REFORMED FLYSWATTER

Charles has returned!

2011-09-06T19:32:00.002-05:00

Several years ago the mysterious Charles of the Calvinist Flyswatter fame went AWOL much to the concern of many, including Brother Bob Ross and myself. This evening we are overjoyed and relieved to report that Charles has returned and the mystery surrounding his disappearance cleared up.

Says Charles,

A long time ago, a guy who had a blog neglected to keep secure backup copies of his passwords. The guy had a data crash and then took a trip to a far away land where he was able to share the good news of Jesus Christ. Upon returning from the far away land, the guy asked someone smarter than him to help retrieve files from the crashed data drive. The smart guy was not only able to retrieve files but also passwords (see I'm back).

Welcome back, Charles!

C. H. Spurgeon's Sermons

2010-11-25T09:37:00.005-06:00

Spurgeon's Sermons and Other Pilgrim
Titles: "Hard Times" Special Announced

Bob L Ross and Michael Ross, Directors of Pilgrim Publications, announce:

In view of the current financial "Hard Times," we want to be a blessing to those of you who are desirous of purchasing titles we publish by Charles Haddon Spurgeon (1834-1892). We are offering a "Hard Times" Special which will be in effect over the Winter months. This is the largest discount offered to individuals on our publications since we started publishing in 1969.

40% DISCOUNT on one or more titles by Pilgrim Publications -- no minimums required. This applies to all books by all authors published by Pilgrim.

For examples, this applies to the following;

NEW PARK STREET PULPIT (set)
METROPOLITAN TABERNACLE PULPIT (Sermon series)
THE TREASURY OF DAVID (7 vols. set)
THE AUTOBIOGRAPHY OF C. H. SPURGEON (4 vol. set)
THE SWORD & THE TROWEL (8 vols set.)
ALL HARDBACK TITLES by all authors published by Pilgrim.
ALL PAPERBACK TITLES by all authors published by Pilgrim.

This discount does not apply to titles by C. H. Spurgeon which we distribute but are published by other publishers (as indicated on our book list).

Consult our website for the list of titles by C. H. Spurgeon and other authors published by Pilgrim Publications. Otherwise, call or email us for a list of our publications.

Shipping cost is additional and depends on the per pound rate charged by delivery companies.

Pilgrim Publications
P. O. Box 66
Pasadena, Texas 77501

By Phone 713-477-4261 or 713-477-2329
By Fax 713-477-7561
By Email pilgrimpub@aol.com

Are Only 3% of Professors Saved?

2010-10-24T18:37:00.008-05:00

Are only 3% of those who make decisions
to accept Christ really born again?

Plus -- C. H. Spurgeon on Immediate
Decision to Accept Christ as Saviour.

I have never known a pastor or an evangelist who said that all of those who made professions of faith in church or evangelistic meetings were beyond doubt "saved," or "born again." Professors were told that they were saved if they believed on Jesus Christ in their hearts (John 3:18).

I have never known a minister who claimed that if you walked down the aisle, that would mean you were undoubtedly born again. If a preacher has ever said that, he is the exception to all the preachers I have ever heard, and I have heard a lot of them across my many years of being a Christian, and even before I became a Christian. I have heard some of the most notable evangelistic preachers of my day -- Billy Graham, Eddie Martin, John R. Rice, Hyman Appelman, J. Harold Smith, and others -- and none of them ever said this in my hearing.

Yet there are some "Reformed" brethren who oppose public invitations who make such allegations, and they talk like very, very few of those who walk the aisles are truly born again. Even if that were the case, it would still not be a legitimate argument against inviting unsaved men and women to come out publicly, walk the aisle, and acknowledge Jesus Christ as Lord of all, and accept Him as Savior. Salvation is not a work one has to do, or a drawn-out "process" one has to go through, or a course in Alleine's Alarm to the Unconverted, or a "pre-faith regeneration" one has to wait for -- no, it is by a simple belief in the heart in Jesus Christ. Paul said --

"But what saith it? The word is nigh thee, even in thy mouth, and in thy heart: that is, the word of faith, which we preach; That if thou shalt confess with thy mouth the Lord Jesus, and shalt believe in thine heart that God hath raised him from the dead, thou shalt be saved. For with the heart man believeth unto righteousness; and with the mouth confession is made unto salvation." -- Romans 10:8-10.

The only real difficulty about salvation is its simplicity -- some just find it too difficult to accept the fact that the Lord will save them if they will simply believe on Him for salvation. The feel like they must add something, maybe a period of sincere praying, or the reformation of their lives, or seeking the right feeling, or maybe getting baptized and joining the church. They think there must be some necessary "preparation." And so many people put such things in the way of immediately being saved before they finally come to realize that it is really simply by faith in Christ, and by nothing else. They have just wasted time by not coming in at the one door of salvation without being detoured.

I often think about the account of C. H. Spurgeon's conversion. He had tried several things, but to no avail. His mother had even read to him from Alleine's Alarm, and it did not bring him to the Lord. Finally, he heard a Methodist layman, who filled the pulpit for the absentee Pastor of the church, and the layman quoted Isaiah 45:22, "Look unto me, and be ye saved," and exhorted young Spurgeon to "Look! Look to Jesus!"

Spurgeon said that he did look, and in that moment he was saved. Just a verse of Scripture, a few words of exhortation, and a look -- that's all it took to convert the lad who went on to become the greatest Baptist preacher who ever lived. And he told about this experience many times to encourage others to simply "Look to Jesus" and be saved, and thousands did so.

Today we have some folks who just don't think it is that "simple." They just don't have much use for the "simple Gospel." And some of their antagonism to public invitations, decisions, accepting Christ, and similar things is due to their antipathy for the idea that salvation is really as simple as Paul explained in Romans 10 and Spurgeon experienced at a young lad in Colchester, England on January 6, 1850.

For example, I had an email recently in which the writer claimed that John Wesley's, Billy Graham's, and Greg Laurie's preaching was bankrupt and devoid of any real power of the Spirit. He alleged that over 97% of the "decision makers" fall away. He claimed that only 3% are truly born again.

Now, where on earth did he get such ideas? Have all of Wesley's, Graham's, and Laurie's professors been followed-up for the rest of their lives to see if they demonstrated the fruits of conversion to Christ? If so, who did the work? By what standard did he test these thousands of professions of faith?

I just don't believe it. I can't accept those statistics as valid, and in fact, I tend to even doubt they were derived by a very legitimate method of census. I would have to see the research information on this, and know about how it was obtained, before I would even give it the least bit of credibility.

First of all, no one knows the hearts of others on this matter of faith in Christ. A professor sometimes may not look so good at the first, but he proves to be "for real" on down the road. Experiences are not all the same. Spurgeon commented on converts, and he said something to the effect that his best ones often turned out to be those that did not make such a big splash at the outset.

Secondly, a temporary lapse after a profession of faith may just be that -- a temporary lapse. Remember Simon Peter made a strong, noble confession of Christ as the Son of God in Matthew 16:16, and shortly thereafter he was rebuked by Jesus for his offence (16:23), and he later even denied that he knew Jesus (Matthew 26:70). Peter was not lost; he was simply backsliding from his original strong committal. Who knows but what many make a strong committal during a public invitation, and like Peter they backslide for a while? Who knows about such things?

Thirdly, even if a profession is not a case of conversion, it may yet be just another experience which will yet lead to ultimate conversion. It may take more than one blow to crack a rock. It may take more than one hit by the hammer to drive the nail down. So a public profession during an invitation may be just one thing which will work for eventual conversion.

At any rate, those who oppose public invitations for sinners to believe in and confess Christ as Savior don't have a leg to stand on, so far as I am concerned. -- Bob L. Ross

********************************************
SPURGEON URGED IMMEDIATE DECISION
C. H. Spurgeon:

May I ask that everyone here will say "Yes," or "No," to the invitation to give himself up to Christ?

If you will do so, say, "I will." If you will not do so, say deliberately, "I will not."

I wish I could get hold of an undecided man, and taking his hand, could say to him, "Now, you must tell me which it will be." I can imagine some of you would say, "Oh, give me time to consider!" and I would reply, "You have had time to consider. Your hair is getting gray."

In spite of all our entreaties, people say, "Oh, but I do not like to decide so suddenly!" If I asked you whether you would be honest, I hope that you would not take many minutes to answer that. Why, then, should you hesitate so long in giving your adherence to Christ? I am like Abraham's servant; some answer I must have.

But can we rightly press men to decide if we fear that they will answer "No"? I think we may, because, from the nature of the case, no answer means a denial. How many of our hearers have thus for years turned their back upon Christ, by the simple method of giving no answer at all! "We hear what you say, sir," they murmur, "and thank you for saying it;" but, nevertheless, they go out, and go on their way, and forget what manner of men they are. Such a response is a refusal; and it is nonetheless a refusal because you will probably retort, "But I did not say 'No,' sir. Indeed, one of these days I may perhaps say 'Yes.'" But, meanwhile, you reject the proposal, and refuse to give yourself up to the Lord.

The question is, Will you believe in the Lord Jesus Christ? The absence of an affirmative answer means, "No, I will not." I am sure that it does in every case. No argument can be raised about that.

But if you will answer me, "No, I will not have Christ; I will not believe on him; I will not become a Christian; I will not leave my old ways; I mean to go on in them;" well, I thank you for the answer, pained as I am, because now we can talk it over. This is better than no response, for now we have something to work upon. An ill answer can be considered, while no answer baffles all our efforts to help you. It is far more hopeful to encounter opposition, than to meet with indifference. It is a great thing, when a ship is at sea, for the captain to know whereabouts he is; and when we meet with those who distinctly reject Christ, we at once know our bearings.

If you say, "No, I am not a Christian, and I do not want to be;" so far you are honest, and I want you now to think it over. Would you like to die in this frame of mind? You may die where you are sitting. Are you wise to come to this determination? Do you think that this is a resolution which you can justify before the judgment-bar of God? You will certainly have to appear there. After death you will rise again, when the trump of the archangel sounds; and, as surely as you are here, you will have to stand before the great white throne, whereon Christ will sit as Judge. How will the resolution which you have now made stand the light of that tremendous day? I pray you, think of it, and I hope that you will alter your decision as many another man has done when he has calmly considered the magnitude of the issues at stake, and the awful result which must come of rejecting him who is now the Savior, but who will one day sit as the Judge.

But we are the more determined to press you for some decision, because an ill answer will set us free to go to others. You see Eliezer says, "If not, tell me; that I may turn to the right hand, or to the left."

Do not suppose that if you refuse Christ, he will lose the effect of his death. "He shall see of the travail of his soul, and shall be satisfied." If you will not come unto him, others will. If you reject him, he has a people who will accept him, by his almighty grace. O sirs, if you that hear the gospel will not have my Master, we will go and bring in the publicans and harlots, and they shall enter the kingdom of heaven before you! Sons of pious parents, children of Sabbath-schools, if you believe not, you shall be cast into "outer darkness," where shall be "weeping and gnashing of teeth," while the people whom you despise, infidels and profligates, the very scum of society, shall accept the Savior, and live.

Oh, I charge you, think not that your refusal of the gospel invitation will leave any gaps in the ranks of the redeemed! Our Savior, in his parable of the marriage of the king's son, foretold what will happen. The king said to his servants, "The wedding is ready, but they which were bidden were not worthy. Go ye therefore into the highways, and as many as ye shall find, bid to the marriage. So those servants went out into the highways, and gathered together all as many as they found, both bad and good: and the wedding was furnished with guests."

But I would urge you to yield yourself unto the Lord, that you may be found at the marriage-supper of the Lamb. Do not trifle with eternal matters. If you want to play the fool, do it with counters or with pebbles, but not with your soul, that shall live for ever in bliss or in woe.My importunity with you is strengthened when I think that, perhaps, if you give me the answer straight out, "No, I am not a Christian, and I do not mean to be one," you may, in saying it, see more clearly what a terrible decision you have arrived at. An ill answer may startle you, and ultimately lead you to repent of your folly, and reverse your decision. If you would write down - "I am not a Christian, and I never mean to be one," it might startle you still more. I challenge you to do so; and when it is written, put it over the mantelpiece, and look at it. It will be far better to do that, horrible as it is, than to continue in this state of wicked suspense, indifferent as to whether you are lost or saved, undecided whether you are for Christ or against him, and yet, in your heart of hearts, dead in trespasses and sins.

In this very place, I once urged those who were undecided to go home, and write down, either the word "Saved," or "Lost," and sign their name to the paper. One man, when he got into his house, asked for pen and paper; and when his wife enquired why he wanted it, he said he was going to do what the parson said, and write down "Lost." She refused to fetch him the paper if he was going to do that. So he got it himself, and put down a capital L, when his little girl climbed up in the chair behind him, and said, "No, father, you shan't do that, I'd rather die than you should do that"; and the child's tears fell on his hand as she spoke. What my sermon had failed to do, those tears accomplished; the strong man was bowed, and yielded himself to Christ; and when they got up from their knees in that little room, he took the pen, and changing the L into an S, wrote "Saved." He was saved because he came face to face with the fact that he was lost. His ill answer startled both himself and his child. May God work the like change in you, both for your own sake and also for the sake of your loved ones!

I want to press you for some kind of answer, because, like Eliezer, I have promised my Master to make search for you, and an ill answer will clear me of my oath. If I can get "No," from you as your answer, and am certain that you will not go with me to my Master's Son, I shall be clear. It was so with Abraham's servant; he and his master agreed to that at the first. When men say "No," and entreaties are of no further use, and the preaching of the gospel has no power over them, then we must leave them, and carry the glad tidings to others, just as Paul and Barnabas of old said to the angry Jews at Antioch, "It was necessary that the Word of God should first have been spoken to you: but seeing ye put it from you, and judge yourselves unworthy of everlasting life, lo, we turn to the Gentiles."

