and warn against.
As people read the Bible, being enlightened by the illuminating rays of the Spirit of God, they come to see these things for themselves. I heard of one IFB pastor who came into the Doctrines of Grace after studying Matthew 11:20-30 where he realised that God had sovereignly withheld repentance from Tyre and Sidon etc. He realised that a Sovereign God owed no man anything, and that He can bestow different levels of mercy on different sinners (none of which, by definition, is deserved) and yet not bring them savingly to Christ. Many folk come to passages like Romans 9 and simply cannot explain away its teaching. This was my own experience. My background was fundamental but non Calvinist and I rebelled against this teaching when I first heard it. I blush now at some of the things I said back then. But I simply couldn't run away from what God said in His book. It hasn't and never did hamper my evangelism at any time. I was as evangelistic after I embraced these Doctrines as before and have since been led full time into the mission field. Have a look round this site, especially at the EVANGELISM ISSUES page for proof. And no, I am not the exception rather than the rule.
2) CALVINISM IS ON THE MARCH BECAUSE MANY PEOPLE
ARE FED UP WITH THE DILUTED ALTERNATIVES WITHIN THE EVANGELICAL SCENE:
3) CALVINISM IS ON THE MARCH BECAUSE OF ITS USE
OF THE PRINTING PRESS AND OTHER COMMUNICATION MASS MEDIUM:
ARE FED UP WITH THE DILUTED ALTERNATIVES WITHIN THE EVANGELICAL SCENE:
Please note that I do not regard the common Non Reformed fundamental interpretation as a denial of the gospel, but as a dilution. I
find it sad to read of Calvinists who took the extreme position, just
as I think it sad to read of men on the other side, including D.A. Waite, who accuses Calvinists of preaching another gospel. (He specifically quotes Galatians 1:8 in this regard)
To their credit, Cloud and others are getting pretty fed up and alarmed also at the shallow "soul winning" that goes on in their circles. However, they fail to see that they themselves effectively prepare the soil for this kind of thing with their defective theology. When you witness the fervency in which they establish their view of man's free will whereby they believe that each and every man can always resist the Spirit of God, then it is not surprising that those who hold to the same theology go down the road they go.
Listen to Spurgeon as he describes the alternative view of the atonement (i.e. that Christ died and atoned for the sins of reprobates, even when some of them were already in an secure hell and all of whom He foreknew would not receive it)
I never have subscribed — I think I never shall — to the doctrine of universal redemption. I believe in the limitless efficacy of the blood of Christ. I would not say, with some of the early Fathers, that a single drop of Christ’s blood would have been sufficient for the redemption of the world. That seems to me to be an expression too strained, though doubtless their meaning was correct. I believe that there is efficacy enough in the blood of Christ if it be applied to the conscience to save any man and every man. But when I come to the matter of redemption it seems to me that whatever Christ’s design was in dying, that design cannot be frustrated, nor by any means disappointed. When I look at the person of our Lord Jesus Christ, I cannot imagine that such an One, offering such a sacrifice, can ever be disappointed of the design of his soul. Hence I think that all whom he came on purpose to save he will save, all who were graven on the strong affections of his heart as the purchase of his blood he assuredly shall have. All that his heavenly Father gave him shall come to him. All that he chose from before the foundation of the world, he will raise up at the last day. All who were included among the members of his mystic body, when he was nailed to the tree, shall be one with him in his glorious resurrection, and "not a hoof shall be left behind." I know there are some who believe in a disappointed Christ, who affect to lament concerning Christ a design not accomplished, a frustrated cross, agonies spent in vain, blood that was poured out on the ground as water that cannot be gathered up. I believe in no such thing. God createth nothing in vain, nor will I believe that Jesus Christ died on the cross in vain in any sense or in any degree whatever. Not a hoof of all his purchased flock shall be left behind.(6:328-329)
Many other similar quotes, rejecting the weakened view of the Atonement, may be found here. See our C.H. SPURGEON INDEX for his rejection of each alternative to the Five Points of Calvinism.
As the age in which we live gets more wicked by the hour, Bible believers want more than the cream puff and candy flavoured variety which effectively enthrones Man and dethrones God. If Jonathan Edwards had've been a modern day Fundamentalist preacher, he would have entitled his famous sermon: God in the hands of angry sinners!