I beseech you, do not put Christ away from you; and I press you for a definite answer. I say, as Eliezer said, "If ye will deal kindly and truly with my master, tell me: and if not, tell me; that I may turn to the right hand, or to the left."

Now I just want to have a little talk with you over this matter. My dear friend, you are in peril of eternal death. While you are hesitating, life is ebbing. During the past few months, how many of our dear friends have been taken away by influenza, and other causes! This congregation has suffered from sickness, in family after family, as I never knew it suffer before. May you not be taken?

I charge you, therefore, do not act as though you had plenty of time. Possibly you have not another week to live. The clock, as it ticks, seems to me to say, "Now, now, now, now, now, now;" and for some of you there is an alarm in the clock, which, when it runs down, utters this warning, "Now or never, now or never, now or never."After all, the matter that we have in hand is not one that requires great debate.

Whether I will believe the truth or not, should not be a matter of discussion. Whether I will receive the gift of God or not, should not be a thing to be argued about if I am in my right mind. Whether, being lost, I am willing to be saved - whether, having the gospel of eternal life proclaimed to me, I should accept it by faith - well, I need not ask the sages as to what I shall answer, nor need I go to the Law Courts to consult the judges as to my reply. This is a thing so simple that it requires no argument. Who will choose to be damned? Who will refuse eternal life? Surely these are questions that should be decided at once.Waiting and trifling have done you no good hitherto.

The countryman, when he wanted to cross the river, and found it deep, said that he would sit down and wait till the water was all gone by. He waited, but the river was just as deep after all his waiting; and with all your delay, the difficulties in the way of your accepting Christ do not get any less. If you look at the matter rightly, you will see that there are no great difficulties in the way, nor were there ever such obstacles as your imagination pictures.

Another countryman, having to cross Cheapside, one morning, was so confused by the traffic of omnibuses and cabs and foot passengers, that he said he felt sure he could not get across the road, and would wait till the people thinned out a little; but all day long they never did thin out. Unless he had waited till the evening, he would have found little difference in that perpetual stream of hurrying people. O friends, you have waited until you can get "a convenient season" to become a Christian, and after all your delay, the way is not any clearer!

Twenty years ago some of you were as near decision for Christ as you are now. Nay, you seemed nearer. I then thought, "Oh, some of them will soon believe in Jesus, and yield their hearts to him!" But you said then that it was not quite time. Is it time now? Is the day without difficulty any nearer? Is the season any more suitable? Nay, indeed, there is no improvement.

Let me say that, I believe that your waiting has not only done you no good, but has positively done you great harm. There were times when it seemed easy for you to yield to the pressure of the divine Spirit. It certainly is not easier now; indeed, it is more difficult.

I think sometimes God treats men as Benjamin Franklin treated the man who stood loafing in his bookshop, and at last took up a book, and said, "How much is this?"
Franklin replied, "A shilling."
"A shilling?" he said, "a shilling?" and he would not give the price.
After staying about ten minutes, he said: "Come, Mr. Franklin, now what will you take for it?"
Franklin answered, "Two shillings."
"No," he said, "you are joking."
"I am not joking," said Franklin: "the price is two shillings."
The man waited, and sat a while, thinking. "I want the book," he drawled out; "still, I will not give two shillings. What will you take for it?"
Franklin said, "Three shillings."
"Well," the man said, "why do you raise your price?"
To which Franklin responded, "You see, you have wasted so much of my time that I could better have afforded to take one shilling at first than three shillings now."

Sometimes, if men come to Christ at the very first invitation, it is a sweet and easy coming. See how dear young children often yield themselves to Christ, and how peaceful is their entrance into the rest of faith! But when people wait, when they postpone believing, when they violate conscience, when they tread down all the uprising of holy thoughts within them, it becomes much harder for them to trust in Christ than it would have been when he was first preached to them.

I come, therefore, to you again, and say, "If ye will deal kindly and truly with my Master, tell me: and if not, tell me; and tell me now."

"Well," says one, "I am glad you have spoken to us; I will think it over."

No, friend, I do not mean that. I do not want you to think it over. You have had enough of thinking; I pray that God's Spirit may lead you to an immediate decision.

"Well, suppose that we consider it during the week," you say. No, that will not suit either my Master or myself. I want the answer now. I am like a messenger carrying a letter, on which is written, "The bearer will wait for a reply." . . .

If I say to you, "Go home, and think it over all the week," I shall be giving you a week in which to remain in rebellion against God; and I have no right to do that. I shall be giving you a week in which you are to continue an unbeliever; and he that is an unbeliever is in peril of eternal ruin, for "he that believeth not shall be damned." Worse than all, the week may lead to many other weeks; to months, perhaps, and years; perchance to a whole eternity of woe. I cannot give you five minutes.

God the Holy Ghost speaks by me now to souls whom God hath chosen from before the foundation of the world, and he says, "Today, if ye will hear his voice, harden not your hearts." The Holy Ghost says "Today, even today.""Turn ye, turn ye from your evil ways; for why will ye die, O house of Israel?"

The question comes to you, Will ye be Christ's? "If ye will deal kindly and truly with my Master, tell me: and if not, tell me."

The best answer you can give is in the verses that follow the text. "Laban and Bethuel answered and said, The thing proceedeth from the Lord: we cannot speak unto thee bad or good. Behold, Rebekah is before thee; take her."

Oh I wish some of you would thus respond to my appeal this day! This thing is also from the Lord: it was he who gave me this message; it was he who brought you to hear it. Surely you will not be found fighting against God. Your heart is open to him; he sees the faintest desire that you have toward him. Breathe out your wish now, and say, "My heart is before thee: take it."

"Take my poor heart, and let it be
For ever closed to all but thee!
Seal thou my breast, and let me wear
That pledge of love for ever there."

He will not be slow to accept that which is offered to him. He will take you now, and he will keep you for ever."

"How is it to be done?" says one. The plan is very simple. Jesus Christ took upon himself the sins of all who ever will trust him. Come and rest upon his atoning sacrifice. Give yourself up to him wholly and unreservedly, and he will save you. Take him to be your Savior by the simple act of faith. The pith of the matter is that I, being lost, give myself over to Christ to save me.

I believe that the act of faith was very well set forth in the statement of a poor imbecile. They said that he was an idiot; but I think that he had more real sense than many a man who boasts of his intellect. Some one said to him "John, have you got a soul?"
"No," he said, "I ain't got no soul."
"Why, John, how is that?"
He replied, "I had a soul once, but I lost it, and Jesus Christ found it, so I have just let him keep it."

There is the whole philosophy of salvation. You have lost your soul; Christ has found it. Let him keep it. God bless you! Amen.

LETTER FROM MR. SPURGEON.DEAR READER, -
This sermon is an urgent appeal to the undecided; and if you are in that condition, I would by this letter press the suit home in the most personal manner. I am a sick man who has narrowly escaped the hand of death, and I feel that the things of eternity ought not to be trifled with. To be saved at the last, our wisdom is to be saved at once. If I had left my soul's matters for a sick bed, I could not have attended to them there, for I was delirious, and the mind could not fix itself sensibly upon any subject. Before the cloud lowers over your mind, give your best attention to the Word of the Lord. I beseech you, dear reader, to do this, for you cannot tell how soon the hour of life may end. It has been life to me to hear of souls saved by God's grace through these sermons, and I am praying the Lord to give me a deep and long draught of this heart-reviving joy, by causing me to hear that this discourse is made to thousands the means of life from the dead. It is a large request, but the Lord has said, "Open thy mouth wide, and I will fill it." Thus would I open my mouth in prayer for you, dear reader, and thousands like you. Do you not, in your heart of hearts, desire that the Lord would hear his servant's petition?
Yours to serve as strength returns,
Menton, Nov. 14, 1891
C. H. SPURGEON.

NOTE: Mr. Spurgeon died a short time later on January 31, 1892. This sermon reveals with what compassion he pleaded with, reasoned with, and pressed upon lost souls to come to Christ for salvation -- right up to the door of his own death. Is it any wonder that he had such a great harvest of souls in his ministry, and extending even beyond the grave thru his published works? Even now, there may be souls reading this excerpt, and they will be moved by Spurgeon's plea to decide now to come to Christ for salvation!

For the complete sermon, see:
Metropolitan Tabernacle Pulpit, Volume 37, Year 1891,
Sermon #2231, page 589.
***************************************
IF YOU MISSED IT -- You may be interested in reading our article, An Examination of the Alleged Dangers of "Invitations" in which instances of Spurgeon's methods are cited. This can also be sent to you via email upon request: pilgrimpub@aol.com

Hybrid Calvinism?

2010-10-15T09:54:00.009-05:00

"Hybrid" Calvinism? -- What is it?

From time-to-time, we have "new arrivals" to our Flyswatter blogs who are not familiar with what I prefer to call "Hybrid" Calvinism.
In a nutshell, this term refers to the teaching that "regeneration precedes faith," or the idea that a person is actually"born again before faith."

This idea apparently was a post-seventeenth century development which arose among the Pedobaptist [baby baptizer] theologians as a means to supposedly explain how their "covenant children" were "regenerated" as babies or even before they were physcially born. These supposed "covenant children" of believers were supposedly "born again" as babies before they ever became believers, which believing supposedly comes later in life.

Hybrid Calvinism is a mixture of (1) Creedal Calvinism on the efficient cause (Holy Spirit) in the New Birth, and (2) the non-creedal idea that the "means" of the Word in creating faith is not an inherent necessary element in the New Birth. It became the "Primitve Baptist" or "Hardshell" view of regeneration by a "Direct Operation of the Spirit apart from Means." It is often called the "Spirit alone" theory.

This theory became part of the "ordo salutis" and the idea is traced by some to Francis Turretin.

W. G. T. Shedd, Dogmatic Theology, Volume 2, pages 492-494, attributes the distinction between "regeneration" and "conversion" to Turretin, and Shedd adopted this approach. He says:

"The divines of the seventeenth century [Puritans] very generally do not distinguish between regeneration and conversion, but employ the two as synonyms. Owen does this continually: On the Spirit, III. v. And Charnocke likewise: Attributes, Practical Atheism. The Westminster [Confession] does not use the term regeneration. In stead of it, it employs the term vocation, or effectual calling. This comprises the entire work of the Holy Spirit in the application of redemption. . . ." Shedd then alleges: "But this wide use of the term regeneration led to confusion of ideas and views. As there are two distinct words in the language, regeneration and conversion, there are also two distinct notions denoted by them. Consequently, there arose gradually a stricter use of the term regeneration, and its discrimination from conversion. Turrettin (XV. iv. 13) defines two kinds of conversion, as the term was employed in his day. . . . After thus defining, Turrettin remarks that the first kind of conversion is better denominated 'regeneration,' because it has reference to the new birth by which man is renewed in the image of his Maker; and the second kind of conversion is better denominated 'conversion,' because it includes the operation and agency of man himself. . . ."

Then Shedd says: "We shall adopt this distinction [by Turretin] between regeneration and conversion. . . . Regeneration is a cause; conversion is an effect."

J. I. Packer also contends that the theory arose in "later Reformed theology:" Packer says:

"Many seventeenth century Reformed theologians equated regeneration with effectual calling and conversion with regeneration . . . LATER REFORMED THEOLOGY has defined regeneration more narrowly, as the implanting of the 'seed' from which faith and repentance spring (I John 3:9) in the course of effectual calling."

Louis Berkhof:

Berkhof likewise acknowledged that the theory had post-Creedal development:

"It is true that some Reformed authors have occasionally used the term 'regeneration' as including even sanctification, but that was in the days when the ORDO SALUTIS was not as fully developed as it is today" (Systematic Theology, page 468).

These are well-known "Reformed" Pedobaptist sources, and they are acknowledging that the "ordo salutis" of modern Reformed theology -- which puts "regeneration" prior to faith -- is in fact a hybrid development which arose "later" than the seventeenth century divines (Puritans) who regarded regeneration and conversion as synonymous.

Contrary to Shedd's idea that "regeneration is a cause," non-hybrids hold that regeneration is indeed an "effect" -- that is, regeneration is the New Birth, and the New Birth is an effect of the Holy Spirit's using the Word of God to bring an unconverted person to union with Christ by faith in Christ.

So non-hybrids contend that no one is born again until he has faith "monergistically" effected in him by the Word as the instrumental cause and the Spirit of God as the efficient cause -- as is plainly taught in our Baptist Confession of Faith, and is known as "Effectual Calling." (1689 London Baptist Confession, Article 10).

That is why we say we are "Creedal Calvinists" on the New Birth as opposed to the modern "Reformed" Hybrid Calvinism of the Pedobaptist "ordo salutis" variety. While we strongly affirm that the Holy Spirit works in a lost person before he actually becomes a believer, this preliminary work or influence does not constitute the New Birth or regeneration.

As Dr. B. H. Carroll has said, "regeneration cannot be complete without faith." [An Interpretation of the English Bible, Volume 10, pages 293, 294].

This is why we disavow so much of what passes today as "Calvinism." It is not a proper representation of Creedal views, but has derived as a hybrid "development" under the label of the "ordo salutis." One of the modern blogging "Calvinists" very well expresses the post-creedal theology which is held by many in the "Reformed" camp:

"The language with respect to the concept of 'regeneration' has been refined since 1646. It isn't as if we stopped doing theology in the 17th century." (Gene Bridges, Pyromaniacs blog of Nov. 8, 2008).

Spurgeon's Forgotten Sermons

2010-09-16T13:52:00.003-05:00

A Second Volume of Unpublished Sermons
by C. H. Spurgeon Available Soon

Another collection of C. H. Spurgeon's sermons -- which do not appear in the original New Park Street Pulpit and Metropolitan Tabernacle Pulpit -- will be available from us in late October or early November 2010 ($30 plus $4 shipping).

We are accepting orders now.

C. H. Spurgeon's Forgotten Early Sermons is the title of the book and it will consist of 28 sermons which first appeared in the monthly magazine The Sword and the Trowel Magazine periodically after Spurgeon's death.

The sermons have been taken from the magazine and compiled in book form by Terence Peter Crosby for the British publisher, Day One. Dr. Crosby also was the compiler of the book of Spurgeon's sermons entitled, C. H. Spurgeon's Sermons Beyond Volume 63 (also available now from us for $40.00 plus $4 shipping).

Place your order now for either or both of these books of hitherto unpublished sermons:

___ C. H. Spurgeon's Forgotten Early Sermons ($30 plus $4 shipping), available late October.

___ C. H. Spurgeon's Sermons Beyond Volume 63 ($40 plus $4 shipping), available now.

Order by: __ Mail; __ Fax; __ Phone; __ Email
All Credit Cards accepted.
Mail: Pilgrim Publications, Box 66, Pasadena, TX 77501
Phone: (713) 477-4261; (713) 477-2329
Fax: (713) 477-7561
Email: pilgrimpub@aol.com

Founders' Founder on Altar Calls

2010-08-04T13:24:00.008-05:00

Are Altar Calls Justified by the
Founder of the Founders,
Ernest Reisinger?

Although the creator of the Founders Ministries, Ernest Reisinger, says in his book on "Worship" that "the invitation system has no place in the church that seeks to be biblical" (page 110), I am strongly inclined to believe that Ernest's rather broad exposition of the "regulative principle" (page 11) at least contradicts the deprecation of the normal use Baptists make of altar calls or invitations.

In fact, while Ernest's conclusions about "the invitation system" may hold true in any particular case where an altar call is misused and made to mean something which violates the truth of the Gospel, yet in regard to what I observe to be the normal practice in Baptist churches, I believe Ernest concedes enough to actually justify the normal Baptist altar call.

Yes, this may come as a surprise to some of the anti-invitationists, but what Ernest says in this book appears to be quite sufficient to legitimatize the use of invitations (or altar calls) -- at least as they are used in most Gospel-preaching Baptist churches with which I am acquainted. Notice the concessions, all of which are supportive of the use of altar calls --

1. Ernest says there is nothing "intrinsically evil" involved in altar calls (page 150).

2. Ernest approves of using an altar call or invitation as a "way" whereby a person can express his desire for baptism (page 150).

He says, "There is no valid reason why it cannot be done in response to an invitation from the pastor. Those who believe themselves to be recipients of saving grace can surely be invited to come forward and present themselves as candidates for baptism" (pages 150, 151).3.

3. Ernest says that invitations are neither "commanded" nor "forbidden" (page 151).

Consequently, invitations neither add to nor take from anything revealed in the Word of God.

4. Ernest approves of "inviting hearers to respond to the gospel message by faith and repentance" (page 90).

He says that lost people "should be invited to come to Christ" and this should be done "before, during, and AFTER the sermon. They should be invited to faith and repentance before, during, and after the worship service. They should be invited to come to Christ," he says, "AT WHATEVER TIME, WHEREVER THEY ARE. Today is the day of salvation! . . . We believe in GIVING AN INVITATION to respond to the gospel message in faith and repentance" (page 91).

5. Ernest says that "God commands people EVERYWHERE to believe the gospel" (page 92).

This would of course include those who hear the Gospel preached in a church or evangelistic service, and who are encouraged by the preacher to immediately obey the Gospel by believing it, and coming forward to confess their faith in Christ as Saviour.

6. Ernest implies that millions have been saved where invitations were used.

His book says there are 15.8 million Southern Baptists and "most of these" became church members "by walking down an aisle" (page 102). Of these 15.8 million members, according to Ernest's calculation 32.7 percent attend worship services. Since attendance and non-attendance of worship services seems to be regarded by Ernest as an indicator or mark of a person's spiritual state, this would imply that millions who responded to invitations in Southern Baptist churches and attend church services are presumably saved people -- according to Ernest's own figures.

7. Ernest says, "As long as the implication is eliminated that coming forward is required for salvation, the altar call can serve a useful and appropriate purpose" (page 151).

8. Ernest says that Scriputral support "does not have to be direct to be true" (page 33).

He cites the "trinity" as an example, noting that the word "trinity" does not occur in the Bible. He says that evidence supporting a matter "is not subject to simple proof-texting" (pages 33, 34).

In other words, we do not have to have a "prooftext" which specifically names an item in order for it to be approved, according to the "regulative principle."

I think that at least these eight items are sufficient to justify the use of altar calls, inviting an unsaved person to believe on Christ and come forward to profess his faith.

The only valid objection to altar calls that Ernest appears to have is his objection to their being presented as a "requirement for salvation." I personally have never heard an invitation in which that requirement was set forth.

Spurgeon's Complete Sermons Online

2010-07-27T17:19:00.004-05:00

VOUMES 1 - 63 OF SPURGEON'S SERMONS
ARE NOW ON THE INTERNET

Praise the Lord!

We rejoice to receive the following email from Brother Emmett O'Donnell informing us that he has put the final volume 63 of C. H. Spurgeon's 63-volume New Park Street Pulpit and Metropolitan Tabernacle Pulpit (1855-1917] on the Internet, thus making the complete set of sermons available at this link:

http://www.spurgeongems.org/

Here is Brother Emmett's email updating us on the work he undertook nearly ten years ago and now has finally completed:

>>
July 26, 2010

Brother Bob,

Well my dear Brother and friend, just short of 10 years by five days or so, our Lord and Master, Jesus Christ, in me has completed modernizing the 63-Volume set of Brother Spurgeon's sermons.

It would have taken much longer, I am sure, if you had not encouraged me so, and so I want to praise God for your faithfulness in this project.

Already a few friends in Kerrville have asked me, "What next?"

Well, all during the project I have prayed that our Lord would raise up someone who would correct all my errors. It seems the Holy Spirit is burdening me to do it and so I will, but would ask anyone who may read this letter to pray about working with me. They could contact me by clicking on the "Contact Us" link on the first page of our site:

SPURGEON GEMS

I have a few ideas about how we might do this. I have committed to grading lessons for Mount Zion Bible Institute. These are lessons sent into prisons and they always need graders. Anyone interested can contact Mount Zion by phone: 850-438-1037, email:school@mountzion.org

or may write:

Mount Zion Bible Institute, 2603 West Wright Street, Pensacola, FL 32505 USA

Thank you, Brother, for all your help. Know that I am praying for Brother Mike.

Brother Emmett O'Donnell
emmettod@ktc.com
>>

The goal of getting Spurgeon's sermons on the Internet actually had it roots in the 1990s when Dr. Philip Traynor of Alabama assumed the task and expense of scanning Spurgeon's sermons into ASCII Text. I don't exactly know the chain of events thereafter, as Dr. Traynor says he turned the materials over to some other sources. These sermons were later put onto CD-ROM by Ages Software, and not long thereafter, Brother O'Donnell was lead of the Lord to use both the CD-ROM and the actual 63 printed volumes to do the long and demanding computer work of getting the sermons into good shape for committing them to a website.

This is quite a remarkable and wonderful achievement. It is even all the more impressive when we consider the physical handicap under which Brother O'Donnell has had to work. I stand in awe of the Lord's wonderful grace in His use of Brother Emmett in view of how he has persevered despite the difficulties. Here is something I wrote about this in an article over a year ago:

>>
Awhile back, I asked Brother O'Donnell to give me an account of his physical state, inasmuch as I knew him to be less than physically "normal" in the use of his bodily parts due to a past injury. Here is what he wrote:

April 18, 2009

Brother Bob,

On August 3, 1981, about seven years before the Lord saved me, He chastised me as I was attempting my second try at “body surfing” in Hawaii. He arranged for a wave to twist my neck so that I was totally paralyzed from my shoulders down. When I left the hospital (SW Memorial) in late February, 1982, I was considered by the medical profession to have “paraplegia” which means I had the partial loss of all my limbs. Many people think I had a stroke because my right side is severely paralyzed, but my right is not. I was 39 at the time — I’ll be 68 in November [2009]. I improved to the point where I was walking with a cane—all in our Lord’s purpose. By 1996 numerous falls necessitated I walk with a walker which I use now in the house. If we go out, which is quite a bit, I use a power chair to get around. With equipment, I am able to drive — our last trip of over 6,500 miles was last summer.The Lord is keeping me in line with helicopter rides (one) to TexSan Heart Hospital in late March. I have problems with my heart and a few other things. I seem to be OK, heart-wise, now — after about $20,000 for the ride and the care. But our Lord has provided. I can still type using my right middle finger and three fingers on my left hand and its thumb, though you have no idea how many errors I made in this letter — the Lord provided Spell-check, so that is between Him and me. Thank you for your kind comments.
>>

I will also again remind you that Brother Emmett was neither solicited to do this work nor was he paid to do it; it has strictly been a work the Lord laid on his heart to do, and he has never asked for any reward for doing it. His reward is the joy he receives from the many thousands of "hits" which his website receives, and will yet receive in the days, weeks, months, and years ahead.

His works will follow [continue] on earth, though he passes on to be with the Lord and Spurgeon in Heaven! (Revelation 14:13).

To access all of Spurgeon's sermons, go to http://www.spurgeongems.org/

Altar Call: Alleged "Dangers"

2010-07-26T11:07:00.021-05:00

Alleged Dangers of the Public Invitation
-- or What Some Refer to as the "Altar Call"

Those who have been on my email list for a while may remember a series of articles I wrote a few years ago which analyzed several of the writings which oppose public invitations in church. Some of these articles are online at Select Writings of Bob Ross.

There is a whole passel of anti-inivitation items on the Internet, and after observing so much of this repetitious legerdemain, I carefully examined the ones by Fred Zaspel, Darryl Erkel, Jim Ehrhard, Ernest Reisinger, Carey Hardy, Jim Eliff, Michael Spencer, plus the writings by Iain Murray and Errol Hulse, and responded to all of the arguments which seemed to be the most pertinent to their advocates.

Certainly, the influence of Pedobaptist "Reformed" writer, Iain Murray, is observable in most (if not all) of these writers. Due to Murray's influence on Ernest Reisinger, the founder of the Founders Ministries, Murray is the virtual "father" of the Founders, and the Founders, such as Reisinger, Pastor Tom Ascol, and Board member Dr. Tom Nettles, have been among the most outspoken opponents of the use of public invitations. (Paradoxically, the wealthy gentleman who bankrolled the Banner of Truth was converted at an "altar.")

Prior to the arrival of Pedobaptist Murray and his Banner of Truth booklet, The Invitation System, one seldom heard among Baptists the type of opposition which called for the abandonment of using public invitations. Of course, the Pedobaptists (baby baptizers) have little use for invitations since they allege that the "elect" born into their families are usually "regenerated" in early infancy or perhaps even before they are born. This is the method by which the Pedobaptists replenish their membership rolls. Most of the current crop of anti-invitationists among Baptists, however, made professions faith in Christ in services where public invitations were given after the sermons.

I have noticed over the past 50 years or so that several Baptist churches which followed Murray in opposing the use of invitations have generally failed to grow, have remained small in number, and some have even ceased to exist. Even Iain Murray has bemoaned the lack of evangelism and growth on the part of those he and other anti-invitationists have influenced.

I think this lack of evangelism and opposition to the use of public invitations are related. There appears to be a lack of passion on the part of those who oppose using invitations to urge upon lost sinners the need for an immediate faith response to the Gospel message. Spurgeon's passion for winning souls lead him to press for an immediate decision. This was due to his dominant soul-winning urgency to make converts to Christ. (An Urgent Request for an Immediate Answer, Metropolitan Tabernacle Pulpit, Volume 37, #2232).

Here is one of my past articles replying to objections to invitations:

AN EXAMINATION OF THE ALLEGED
DANGERS OF "INVITATIONS"

I recall reading in the works of Andrew Fuller where someone had questioned him about his quoting John 3:16, inasmuch as it is so often used by Arminians. Fuller replied to the effect that he did not know that a verse as Scripture was any worse off for having been quoted by an Arminian.

I am of the opinion that the same attitude may be held with regard to the use of "invitations" in church services. To reject all forms of using public invitations to the lost is going just a bit too far.

However, I like to think that I have an "open mind," at least open enough to consider and evaluate criticisms and objections. Consequently, I have found some items on the Internet which set forth the reasons some give for not using invitations, and I have a few thoughts I wish to express in response to these objections.

Much of the thinking on the subject seems to have been borrowed -- a great deal of it apparently from Mr. Iain Murray, a Pedobaptist long associated with the Banner of Truth Trust in Scotland. I have written articles replying to Mr. Murray's arguments, which seemingly are prized by some as the most influential of all. I also have written articles which discuss the misunderstanding and misrepresentation of C. H. Spurgeon's practices. Spurgeon is often cited as if he opposed invitations, which is a misunderstanding on the matter.

It seems that at the root of anti-invitation thesis is the post-seventeenth century non-creedal theory advocated by some Pedobaptist theologians that the New Birth takes place prior to the Holy Spirit's creating faith by the instrumentality of the Gospel, or Word. This theory is usually cited as a basis for objecting to calling on sinners to immediately act in some way in acknowledging Christ as Lord and Savior, such as a public invitation circumstance.

The writers that I have read have obviously been greatly influenced by the anti-invitation writings of the Pedobaptists who question "sudden conversions." The Pedobaptists primarily get most of their "converts" and church members in infancy, alleging that infants inherit the blessings of regeneration and the right to church membership by virtue of the supposed "covenant" relationship that their believing parents have with God. According to the Pedobaptist theory, regeneration can be assumed to take place in the infant child before baptism, at baptism, and soon after baptism. Some Baptists who call themselves "Reformed" in theology -- such as the Reformed Baptists and Southern Baptists in the Founders Ministries fellowship -- do not go that far with the Pedobaptists on infants, nevertheless they appear to have been influenced to follow the Pedobaptists such as Mr. Murray in opposition to public invitations.

Here is a summary of some of the arguments used:

1. "Most Christians are not aware that the 'altar call' method in evangelism was not practiced by Jesus or His apostles."

The argument developed from this proposition is that the invitation is wrong because it was not something done by Jesus and the apostles. Frankly, if we have to use this as the guideline for what we today do in religious matters, I fear to think to what lengths it would lead us! Did Jesus pastor the First Church of the Lord, located at the corner of Jeremiah Avenue and Elijah Street? Did the apostles build church buildings and furnish them with pews, carpeted floors, indoor heated baptistries, choirs, organs, and pianos? Did they a schedule of services on Sunday, Wednesday, or some other day? Did they conduct Bible coanferences and seminars? Wonder if this "patternism" approach would allow for a website?

The same writer later says, "It is always dangerous to promote a practice which cannot be substantiated from the Word of God." And later, "it violates the New Testament pattern of evangelism."

This is the old worn-out "patternism" argument by which just about anything and everything can be proven to be wrong other than what the "patternist" himself will allow as being "scriptural." Campbellites, Hardshells, and Landmarkers have all erected their kingdoms on the basis of "patternism."

Strange, however, the "patterns" don't ever seem to be the same!

Among other things, "patternism" has been used against passing the offering plate, using communion cups and breadplates, indoor baptistries, musical instruments, using a "name" for the church, having Sunday School, revival meetings, mission boards, salaried pastors, having a single pastor, deacon boards, finance committees, incorporation of the church, church kitchens, fellowship halls, and a score or more of other such things. It smacks as a form of legalism, binding where the Word of God does not bind.

Wherever the Gospel is preached, we believe that listeners should be called upon to accept it and confess it before men, right on the spot. The public invitation, used for years by Baptists, is as good a method as any for this to be done. There must be some method for accommodating initial professions of faith, and the Bible does not standardize any particular format.

2. "The practice of publicly inviting people to come forward at the conclusion of a Gospel sermon, did not begin until the time of the 19th century revivalist, Charles G. Finney (1792-1895), who was probably the first to employ this method."

This is not the case, but even if this were a fact, it would not militate against invitations. Finney was a Presbyterian who evidently came to realize that Presbyterians had not been "regenerated" in infancy, and so he sought to bring them to a true conversion. After awhile, he started to use the "anxious seat" as a means of dealing with concerned souls --which differs considerably from the public invitation as practiced by most Baptists. If Finney's method does not meet with your approval, you can perhaps blame the super-duper Calvinistic Presbyterians whose spiritual condition accounts for him.

There have been several "firsts" for practices that are commonly used today without much question as to their validity and utility. Spurgeon was one of the first, if not the first, to have a Pastors College for preachers without educational advantages (Bible Institute style). William Carey was among the first to instigate foreign missions. Sunday Schools, associations of churches, mission societies, Bible translation societies, seminaries, Bible colleges, hymnals, degreed ministers, and many other practices had beginnings with someone this side of the apostolic period. "Patternism" would exclude all of these other than what the "patternist" would allow.

3. "While incredible numbers of people are alleged to have been saved through the invitation system, the facts do not really support this."

And again, "The invitation system tends to produce spurious converts."

False professions are not confined to some who responded to public invitations. Baptism and church membership have their share of false professions, too.

No one knows who is saved, except the Lord, not even in the best of circumstances. Some have been known to appear awfully good at the first, but later on they manifested another appearance. So, too, some have not looked very good at the first, but proved to be sound converts in the long haul.

Sometimes, alleged "percentages" of converts have been bandied about as if to prove invitations are wrong. If the truth were known, it seems reasonable that such statistics are contrived, and at best based on a very limited census procedure.

Paul seemingly had a great acceptance of the Gospel he preached in Galatia, but sometime later he indicated he had some serious reservations about them (Galatians 3). We can always expect some spurious professions, but they do not invalidate the valid ones.

Furthermore, what is often passed off as "fact" is based on imperfect subjective judgment and analysis, for no one can actually, factually, and certainly know how many were or were not valid professions of faith. So far as I have read, the reported "follow-ups" are based on whether the parties went on to be baptized or unite with churches within a certain span of time, and that is not really determinative of the validity of a profession of faith.

4. "Evangelists who have most used and popularized the invitation system have not been marked as particularly keen theologians."

D. L. Moody is cited by the writer as an example. I have read quite a bit from Mr. Moody, and for an untutored man, the basic principles of his preaching were sound. He was certainly approved by C. H. Spurgeon who had him preach at the Metropolitan Tabernacle and Spurgeon also preached in defense of Mr. Moody in a sermon entitled, Messengers Moody and Sankey Defended (MTP, #1239).

Furthermore, Moody said he read everything he could find that Spurgeon ever published, and that might have been a much better theological education than many with "Reformed" seminary degrees have received in our time. Moody also founded a Bible Institute (inspired by Spurgeon's model) and a publishing company (also inspired by Spurgeon's Colportage work) which have been quite a blessing in the dissemination of conservative biblical faith and practice.

I myself was converted under the ministry of Eddie Martin, an evangelist who attended Moody Bible Institute.

5. "How often do we hear at modern Gospel crusades a serious exposition of the Scriptures or a clear explanation of what took place at Calvary?"

The best sermon I recall ever hearing on the subject of Jesus Christ as the Son of God was delivered by evangelist Billy Graham which I heard on television a few years ago around Christmas time. And I have not heard a better sermon on that subject since.

6. "Although Spurgeon proclaimed the Gospel to thousands weekly, he sensed no necessity to urge lost sinners to come forward . . ."

We have discussed Spurgeon a few times in the past, and this representation of his practice is not accurate. Spurgeon liked to see immediate responses, as we have demonstrated before.

He said, "I should think there is no condition of gentleness, or of obscurity, or of poverty, or of sorrow, which should prevent anybody from making an open confession of allegiance to God when faith in the Lord Jesus Christ has been exercised. If that is your experience, my dear friend, then whoever you may be, you will find an opportunity, SOMEWHERE OR OTHER, of declaring that you are on the Lord's side. I am glad that all candidates for membership in our church make their confession of faith at our church-meetings. I have been told that such an ordeal must keep a great many from joining us; yet I notice that, where there is no such ordeal, they often have very few members, but here are we with five thousand six hundred, or thereabouts, in church-fellowship, and very seldom, if ever, finding anybody kept back by having to make an OPEN CONFESSION of faith in Christ. It does the man, the woman, the boy, or the girl, whoever it is, so much good for once, at least, to say right out straight, 'I am a believer in the Lord Jesus Christ, and I am not ashamed of it,' that I do not think we shall ever deviate from our custom. I have also noticed that, when people have once confessed Christ before men, they are very apt to do it again somewhere else; and they thus acquire a kind of boldness and outspokenness upon religious matters, and a holy courage as followers of Christ, which more than make up for any self-denial and trembling which the effort may have cost them" (MTP, Volume 46, 1900 page 289).

He also said, "I believe that it is a great help in bringing people to decision when Mr. Moody asks those to stand up who wish to be prayed for. Anything that tends to separate you from the ungodly around you, is good for you." (MTP, 1897, page 516).

7. "The invitation system tends to equate the act of coming forward with salvation." Also, the writer complains, "The invitation system gives assurance to people who may not yet be converted." And further, "The invitation system seeks to condition people for a response through the use of such externals as uplifting music, dynamic personalities, and a charged or emotional atmosphere. The problem with this is that it tends to provoke a response which is based on factors other than the truth of the Gospel."

Whatever real or imagined aberrations and errors attributed to invitations by some critics does not warrant dispensing with the practice itself, no more than error with regard to the purpose or mode of baptism means we should dispense with baptizing. There is error and abuse oftentimes associated with every item of faith and practice, but that does not warrant that we quit teaching and practicing that which is the truth.

Those who are faithful to the Gospel message will most likely not be guilty of the type of aberrations which are specified by the critics.

8. "If they are regenerated and granted faith to believe the Gospel (Acts 18:27; Philippians 1:29), there is no further need to prompt them to come forward."

But the Scripture shows that confession of faith is to follow repentance and faith, and then baptism and church membership. In some manner, the believer is to "come forward" to make that confession, be baptized, and be received into the church.

To quote Spurgeon again, "Tell it out then, tell it out, you who have been lately converted, do not hide your light under a bushel." "C. H. Spurgeon earnestly exhorted those who had accepted Christ as their Savior to COME FORWARD amongst his people and avow their attachment to his person and name. Words of kindly encouragement and of loving persuasiveness, were addressed to the timid and retiring ones, who feared to avow themselves to be the Lord's, lest they should fall back into sin and dishonor his name. This was followed by an appeal to those who had confessed the name of Jesus -- an appeal of so stirring and searching a nature, that many must have felt constrained to say, 'Lord what wilt thou have me to do?'" (The Sword and the Trowel, 1865, page 70).

9. "The invitation system tends to attach an undue importance on numbers."

I have yet to see an anti-invitation church which was in any danger from attaching "undue importance to numbers." They may have reason to be concerned for the lack of numbers, and the decline in numbers, but not for the abundance of numbers. The anti-invitation churches I have observed tend to be lacking in numbers of professions of faith.

10 . "The modern invitation method implies that sinners have the power inherently to believe on Christ any time they so choose."

The fact is, men must and do make a "choice" once they hear the Gospel. It is a consequence of hearing the Word and the convicting power of the Holy Spirit that one is moved to make a choice to come to Christ. They either choose for Christ, or choose against Him, in one form or another. And if they have the liberty of mind, heart, and will to believe in Christ, as the Word is blessed to them by the Holy Spirit, why should they not be encouraged on the spot to make known the choice they have been blessed to make?

Spurgeon, preaching on Joshua 24:15, DECISION ILLUSTRATED BY THE CASE OF JOSHUA, exhorted his hearers:

"That resolve on the part of Joshua was openly declared. I want to come straight home to some of you here who have said in your hearts, 'Yes, we will serve the Lord,' but you have never yet declared your allegiance, for you have thought it quite enough to promise in secret. Does not Joshua's outspoken vow make you blush? You are espoused to Christ, you say, but will there never be an open marriage? Will you never take Him publicly before the eyes of men to be your Lord and Husband forever and ever? Does Jesus agree to secret nuptials? Can such a thing be done in a corner? Of old the candle was put on a candlestick; is it now to be put under a bushel? You say you are His soldier; will you never put on your Prince's uniform? Shall your Captain's colors never adorn you? Will you never come forward and take your Commander's weapon in your hand and march at His bidding to the fight? . . . I long to drive you to a decision! If God is God, serve Him! If Baal is God, serve him! O, may the Spirit of God lead you to decide for God and His Christ this very moment and He shall have the praise forever! Amen." (MTP, Volume 21, #1229).

These objections rather summarize the anti-invitationist's point of view against invitations. But I suspect the real root of his complaints is revealed in the following words: "So long as today's church continues to wallow in the mire of semi-Pelagian error, turning its nose against Calvinistic soteriology, the invitation system will remain. But so will our ignorance, superficial holiness, and general disdain for biblical theology."
What this probably translates to mean is, in my opinion, that super-duper Calvinism of the "steroid" variety borrowed from Pedobaptist theologians is what must be believed and practiced in order to have a valid evangelism. If that is the case, then it makes one wonder how it is that so many of our modern Calvinists say they were brought to Christ under ministries that either were not Calvinistic, or were even "rank Arminians"?

Why can't Calvinists, who say they are preaching the pure Word of God, somehow work it in as a "sixth" point that it is OK to invite those who hear the Gospel and accept it to immediately come forward and confess Christ as Lord and Saviour? -- Bob L. Ross

Altar Calls vs No Altar Calls

2010-07-25T13:49:00.005-05:00

Differences Between Reformed and Southern Baptist Churches: Altar Calls vs No Altar Calls

A Southern Baptist pastor, Les Puryear, has recently been stirring the nest of some of the "Reformed" brethren among Southern Baptists.

One of the issues cited by Les as distinguishing traditional Baptists and those who are calling themselves "Reformed" is the use of the public invitation, sometimes referred to by some as the "altar call."

We have written extensively about "Reformed" objections to invitations, some of the articles being online at this link. We have commented on perhaps every concevable objection offered by the "Reformed" or by any others who oppose giving a public invitation as practiced by traditional Baptists of the past and present.

One of Reformed objections offered to Les' article is the notion that baptism constitutes one's confession, such as the following by James W. Galyon:

"How does somebody publicly acknowledge faith in Christ in my home church? Through baptism, just like they did in the NT."

I dealt with this error about three years ago in an email article, but it was not posted on the blog. Therefore, I offering this article to refute the idea that "baptism constitutes one's confession."

Perhaps the primary reason the Reformed Pedobaptists (Presbyterians) oppose public invitations is because of their doctrine about the supposed "regeneration" of infants born to Christian parents. According the Reformed, children born to Christian parents are "elect" or "covenant children," and they inherit the covenant blessing of regeneration (new birth). Supposedly, such "elect children" get regenerated (born again) very early, perhaps even before they are born, according to John Frame and R. C. Sproul. With this type of doctrine, it is easily understood why the Pedobaptists would have little to no use for public invitations.

HYBRID CALVINIST ERROR CONCERNING BAPTISM AS
BEING THE FIRST "CONFESSION" OF CHRIST

By Bob L. Ross
[01/12--2007]

I recently ordered and read the book entitled, Ernest Reisinger, A Biography, by Geoffrey Thomas, published by the Banner of Truth. Brother Reisinger is perhaps best known as the primary person who was instrumental in founding the "Founders Ministries" in the 1980s, now headed by Pastor Tom Ascol of Cape Coral, Florida.

The Founders Ministries maintains that its primary purpose is to promote the "Doctrines of Grace," but in our estimation it promotes a "hybrid" form of "Calvinism" which is more in line with post-17th century Presbyterianism than with the historic Confessions of Faith.

Although for years I had known the late Brother Reisinger [1919-2004] since first meeting him in Carlisle, Pennsylvania at the first Grace Bible Conference at Grace Baptist Church in Carlisle, Pennsylvania in the mid-1960s, and had met him a few times thereafter, I had never heard or come across any detailed account of his conversion. I have not even been able to find such an account on the Founders's website.

The account related in this book, however, is rather detailed, and it immediately became of particular interest to me in view of the present negative attitude of the Founders Ministries in regard to certain evangelistic methodology, such as invitations, "the sinner's prayer," and related efforts to bring the lost to Christ. Reisinger's actual conversion experience seems to considerably contrast to the current opposition of the Founders to certain evangelistic methods.

On the whole, I have observed that the Founders Ministries criticizes the use of certain methods which they consider "Arminian," yet this biography paradoxically relates how Reisinger was brought to Christ in relation to the use of such methods.

According to this biography, Ernest's salvation experience culminated in his praying "the prayer of the publican of whom Jesus spoke in the gospel, 'God be merciful to me a sinner'" (page 20), which is quite inconsistent with what is advocated by the Founders.

According to this biography, a Christian & Missionary Alliance layman named Elmer Albright sought Ernest's conversion, and consistently and frequently witnessed to Ernest over a period of time, prayed for him, and encouraged him to attend the C&MA church. (C&MA is a theologically "Arminian" denomination, founded by A. B. Simpson in the 1880s. Notable writer, A. W. Tozer, belonged to the C&MA).

In due course of time, this layman's witnessing efforts began to bear results. Ernest did agree to attend the C&MA church and began to experience conviction for his lost condition. After a subsequent visit to his home by Christian witnesses, Ernest determined that "settling this matter was more important than going to work," and that is what he set out to do.

On pages 19, 20, the book says:

"Ernest Reisinger listened earnestly and intently, and they prayed with him before leaving and gave him some leaflets to read. . . . He stayed home and read the leaflets his friends from the Sunday School had brought him. . . . Then he began to open the Bible, turning over pages at random. . . . He could not find how to be saved. . . . Then eventually he came across a little piece of paper tucked between two pages. It was a tract, and written boldly on the cover were the words, 'What Must I Do to be Saved?' The tract told him that he had sinned against God and that he would get nowhere unless he acknowledged that to him.

"Ernest C. Reisinger knelt down in his living room and prayed the prayer of the publican of whom Jesus spoke in the gospel, 'God be merciful to me a sinner.'

"The tract then directed him to John chapter 5, verse 24. There he read these words, 'Verily, verily, I say unto you, he that heareth my word, and believeth on him that sent me hath everlasting life, and shall not come into condemnation, but is passed from death to life.' As the words in all their simplicity and hope registered in his mind and affections, Ernie's heart was flooded with the assurance that Christ was now his Lord; he sat weeping before the Bible. On that day, through true repentance for his sins, and by faith in the Lord Jesus Christ, Reisinger knew he had met the God of grace."

Sometime not long aferwards, Reisinger went to a Salvation Army service and there "first bore testimony to his new life in Christ."

Later, since the Salvation Army did not practice baptism, Reisinger conferred with the pastor of a Southern Baptist church and was baptized in the First Baptist Church of Havre de Grace, Maryland (page 20).

So Reisinger bore his "first testimony" of faith in Christ at a Salvation Army meeting, and later he was baptized at the FBC in Havre de Grace, Maryland. This is the usual Baptist order of (1) Confession of faith, and (2) Baptism follows Confession.

What was rather striking to me about this experience of Ernest Reisinger is how the Founders Ministries has since adopted the teaching of pedobaptist Iain Murray that baptism itself is the "confession" (The Invitation System, page 9). While it is true that baptism is a means of showing identity with Christ, Baptists believe that Confession of Faith is a prerequisite to being baptized. This is what Ernest Reisinger did in his experience -- he confessed before being baptized; he did not substitute baptism for confession.

However, TOM NETTLES, a Founders Ministries board member, and a professor at Southern Baptist Theological Seminary, advocates the pedobaptist theory put forth by Murray in Murray's anti-invitation booklet, which contends that baptism itself is one's confession. Nettles asserts this fallacy in his book, By His Grace, and for His Glory (pages 421, 422, edition of 2002).

The idea that baptism is the believer's initial confession is wrong for the simple reason that one must make a confession of faith in Christ before he is even qualified for baptism which is based on that profession. The Ethiopian eunuch, for instance, confessed his faith in Christ before Philip baptized him (Acts 8:35-38). The Reformed Presbyterian pedobaptists (baby baptizers) have it backwards: they baptize babies who don't have any faith to confess, add the babies to the church membership roll, and hope that the babies will grow up and confess Christ later.

It is unfortunate that Ernest Reisinger fell under the influence of the baby baptizers such as Iain Murray later in his life, and adopted too much of the pedobaptist Hybrid Calvinism which has permeated and distorted the Founders Ministries. In fact, the biography relates that a church Reisinger later pastored in North Pompano Beach, Florida was divided and split over issues related to some of the Presbyterianism which Reisinger imbibed from pedobaptists such as Iain Murray (pages 196, 197). I understand that there is nothing left of this church today. See this link:

WHAT MIGHT BE EXPECTED FROM A"REFORMATION" BY THE FLOUNDERS?

"Reformed" & "Truly Reformed"

2010-07-07T18:02:00.005-05:00

The "Reformed" and "Truly Reformed"

As a Baptist, I have often been amused by the use of the term "Reformed" and even more amused when I see the term "Truly Reformed." This is even more amusing when I see or hear it from a Baptist.

Those terms actually belong to the Pedobaptists (baby sprinklers), and up until a few years ago, you never heard Baptists using them. In fact, when I became a Christian in 1953, there were no "Reformed" Baptist people in the city or state . . . at least that I knew of. That term, I later found, had been used by the Baptist apostates who became Campbellites, following Alexander Campbell in his "Reformation Movement" of the early 1800's. The term was never used by any Baptists of that time other than those who went off into Campbellism.

Then in the 1960s, with the coming of "Banner of Truth" publications, it seemed that "Reformed" began to pop-up on occasion among some Calvinistic Baptists. I even knew a Baptist church or two which added the word in their church name. I recall a book written by Kenneth Good called "Are Baptists Reformed?" It was a "new thing" for Baptists to say they were "Reformed." A lot of explaining had to be done. [There is relatively good history by Mark Sidwell about "Reformed Baptists" groups at this link: The Reformed Baptists.]

To my knowledge, the word was a relatively modern Pedobaptist creation. It was never applied by Baptists to themselves, and I don't recall that it was used by the Puritans. I never found C. H. Spurgeon referring to himself as "Reformed," although there are some web sites today identifying Spurgeon as "Reformed." Just because Spurgeon held some theological views which may also be held by the Pedobaptists does not make him "Reformed."

Now in more recent times we have often come upon another word being added to it -- "Truly Reformed." It seems that "Reformed" is not quite good enough, so they tack on "Truly." That seems to help somehow certify that one is "truly" Reformed. You can prowl around some of the "Reformed" web sites and see what they are defining as being "Truly Reformed." Of course, those using that term to apply to themselves are obviously the "standard" of what is "Truly Reformed."

Nathan Finn, who teaches at Southeastern Baptist Theological Seminary, while he goes along with using the word "Reformed" of some Baptists, nevertheless admits the following;

"It is fair to say, from a historical standpoint, that Reformed Baptists are not Reformed in the fully historic sense of the term because they embrace a Free Church ecclesiology and credobaptism. If there were to be a contest to demonstrate which side can “out-Reform” the other (in terms of embracing historic Reformed distinctives), and if history were the judge, the pedobaptists would win, no question."

Here we are simply Baptists. Not "Reformed" and not "Truly Reformed." We leave those terms with the Pedobaptists who contrived them. As our web site name indicates, we "swat" some of the "Reformed" ideas which were contrived by the Pedobaptists -- whether "Reformed" or "Truly Reformed" -- some of the ideas even adopted by some professing Baptists who call themselves "Reformed."

One church I knew that added "Reformed" to their name later dropped it. I didn't ask "Why?" but I assume that it was too burdensome -- always having to explain what is meant by "Reformed" or maybe even "Truly Reformed" -- like some web sites seem to think they have to explain who qualifies as "Truly Reformed." Maybe before long we will be reading about the "Really Truly Reformed." Where will it all end?

BTW, some entrepreneurs are taking monetary advantage of the situtation. You can get a T-Shirt identifying yourself as "Truly Reformed" for just $22.

Spurgeon and Altar Calls

2010-06-19T14:49:00.005-05:00

Spurgeon's "Inquiry Room" -- Forerunner
to the Public Invitation or Altar Call

Since there are many "anti-invitationists" using the Internet for bogging and web sites, I have noticed a number of articles which repeat the anti-invitationism arguments of Pedobaptist ministers such as the late Martyn Lloyd Jones and his one-time assistant, Iain Murray.

The latest blog I have seen to use Pedobaptist Lloyd-Jones against invitations is Pastor Wade Burleson of Enid, Oklahoma, whom we have had occasion to refute on some matters in the past. What Bro. Burleson fails to point out, however, is that Reformed Pedobaptists believe elect babies get "regenerated" in infancy, if not even before they are born, so Pedobaptists seldom would have any use for public invitations when lost sinners are called upon to accept (or believe on) Christ as Saviour and "come forward" to make a public profession of faith. This is the circumstance in which many, if not most, Baptists have been brought to Christ, according to my observation. In fact, many of those who later opposed inivitations admit that they were saved in just such a circumstance as the public invitation or what some call "the altar call."

Often, misleading information about C. H. Spurgeon on the "inquiry room" and invitations is given, especially by Iain Murray and those who follow his writings, as if to add some "weight" to anti-invitationism. While it is true that C. H. Spurgeon did indeed advise against the abusive use of the "inquiry room," as noted by Murray in some writings, there is no source in Spurgeon's sermons and writings which indicate that he opposed its proper use.

No, Spurgeon did not oppose the use of the "inquiry room," for he used it himself. He obviously simply wanted to protect against the abuses of it.

Pedo-regenerationist Murray, the "father" of most of the modern anti-invitationalism, was perhaps the first in our time to express criticism of the "inquiry room." But Murray fails to appropriately use quotations from C. H. Spurgeon in his booklet on "The Invitation System" to properly represent Spurgeon. I have articles on a website refuting Mr. Murray and other opponents of the public invitation. See Selected Writings of Bob Ross.

SPURGEON USED THE INQUIRY ROOM

Yes, Spurgeon himself used the "inquiry room" at the Tabernacle, and while he wanted to guard against the abuse of it, he never opposed its use, nor did he oppose "the invitation system," as has been falsely alleged. Spurgeon approved of any reasonable method which tended to bring men to repentance and public confession of Christ as Saviour.

For example, Spurgeon supported the revival work in Great Britain by D. L. Moody, and he approved of Moody's methods. He had Moody to conduct evangelistic meetings at the Metropolitan Tabernacle in London, and Spurgeon said of Moody's methods:

"I believe that it is a great help in bringing people to DECISION when Mr. Moody asks those to STAND UP who wish to be prayed for. Anything that tends to separate you from the ungodly around you, is good for you." (Metropolitan Tabernacle Pulpit, 1897, page 516).

Awhile back I wrote an article entitled --
"Was C. H. Spurgeon the Innovator of the Modern Public or Church Invitation?"

The point was that Spurgeon's methods in essence developed into the public invitation used by evangelists and churches of the 20th century.

Here are a few excerpts from that article --

"C. H. Spurgeon earnestly exhorted those who had accepted Christ as their Saviour to come forward amongst his people and avow their attachment to His person and name." - The Sword & The Trowel Magazine, 1865, pg. 70.

SPURGEON and the "CALVINISTS"

Spurgeon was "bucking" the system of the "high Calvinists" of the times by this type of innovation as well as by his preaching the "simple Gospel" and promising "immediate salvation" to those who believed it. The hypers, hybrids, and ultras of that age did not appreciate Spurgeon's emphasis.

The leading pastor among the Calvinistic Baptists of the time, James Wells, who was dubbed "King James," said he had his "doubts" as to "the divine reality of his [Spurgeon's] conversion," and alleged that Spurgeon was "deceiving others with the deception wherewith he himself is deceived" (CHS Autobiography, Vol. 2, pages 38, 39).

When Spurgeon first came to London in late 1853, the Baptist preachers such as Wells and the churches of the Park Street Chapel variety were mostly either hyper-Calvinists or ultra-Calvinists, or something on the order of what the "Hybrid Calvinists" are and are becoming in our time. The killing effects of "mere doctrine" and too great an emphasis upon "the Calvinist system" had virtually killed evangelistic efforts in England. Spurgeon's success in preaching the "simple Gospel" made him the object of resentment, jealousy, criticism, and even cynical ridicule by some of the Baptists, especially some of the respected leaders among the professed "Calvinists." In a letter to his family, Spurgeon complained of the "Calvinism" which prevailed at the church at that time and how "It is the Calvinism they want."

“December __, 1853.
“My Dear Father, . . . . . . The London people are rather higher in Calvinism than I am; but I have succeeded in bringing one church to my own views, and will trust, with Divine assistance, to do the same with another. I am a Calvinist; I love what someone called ‘glorious Calvinism,’ but ‘Hyperism’ is too hot-spiced for my palate. . . . It is Calvinism they want in London, and any Arminian preaching will not be endured.”

Spurgeon not only literally knocked out the windows of the dingy old New Park Street Chapel to let in the air, he began to strike blow-after-blow at what he often called the "false Calvinism" of his "ultraists" brethren. Some of his very worst enemies were those who loudly proclaimed their "Calvinism." Spurgeon became so "put out" with these types, he said, "I do not hesitate to say, that Phariseeism is mixed with Hyper-Calvinism more than with any other sect in the world" (New Park Street Pulpit, Year 1860, #336 — Struggles of Conscience, page 403).

One of the innovations which Spurgeon put to good use, out of the practical necessity for the hearing of confessions of Christ by those responding to his evangelistic preaching, was the use of inquiry rooms. D. L. Moody, before he ever started preaching, went to London to hear Spurgeon for the first time in 1867. Moody became Spurgeon's devoted disciple and ardent protege. In this regard, Moody was indeed a sort of "Timothy" in relation to C. H. Spurgeon. Moody -- who later started his own preaching ministry -- adopted many of the means and methods he had observed in Spurgeon's implementing the work of the Gospel, including starting a Bible Institute similar to Spurgeon's Pastor's college, a colportage or publishing work similar to Spurgeon's, preaching to the masses in large halls as did Spurgeon, and using the inquiry room to deal with converts, as did Spurgeon. The latter method, in its essential elements, became the forerunner of what we today call the "public invitation."

This method did not derive from Charles G. Finney's "anxious seat," as Lloyd-Jones and his disciples allege, for the inquiry room was not on that order at all. Moody never even heard Finney preach, nor saw the "anxious seat" used in a Finney revival meeting. By 1860, Finney could not even travel, much less hold revival meetings, and that was long before Moody even started preaching.

But Moody did hear Spurgeon, followed Spurgeon around to hear him, read everything published by Spurgeon, and he saw how Spurgeon dealt with souls. Moody adopted Spurgeon's methods.

Here is an example of Spurgeon's method, later adopted by D. L. Moody, demonstrated in the year 1865. This is from the March 1865 issue of The Sword and the Trowel, Spurgeon's magazine, page 128, during a high period of intense, ongoing revival, with many being converted to Christ, and a fervent spirit abounding in the church:

>>NOTICES
[Reported by George Rogers, Principal of Spurgeon's Pastors' College]The second proposed special prayer meeting, mentioned in our last number, was held in the Metropolitan Tabernacle on the evening of the 6th February. . . .Between six and seven thousand persons assembled -- not to witness a theatrical exhibition -- not to hear an eloquent preacher -- not to witness a select and diversified display of platform oratory -- but for a prayer meeting! This was a sight that could not fail to gladden the hearts of good men, and prepare them for the higher enjoyment that followed. It was evident that the impression of the former meeting had not passed away, but it influence had become more widely extended, as the attendance was not only more numerous, but some hundreds were unable to gain admission. No extraordinary efforts were made to provide for the meeting; no sensational speakers were engaged; no novelty was either thought or desired. The ministers of the new fraternity, as on the former occasion, in the spirit of prayer, and confident reliance upon the Spirit of God, quietly and solemnly came upon the platform. Several of the ministers who took part in the proceedings, and two of them were students yet in the college; but all were of one mind and of one heart. Mr. Spurgeon, after a few words of gratitude and joy for the return of such an occasion, gave out some verses of the 100th Psalm, that all might join in a song of praise. He then suggested that their next duty was to give thanks for the blessing which had attended the former meeting of the same kind, the effect of which, upon his own people, was that ninety-three [93] had set down on the previous evening, for the first time at the table of the Lord. Mr. Marshall and Mr. Barnard presented the incense of praise. Mr. Spurgeon then gave out the hymn, commencing with -- "Just as I am, Without one plea."

This was a prelude to confession of sin, which, after a silent confession of two or three minutes of each for himself, was offered in the name of all by Mr. Clark. Some verses of the hymn, "I will praise Thee every day," were then sung, after which petitions for the revival of the Churches were presented by Mr. Warren and Mr. Offord: those of the latter were preceded by a touching and powerful appeal to the hearts of believers.

Now came the direct reference to the unsaved. This was introduced by a most earnest and awakening address by Mr. Spurgeon, and was responded to in prayer by Mr. Stott and Mr. Varley. A hymn followed, commencing thus, "Once a sinner near despair."

Mr. Teal and Mr. Burton then prayed, and Mr. Spurgeon closed with prayer. INQUIRERS were then encouraged to retire to the lecture hall, where ministers and elders would be glad to converse with them'; and MANY RESPONDED TO THE INVITATION.

This was one of the most sober, the most impressive, and, we should judge, the most effective meetings we have ever witnessed. . . .
>>

Here observe that all of the essential elements which characterize a sane, sound, Baptist public invitation are present: (1) Preaching, (2) Prayer, (3) Encouragement to respond, and (4) and Invitation to be conversed with. Even the great invitation hymn, Just As I Am, was used by Mr. Spurgeon at this meeting, from his hymnbook, Our Own Hymnbook, #546.

Later, in the same article, we read:
"His own ministry had begun in a storm of opposition, but he had been enabled to outlive it, and to obtain a position of comparative quiet in the denomination to which his Church belonged . . . He had to remind the Church how greatly God had blessed the preaching of the Gospel in their midst during the past year. Conversions had been frequent in the Sunday-schools, in the Bible and Catechumen Classes; and never had the Word come with greater power to the great congregation. The Church had received by Baptism 381 members; . . . the present number of members on the Church books, 2,881."

Moody's "model" was Spurgeon, not Finney. Moody and Sankey in Great Britain [The Sword and the Trowel, February 1876, pages 84-87]

When D. L. Moody was engaged in evangelistic work, he held meetings in Scotland and in England. His work in Scotland began rather hopelessly, with but a scant few -- "only eight persons were in attendance." However, by "hanging in there" and "fighting the good fight of faith," Moody's work gradually gained ground and finally became extraordinarily productive, with multitudes eventually saved. In England the professed conversions were not quite so numerous, primarily because so many of the recent enthusiastic converts were filling up the seats in the meeting place, therefore many of the unconverted were thereby "kept out" -- not purposefully, but circumstantially. Also, Spurgeon cites the lack of significant interest in the meetings by the PEDOBAPTIST English churches, due to their own peculiar evangelistic coldness toward enthusiastic evangelistic preaching. After all, they claimed that their children had inherited "regeneration" in early infancy and did not need the type of conversion preached by either Moody or Spurgeon!

Here is an excerpt of how Spurgeon describes the Moody-Sankey evangelistic efforts:

>>
The work in Edinburgh was repeated in many other towns of Scotland such as Perth, Dundee, Aberdeen, etc., and with similar results, the people going so far as to tolerate Mr. Sankey's "unsanctified musical machine." The campaign in Ireland which succeeded was still more remarkable when we take into account the national prejudices of the population. In Dublin the Great Exhibition building was hired for the meetings as being the only place in the city capable of accommodating the multitudes who came to hear. This success of the evangelists in the Emerald Isle was a fine testimony to the power of the simple gospel; for while no fierce denunciations of the apostate church were heard from the platform, the converts came alike from the ranks of Romanists as well as from the houses of the Protestants. The Romish leaders raised the voice of warning, but to no purpose; and their machinations were aided by a club of atheists, who penetrated into the inquiry rooms to endeavor to turn the whole into controversy. [Note: These Romanists and Protestants had supposedly "born again" when they were babies. The were probably hearing the Gospel for the first time, and many were being truly born again! -- Bob]". . . . This man was coming upon the stage one evening to sing a comic song, when a verse of a Sunday School hymn, which he had learned years ago, flashed through his mind, producing so deep an impression that he was unable to drive it away. He attempted to sing his song but failed, and on retiring from the stage was summarily dismissed by the manager. For three weeks he plunged into the deepest dissipation, being scarcely sober for a single hour all that time. During this debauch he wrote a comedy, which he finished off with a burlesque upon Messrs. Moody and Sankey, who had just then arrived in Liverpool; and in order to give greater point to his satire, he attended one of the services in Victoria Hall, to hear them for himself. While thus watching for something of which to make sport upon the comic stage, the Holy Spirit so impressed the truth upon his heart that he remained to the after-meeting for inquirers, was instructed in the way of his duty, and that very night found peace with God. He has now entered into training for the purpose of becoming a missionary."
>>

From another one of my articles, here are some excerpts:

Spurgeon indeed often made negative comments which were intended to either expose or guard against abuses of methods and practices, but those remarks do not convey the total image of Spurgeon on such matters. He likewise often commented in a negative vain about abuses associated even with Calvinistic theology, baptism, the name "Baptist," church attendance and membership, the use of music, miscellaneous financial schemes, and similar activities, but such remarks must not be isolated if one is to avoid an erroneous impression of Spurgeon. For example, though he often rebuked "worldly" methods as to church finance schemes, his own church conducted a Bazaar to raise money for the construction of the Tabernacle, which some might view as contradictory to what he sometimes said against things of this sort. The fact is, as to the matter of methods in regard to professions of faith, it is stated in The Sword and The Trowel, January 1890, page 45: "That which is admirable with one congregation may not suit another."

Spurgeon was for any method which incorporated the Gospel message in relation to accepting and confessing Christ as Savior.

SPURGEON-SPONSORED EVANGELISTS
USED THE INQUIRY ROOM

In the 1890 bound volume of The Sword and the Trowel magazine, there are reports of Tabernacle-sponsored evangelistic meetings which demonstrate that Spurgeon favored an evangelism which sought to obtain immediate professions of faith by various ways and means. Spurgeon and the Tabernacle Church actually sponsored Evangelists who conducted special evangelistic campaigns or missions. The foremost two were J. Manton Smith and W. Y. Fullerton. There are quite a number of reports in this 1890 volume of their meetings which refer to the "decisions" made, the "after-meetings," and the "inquirers" who went into the "inquiry rooms." A report appeared in the January 1889 Sword & Trowel which is illustrative of the work done by the Metropolitan Tabernacle-sponsored Evangelists.

>>
The hopes that we expressed last month respecting Messrs. Fullerton and Smith services at the Tabernacle were more than realized before the mission closed. The numbers in attendance increased nightly, until, at the closing service, not only was the Tabernacle densely packed, but overflow meetings were held in three rooms in the College, and some thousands of persons were unable to gain admission. All who had professed to find the Saviour were asked to meet the workers in the lecture-hall, at the close of the public services, and very soon the hall was quite full. Those who were present will not soon forget the scene when, in response to Mr. Fullerton's request, some hundreds of hands were held up in token of blessing received during the mission. . . . Messrs. Fullerton and Smith came over from Bloomsbury for the first half-hour, and gave wise and weighty counsels to those who had been brought to decision. . . .Mr. Chamberlain sang and spoke, and then asked any who had been brought to decision during the mission just to rise, and declare that fact. In less than half-an-hour, no less than fifty-one persons bore oral testimony to what the Lord had done for them at the special services, and many more would have spoken if there had been time.

The converts were of all ages, and of both sexes; there were 'young men and maidens, old men and children,' praising the name of the Lord for the great things done for them.. . . .Let us pray that the work of revival may continue to spread until thousands more are won for the Saviour.
>>

In the February 1889 issue of S & T, Spurgeon published a number of comments from Pastors and Churches in regard to meetings held by the Tabernacle-sponsored Evangelists. Here are a couple of those:

"Had you been present at the large enquirers' meeting which we held in the lecture-hall last night, your heart would have been rejoiced to hear the testimonies of God's power to save; and many steady, matured Christians added their witness to the fresh power and renewed consecration which they had experienced during the mission."

"Seldom have we known a finer blending of the instructive with the earnestly exhorting to immediate decision than was nightly listened to from Mr. Fullerton. . . . Best of all, great spiritual results have followed. No fewer than 150 persons went into the enquiry-room. Many of these have avowed their conversion to God, their newly-found faith in Jesus. Amongst these some are the children of the officers and members of the church, some restored backsliders, and others are men and women who for many, many year have never gone inside a house of God. . . . souls have been born again, and the Saviour has been greatly honored."

While there are some today who are trying to utilize a few remarks by Spurgeon which were obviously focusing upon real or possible abuses of evangelistic methods, you will most likely not find such reports as the foregoing, from Spurgeon's own magazine, called to the readers' attention. They demonstrate that Spurgeon favored a very aggressive evangelism, one that pressed for immediate response, decision, and public confession.

Unlike the modern Reformed pedo-regenerationists, such as Mr. Murray, who are apparently inactive in aggressive evangelistic missions such as those by Smith and Fullerton, Baptists such as Spurgeon did not have the practice of infant baptism and baby "regeneration" to fall back upon to make "disciples" and church members, and so they used the Biblical type of evangelism of preaching the Gospel to those who would give it a hearing, be convicted of sin, come forth publicly to acknowledge faith in Christ, and confess Him as Savior.

Copy of Spurgeon's Letter

2010-06-08T10:53:00.019-05:00

A Copy of C. H. Spurgeon's Letter
Regarding the
"Down Grade" Controversy

A few weeks ago, I was furnished with a copy of a C. H. Spurgeon hand-written letter, sent to me by our longtime friend, Pastor Gary W. Long of Sovereign Grace Baptist Church and Particular Baptist Press, Springfield, Missouri.

The letter, dated February 17, 1888, serves to further substantiate what Spurgeon himself wrote in some issues of The Sword & the Trowel magazines -- namely, that "Calvinism" was not an issue in the Down Grade Controversy. This is what we have have always represented as a matter of authentic history on this particular matter.

I did not have this letter when we reprinted the book, THE DOWN GRADE CONTROVERSY, a few months ago; otherwise, I would have included the letter in that book. But after I received the letter, we had copies made which we now insert into the book.

If you want a copy of the letter, send a postage-paid self-addressed envelope to --

Bob L. Ross, Box 66, Pasadena, Texas 77501.

I have a lot of interest in and respect for authentic history, but not much interest in someone's "interpretation" of history, especially their "eisegesis" of history (reading their own ideas into history). Nothing chafes me more than someone who -- for whatever reason -- distorts authentic history.

Some of our Calvinistic brethren, such as Iain Murray and Erroll Hulse, who have written about Spurgeon and the Down Grade Controversy, have unfortunately strayed from authentic history and have attempted to inject Calvinism into the DGC, and I sometimes see comments by some who are evidently influenced by Murray and/or Hulse. I suppose that Murray and Hulse, ever zealous to promote their version of Calvinism, think it adds weight to associate Spurgeon and Calvinism to the Down Grade Controversy. But Spurgeon staunchly denied this accusation when it was made in his lifetime by his detractors, as we learn from his magazine and also from this letter. According to Spurgeon, the issues involved were of greater significance than one's theoretical understanding relating to Arminian-Calvinist squabbles over differing views. He said:

"Certain antagonists have tried to represent the Down-Grade controversy as a revival of the old feud between Calvinists and Arminians. It is nothing of the kind. Many evangelical Arminians are as earnestly on our side as men can be."

If you want a free copy of Spurgeon's letter, send a stamped SAE and I will mail it to you.

If you want the DOWN GRADE CONTROVERSY book itself, it sells for $8.99 plus $3 to mail -- $11.99 -- but we will settle for $10.

******************************************

Permission granted to copy and use this article.

Pilgrim Website: http://www.pilgrimpublications.com/

By request, names are added to my Email List, or removed.

Publishers of C. H. Spurgeon's Sermons & Other Works

Send your snail-mail address for a printed Price List.

Pilgrim Publications, Box 66, Pasadena, TX 77501.

Phone: (713) 477-4261. Fax: (713) 477-7561

VIDEOS ON INTERNET:

"Charles Haddon Spurgeon Country"

Other Pilgrim videos are now available on
YOUTUBE, YAHOO Video and GOOGLE Video --
Simply enter "Larry Wessels" in Search box.

YOUTUBE channel page:

YAHOO VIDEO:

GOOGLE VIDEO:

Other Internet Resources:

Writings of Bob L. Ross

Calvinist Fllyswatter blogs by Bob:
King James Only Resource Center

*******

"C. H. SPURGEON WORLD WIDE WEB NETWORK"

68:11

Spurgeon Gems
Spurgeon Archive

Spurgeon sermons in SPANISH

SingleVision Ministries

"The Prince of Preachers Live!"

Christian Classics

Spurgeon's Devotionals

CHS' Sermons on CD / Cassette

Pilgrim Publications

*******

Please report any defective links.

Spurgeon's Sermons on Internet

2010-05-25T11:38:00.019-05:00

61 Volumes of C. H. Spurgeon's Sermons
Now on the Internet [05/21--2010]

The following email from Brother Emmett O'Donnell is a report on Emmett's remarkable progress in putting C. H. Spurgeon's New Park Street Pulpit (1855-1860) and Metropolitan Tabernacle Pulpit (1861-1917) on the Internet, available around the world.

Spurgeon never had any idea that his sermons would one day "miraculously" be available in this form!

Thank the Lord that He inspired Brother O'Donnell to give himself to this task, and thank the Lord that Bro. Emmett has been enabled to persevere in doing it!

Here is his recent report:

May 15, 2010
Dear Ones,
Let us pray for Grace to give our Lord and Savior, Jesus Christ, all the praise and honor for using me to complete the modernization of 61 volumes of Brother Spurgeon's sermons. -- Brother Emmett O'Donnell.

Jesus Christ is the ONLY way to God The Father!
Not Mary. Not Mohammed. Not a future Messiah.
Jesus Christ is the ONLY way.(John 14:6).

Visit http://www.spurgeongems.org/ for over 3,500 C. H. Spurgeon sermons in today'slanguage.

"All the history of an elect child of God, even before conversion, will be found to be full of traces of the preventing goodness of the Lord."--Volume 60, Sermon #3413, Metropolitan Tabernacle Pulpit.

READ Brother Emmett's testimony here.

Permission granted to copy and use this article.

Pilgrim Website: http://www.pilgrimpublications.com/

By request, names are added to my personal Email List, or removed.

Publishers of C. H. Spurgeon's Sermons & Other Works

Send your snail-mail address for a printed Price List.

Pilgrim Publications, Box 66, Pasadena, TX 77501

Phone: (713) 477-4261. Fax: (713) 477-7561

VIDEOS ON INTERNET:

"Spurgeon Country"
http://video.yahoo.com/watch/1044139/3888336

Other Pilgrim videos are now available for viewing on
YOUTUBE, YAHOO Video and GOOGLE Video --
Simply enter "Larry Wessels" in the Search box.

YOUTUBE channel page:
http://www.youtube.com/user/CAnswersTV

YAHOO VIDEO:
http://video.yahoo.com/search/?p=LARRY+WESSELS

GOOGLE VIDEO:
http://video.google.com/videosearch?q=LARRY+WESSELS&hl=en&emb=0&aq=f#

Other Internet Resources:

Selected Email Articles by Bob L. Ross at http://writingsofbobross.tripod.com/1toc1.html

Articles on blogs by Bob:

http://calvinistflyswatter.blogspot.com/
and

http://reformedflyswatter.blogspot.com/

King James Only Resource Center

http://www.kjvonly.org/

*******

"C. H. SPURGEON WORLDWIDE WEB NETWORK"

Psalm 68:11
Spurgeon Gems http://www.spurgeongems.org/
Spurgeon Archive http://www.spurgeon.org/mainpage.htm

Spurgeon sermons in SPANISH http://www.spurgeon.com.mx/
SingleVision Ministries http://www.seegod.org/

"The Prince of Preachers Live!" http://www.charlesspurgeon.net/

Christian Classics http://www.ccel.org/s/spurgeon/

Spurgeon's Devotionals http://www.gospelweb.net/table1fcb.htm

CHS' Sermons on CD / Cassette

http://www.chspurgeon.com/

Pilgrim Publications

http://www.pilgrimpublications.com/

Videos on Hardshellism

2010-05-14T12:57:00.004-05:00

LINKS TO
VIDEOS ON HARDSHELLISM

Cultic Hyper-Calvinistic Doctrines of the Primitive Baptist Church Part #1
from CAnswersTV
Bob L. Ross, Director of Pilgrim Publications of Pasadena, Texas, a leading publisher of the works of Charles Haddon Spurgeon in the world, is joined for this...
59:54

Cultic Hyper-Calvinistic Doctrines of the Primitive Baptist Church Part #2
from CAnswersTV
Bob L. Ross, Director of Pilgrim Publications of Pasadena, Texas, a leading publisher of the works of Charles Haddon Spurgeon in the world, is joined for this...
59:26

Cultic Hyper-Calvinistic Doctrines of the Primitive Baptist Church Part #3
from CAnswersTV
Bob L. Ross, Director of Pilgrim Publications of Pasadena, Texas, a leading publisher of the works of Charles Haddon Spurgeon in the world, is joined for this...
59:54

Blessings,

Larry Wessels
1 Peter 3:15

Hardshell Liberal Movement

2010-05-07T15:17:00.003-05:00

Stephen Garrett on the Hardshell
"Liberal Movement"

Bob L. Ross' note:

Stephen Garrett, at the BaptistGadfly, has written a very enlightning summary of modern "Hardshellism," especially in relation to Pastor Lasserre Bradley Jr. of Cincinnati, the "radio voice" of the Hardshells (aka Primitive Baptists) for many years. We are publishing a few of his opening paragraphs and the remainder can be read at BaptistGadfly. The modern Reformed "regeneration precedes faith" heresy is at the heart of Hardshellism, as it was in the case of Bradley when he left missionary Bapists for the anti-missionary Hardshell sect.

Also, you may view a video on Hardshellism which I made with Stephen Garrett, a former Hardshell preacher, at --http://video.yahoo.com/watch/5943967/15468873

Hardshell Liberal Movement
by Stephen Garrett

Since I began writing my book against those today who call themselves "Primitive Baptists" (see the link titled "Hardshellism" for chapters published in my ongoing book "The Hardshell Baptist Cult"), I have had several interactions with elders in the PB church. Some of the discussions have involved the "liberal movement," which began among the Hardshells in the 1990's, chiefly as a result of Elder Lasserre Bradley Jr., pastor of the Cincinnati Primitive Baptist Church.

Elder Bradley began his ministry as a young teenager among Sovereign Grace Baptists until the late 50's when he and his flock became converted to "Primitive Baptist" teachings and were re-baptized and reconstituted as a Hardshell Church. This event was heralded and applauded by the "Primitive Baptists" as a second Pentecost. Elder Bradley became an overnight sensation among the Hardshells and was the most popular preacher among them, travelling far and wide to hold meetings for them. His radio program, the Baptist Bible Hour, became a leading voice in promoting the denomination.

I know Elder Bradley personally. I have been in his home and have had several telephone conversations with him during the years when I preached for the PB's. I was invited by him to stand in for him at the Cincinnati church. When a young preacher, living in the Cincinnati area, in the mid 70's, I use to visit the Cincinnati church frequently.Elder Bradley and the Cincinnati church were instrumental in constituting my dad's church, which had also formerly been a Sovereign Grace Missionary Baptist church, into a Hardshell church in the mid 60's. They re-baptized my dad and his small church, after they united with the Cincinnati church, and then reconstituted them into a church.

What led Elder Bradley, and my father, and some other Sovereign Grace Missionary Baptists, to join the Hardshells was their coming to see that regeneration precedes [faith] in the new birth. This led them to believe that the gospel, and faith and repentance, were not means or accompaniments in regeneration, and were therefore not necessary for regeneration. They embraced the idea that regeneration was distinct from conversion, that the former was necessary for salvation, but the latter was not. They were also led to believe that this view was the view of the Baptists prior to 1832, the formal date when the Hardshells declared non-fellowship with Mission Baptists and became a distinct denomination.

This view also led Elder Bradley to take an unbiblical view of what constitutes the experience of regeneration and what it means to "persevere." He was given the Hardshell hermeneutic regarding passages which seem to teach the necessity of faith in Christ, and the means of the gospel, in order to be eternally saved. He was told that those passages which teach the necessity of faith in Christ for "salvation" did not relate to "eternal" salvation from sin and eternal hell, but to a "timely" salvation from errors, a topic I have addressed exhaustively in my book on the Hardshells.

After several years of preaching for the Hardshells, however, Elder Bradley seems to have become disillusioned with the Hardshells, just as I had in the early 80's. He began to swing back to his older views.

His turning back seems to have started when he organized a "preacher's school" at the Cincinnati church, at first designed for the benefit of young preachers, to help them counsel with their members on many social and spiritual issues. He at once began to be attacked by the hardliners, they accusing him of being "liberal" and departing from the faith and practice of PB's, who had stood against the practice of having anything akin to a seminary, Sunday School, or bible classes.

See here and here for more information by the hardliners against Elder Bradley.

READ THE REMAINDER OF THE ARTICLE AT
BAPTISTGADFLY

Galyon's Gregious Omission

2010-04-17T10:45:00.029-05:00

Galyon's Glaring Omission as to
the Heresy of Hyper-Calvinism

Our sometime nemesis, "the rev" James Galyon, has attempted to define for his readers what constitues "Hyper-Calvinism," to which he refers as "Heinous Error."

Yet Galyon himself is guilty of a gregiously heinous error on this matter.

As we have found to often be the case with "the rev," he omits information which would present a more complete representation of the subject under discussion. In the current instance, he lists 16 items which he alleges as characteristics of Hyper-Calvinism, but he does not bother to point out the fact that all Hyper-Calvinists hold to a theory on "Regeneration" which we prefer to categorize as HYBRID CALVINISM. Every Hybrid Calvinist may not agree to all of the 16 items mentioned by "the rev," but if there is a Hyper-Calvinist who does not hold to Hybrid Calvinism, I have failed to learn of him (or her).

We have pointed out that Hybrid Calvinism is a departure from Creedal Calvinism on Effectual Calling whereby the Hybrids separate the Word and Spirit in the work of regeneration, which is contrary to all the Calvinistic creeds.

Hybridism alleges that "regeneration" takes place without the use of the Gospel or Word of God as the instrumental means of the Holy Spirit in producing the New Birth. Supposedly, the elect get "born again before, apart from, and without faith" -- most of them even "born again" either in infancy or "possibly" before the physical birth.

R. C. Sproul, for example, says, "It is possible that God gave me new life within the womb, and over time I came into a deeper understanding of the faith He gave me." Likewise, John Frame alleges, "I hold the Reformed view that children in infancy, even before birth, can be regenerated and saved, presumably before they have any conscious doctrinal beliefs."

The heart of Hybrid Calvinism is what they prefer to call the "ordo salutis," and its evolution is traced by Dr. Shedd to Pedobaptist Francis Turretin. The "regeneration precedes faith" notion is therefore a post-reformation creation of the Pedobaptists.

W. G. T. Shedd, Dogmatic Theology, Volume 2, pages 492-494:
"The divines [Puritans] of the seventeenth century very generally do not distinguish between regeneration and conversion, but employ the two as synonyms. Owen does this continually: On the Spirit, III. v. And Charnocke likewise: Attributes, Practical Atheism. The Westminster does not use the term regeneration. In stead of it, it employs the term vocation, or effectual calling. This comprises the entire work of the Holy Spirit in the application of redemption. . . . But this wide use of the term regeneration led to confusion of ideas and views. As there are two distinct words in the language, regeneration and conversion, there are also two distinct notions denoted by them. Consequently, there arose gradually a stricter use of the term regeneration, and its discrimination from conversion.

Turretin (XV. iv. 13) defines two kinds of conversion, as the term was employed in his day. . . . After thus defining, Turretin remarks that the first kind of conversion is better denominated 'regeneration,' because it has reference to the new birth by which man is renewed in the image of his Maker; and the second kind of conversion is better denominated 'conversion,' because it includes the operation and agency of man himself. . . . We shall adopt this distinction between regeneration and conversion. . . . Regeneration is a cause; conversion is an effect."

Thus, Shedd admittedly is a disciple of the Turrentin phantasmagoria.

J. I. Packer likewise attributes this Hybrid theory to post-reformation pedobaptists:

"Many seventeenth century Reformed theologians equated regeneration with effectual calling and conversion with regeneration . . . LATER REFORMED THEOLOGY has defined regeneration more narrowly, as the implanting of the 'seed' from which faith and repentance spring (I John 3:9) in the course of effectual calling."

Louis Berkhof also acknowledged that the theory had post-Creedal development:

"It is true that some Reformed authors have occasionally used the term 'regeneration' as including even sanctification, but that was in the days when the ORDO SALUTIS was not as fully developed as it is today" (Systematic Theology, page 468).

These are well-known "Reformed" Pedobaptist sources, and they are revealing that the "ordo salutis" of modern Reformed theology, which puts "regeneration" prior to faith, is in fact a hybrid development which arose "later" than Calvin, Owen, Watson, Sibbes, and the seventeenth century divines (Puritans) who regarded regeneration and conversion as synonymous.

It should be significant for a Baptist to take note of the fact that many, if not most, of the current notable advocates of Hybrid Calvinism are from the Reformed Pedobaptist (baby baptizers) camp. And even those who are not Pedos generally have been significantly impacted in their thinking by the influence of Pedobaptists. Hybrid Calvinist advocates have never been especially noted for emphasis upon evangelism, soul-winning, and witnessing, but they have made reputations for themselves via their academic writings and "registration fee required" conference appearances.

As Phil Johnson, John MacArthur's associate, has said, "modern Calvinism is producing mostly students and polemicists, not evangelists and preachers." They conduct no evangelistic meetings and do not plant churches as a result of their lack of effort.

Furthermore, no less a Calvinist "reformer" than Iain Murray (a Pedobaptist Hybrid Calvinist) apparently recognizes the lack of evangelistic emphasis in the so-called "resurgence" of Calvinism in our time. In the Preface of his 1995 book, Spurgeon v. Hyper-Calvinism, Murray says:

In the 1960s it seemed to many of us that Spurgeon's continuing significance had to do with his witness to the free-grace convictions of the Reformers and Puritans over against the shallow and non-doctrinal evangelicalism of our day. Thirty years later that witness remains relevant and yet it is apparent that the recovery of doctrinal Christianity is not necessarily our chief need today. In many churches there has been a real increase in knowledge and a resurgence of Calvinistic belief has occurred across the world. The word 'forgotten' is happily far less applicable to Spurgeon than it was forty years ago. But it may well be that the time has come when we need to be MUCH MORE FAMILIAR with a rather different emphasis in Spurgeon. While I know of no evidence that Hyper-Calvinism is recovering strength, it would appear that THE PRIORITY WHICH SOUL-WINNING HAD IN SPURGEON'S MINISTRY IS NOT COMMONLY SEEN TO BE OUR PRIORITY.

The revival of DOCTRINE has scarcely been matched by a revival of EVANGELISM. While not accepting the tenets of Hyper-Calvinism it may well be that we have not been sufficiently alert to the danger of allowing a supposed consistency in doctrine to OVERRIDE THE BIBLICAL PRIORITY OF ZEAL FOR CHRIST AND SOULS OF MEN.

Doctrine without usefulness is no prize. As Spurgeon says, 'You may look down with contempt on some who do not know so much as you, and yet they may have twice your holiness and be doing more service to God.'

Spurgeon's Publishers: Passmore & Alabaster

2010-03-28T14:15:00.004-05:00

"Passmore & Alabaster" --
Original Publishers of
C. H. Spurgeon's Sermons and Works

Historian Terry Wolever, who is in association with Pastor Gary W. Long and their publishing work, Particular Baptist Press of Springfield, Missouri, sent me the following most interesting information about C. H. Spurgeon's publishers, Joseph Passmore and James Alabaster --

Bob, awhile back I had asked you if you knew when the two Spurgeon publishers, Passmore and Alabaster, were born. At the time neither of us knew. I have since pursued this further and with the help of a friend in England I can share more about the two.

JOSEPH PASSMORE, the senior partner in the firm, is stated in Boase, Modern English Biography, page 1376, to have been born in 1822. But according to the 1881 British Census, FHL film 1341147, Folio 57, page 12, which was taken on March 31st of that year, he more likely was born in 1823, as his age is shown to be 57. Boase goes on to say of Passmore that he was "a member of C.H. Spurgeon's church, actively assisted in building the Tabernacle institutions and in founding the Stockwell orphanage 1867; [he] suggested the weekly issue of Spurgeon's Sermons 1855 and continued printing it without intermission [for] 36 years; [he] printed and published the whole of Spurgeon's works 1855-1895." Passmore died at his residence in London on August 1, 1895.

JAMES ALABASTER, the junior partner, was born ca.1826 and died on November 19, 1892 (the same year as Spurgeon). His death was recorded in this notice in the Sword and Trowel:

"On Saturday, November 19, just as these 'Notes' were being printed, Mr James Alabaster was 'called home,' after being laid aside less than a week. His loss is most keenly felt by his family and partners in business, especially by the head of the firm, Mr. Joseph Passmore, with whom Mr. Alabaster had been in close personal friendship for nearly forty years. We have tried to picture the meeting [in heaven] between the beloved Pastor and his esteemed publisher; for, although Mr. Alabaster was a staunch adherent of the Church of England, he loved the same Lord whom Mr. Spurgeon served, and was an equally devout believer in the faith once for all delivered to the saints."

At the time of their deaths, Passmore would have been 71 and Alabaster about 66. As all of us who appreciate the writings of Spurgeon know, we owe a great deal under God to the diligence of these two men and their associates for preparing the extensive works of Sprugeon for publication. I hope Mike is doing much better. With kind regards, Terry Wolever

Bob's Note:

We are deeply grateful for this -- as well as for other information which Brother Wolever has provided for us over time. He has done a remarkable job with the historical works which have been reprinted by Particular Baptist Press, and I would urge my readers to take a look at these works and make them a part of your library.

Pilgrim Publications has made it our practice to always use original, unedited editions of Passmore & Alabaster productions when we have done a reprint of a Spurgeon book. -- Bob L. Ross

"The Internet Monk"

2010-03-14T15:09:00.010-05:00

Dim Health Report on Michael Spencer,
Known on the Web as "The Internet Monk"

I had not visited the blog of Michael Spencer, "The Interent Monk," for a long time, to the best of my recollection. Back when blogging was somewhat in its "heyday," Michael was one of the most notorious of the bloggers, especially noted for his rather brash style and verbiage.

However, what "stirred my feathers" about Michael was when he tried to implicate C. H. Spurgeon in his pot of cauldron against the use of public invitations. He wrote extensively against invitations, and I replied to his exorbitancies in a short series of emails to my list [I was not blogging at the time]. Michael alleged that public invitations had "corrupted evangelical Christianity." I replied to his exaggerations point-by-point, and he wrote me some emails, demanding that I cease my criticisms.

[On The Calvinist Flyswatter, I commented:
And, as if to salve over his past approval of invitations, he said that "nearly every evangelical Christian" he knows responded to an altar call at the outset of their faith journey. He went on to explain that he later "met the Calvinists" and he was "ruined." He mentions Iain Murray's anti-invitation booklet, and goes on to embellish the names of a few notable Pedobaptist theologians who teach the "pre-faith regeneration" theory. He arrived at the conclusion that invitations had "corrupted evangelical Christianity," and it appears that he may be trying to demonstrate the reality of that corruption by furnishing himself as Exhibit A.]

Michael's other obsession to which I ventured to take exception was his extreme antagonism against Joel Osteen, our neighbor here in this area. He seemed to be determined to mount a "holy crusade" of sorts against Joel, while Joel just kept minding his own affairs and paid no attention to Michael's boisterous deprecations. We defended Joel and this infuriated Michael even more.

He alleged more than once that I was a "man without honor" or "integrity," but paid no attention to our critiques of what he had written on invitations, his Hybrid Calvinism, and other issues.

For some reason, and as blogging declined, we gradually more or less lost interest in what the Monk was saying about anything. We devoted a few stabs at humor about the Monk on the Calvinist Flyswatter, and soon had little to no contact with his website.

Yesterday, I was going thru my "Favorites" list of links, deleting some dead links, and I came upon The Internet Monk's. I checked to see if it was still functioning, and in doing so I came upon the unexpected report of his declining health -- which you may consult at this link.

Michael is only 53, and we regret that this is his condition. Despite our strong differences, we would have desired for him a long and enjoyable time for years to come. We pray for him, his family, friends, and entrust him to the Providence of our Lord and His Will for his life.

"Reformed" -- not for Baptists

2010-02-27T17:31:00.007-06:00

Why Baptists Should Shun
the "Reformed" Label

Awhile back, a friend of mine who is a very keen and scholarly student of Baptist history sent me the following email about the word "Reformed" in its historical relation to Baptists:

Bro. Bob:
In my research over the years I have never found a historical reference where the term "Reformed Baptists" was used by missionary Calvinistic Baptists before the 1950s influence of the Banner of Truth men. It was, however, in the nineteenth century a term used to designate both the anti-missionary Primitive Baptists and the anti-missionary Campbellite movement, and as you know the latter was also anti-Calvinistic. The Campbellites were often referred to by Regular (Calvinistic) Baptists as "Reformers" and "Reformed Baptists."

I can cite a number of historical examples of this. Even "Reformed Baptist" Samuel Waldron, in his book, Baptist Roots in America, in order to find a historical use of the term "Reformed Baptists" had to cite a Primitive Baptist example. [Quoted in an email article I originally sent, "Reformed" in Baptist History, 05/26/04]

BOB'S COMMENT:

I certainly appreciate this information. Although I have in the past taught classes in a small theological school -- Texas College of Theology, Pasadena, Texas -- on Baptist History, I had never given this particular term much thought, and therefore had done no research on it whatsoever. I know this brother has done other work which demonstrates that he is one of the most diligent researchers on Baptist history, and I have the utmost confidence in his findings. If there is, however, any one who reads this who has found anything which conflicts with his findings, we would of course invite your sending that information. Inasmuch as some "Reformed Baptists" of our time have adopted some of the theories and practices of both the Campbellites and the Hardshells, we wonder just how far they may continue this drift.

I agree with the "Truly Reformed" who are known to scorn the idea that Baptists who hold to Calvinistic theology are properly designated as "Reformed." That term belongs to the Pedobaptists who (1) sprinkle babies for baptism according to their notion about the Abrahamic covenant, and (2) practice the presbyterian form of church government.

I am of the opinion that the term "Reformed" gained popular usage among some modern-day Baptists who were influenced in the latter 1900s by the Pedobaptists identified with the Banner of Truth publication company based in Great Britain. To really and truly be Reformed, according to that version of Christianity, it seems that a church not only must hold to the Hybrid form of Calvinism, must also hold to infant baptism and presybyterian church government to please the "TR" folk.

And wherever this has been attempted to be at least partially implemented by Baptists, it has ordinarily caused internal strife and even open division. Ernest Reisinger of the Founders tried to make a "reformed" church out of a Southern Baptist church in Florida, and the ultimate result was its demise.

I have also observed that when a church adopts the term "Reformed," it becomes necessary to explain "What is meant by 'Reformed?'" One church of my acquaintence at one time used the term in its church name, but decided to drop it because of having to do so much explaining.

Why would a Baptist church, which is professedly committed to a "regenerated church membership" standard, blemish itself by using the term "Reformed" which implies certain elements of the Pedobaptists which the Baptists do not believe and practice?

Baptists should leave the word "Reformed" where it came from -- the Pedobaptists.

Garrett Rebutts "Regeneration" Theory

2010-02-27T10:20:00.007-06:00

STEPHEN GARRETT COUNTERS THE
"PRE-FAITH" REGENERATION THEORY

On the BaptistGadfly blog, our longtime friend, Stephen Garrett, a former Primitive Baptist ("Hardshell") Pastor for several years, refers