Another evidence of such shallowness may be observed in many of the Web site "What we believe"sections. The Calvinist Confessions of Faith are truly full and weighty stuff. Many (although not all) of the Non Calvinist articles are one liners...mostly good Fundamental stuff with which I agree, but lacking the depth of the fuller Confessions. One of the arguments often brought forth for the supremacy of the Authorised Version is that it was produced in an age of spiritual giants. I agree. This was also the age that produced the great Calvinistic Confessions of Faith.
If my reader should belong to the other side of the fence (as I once did) please note that there is a viable alternative, not to the basic element of your gospel (on which Calvinists and Non Calvinists unite and agree) but to your weak interpretation of it.
To their credit, Cloud and others are getting pretty fed up and alarmed also at the shallow "soul winning" that goes on in their circles. However, they fail to see that they themselves effectively prepare the soil for this kind of thing with their defective theology. When you witness the fervency in which they establish their view of man's free will whereby they believe that each and every man can always resist the Spirit of God, then it is not surprising that those who hold to the same theology go down the road they go.
Listen to Spurgeon as he describes the alternative view of the atonement (i.e. that Christ died and atoned for the sins of reprobates, even when some of them were already in an secure hell and all of whom He foreknew would not receive it)
I never have subscribed — I think I never shall — to the doctrine of universal redemption. I believe in the limitless efficacy of the blood of Christ. I would not say, with some of the early Fathers, that a single drop of Christ’s blood would have been sufficient for the redemption of the world. That seems to me to be an expression too strained, though doubtless their meaning was correct. I believe that there is efficacy enough in the blood of Christ if it be applied to the conscience to save any man and every man. But when I come to the matter of redemption it seems to me that whatever Christ’s design was in dying, that design cannot be frustrated, nor by any means disappointed. When I look at the person of our Lord Jesus Christ, I cannot imagine that such an One, offering such a sacrifice, can ever be disappointed of the design of his soul. Hence I think that all whom he came on purpose to save he will save, all who were graven on the strong affections of his heart as the purchase of his blood he assuredly shall have. All that his heavenly Father gave him shall come to him. All that he chose from before the foundation of the world, he will raise up at the last day. All who were included among the members of his mystic body, when he was nailed to the tree, shall be one with him in his glorious resurrection, and "not a hoof shall be left behind." I know there are some who believe in a disappointed Christ, who affect to lament concerning Christ a design not accomplished, a frustrated cross, agonies spent in vain, blood that was poured out on the ground as water that cannot be gathered up. I believe in no such thing. God createth nothing in vain, nor will I believe that Jesus Christ died on the cross in vain in any sense or in any degree whatever. Not a hoof of all his purchased flock shall be left behind.(6:328-329)
Many other similar quotes, rejecting the weakened view of the Atonement, may be found here. See our C.H. SPURGEON INDEX for his rejection of each alternative to the Five Points of Calvinism.
As the age in which we live gets more wicked by the hour, Bible believers want more than the cream puff and candy flavoured variety which effectively enthrones Man and dethrones God. If Jonathan Edwards had've been a modern day Fundamentalist preacher, he would have entitled his famous sermon: God in the hands of angry sinners!
Another evidence of such shallowness may be observed in many of the Web site "What we believe"sections. The Calvinist Confessions of Faith are truly full and weighty stuff. Many (although not all) of the Non Calvinist articles are one liners...mostly good Fundamental stuff with which I agree, but lacking the depth of the fuller Confessions. One of the arguments often brought forth for the supremacy of the Authorised Version is that it was produced in an age of spiritual giants. I agree. This was also the age that produced the great Calvinistic Confessions of Faith.
If my reader should belong to the other side of the fence (as I once did) please note that there is a viable alternative, not to the basic element of your gospel (on which Calvinists and Non Calvinists unite and agree) but to your weak interpretation of it.
3) CALVINISM IS ON THE MARCH BECAUSE OF ITS USE
OF THE PRINTING PRESS AND OTHER COMMUNICATION MASS MEDIUM: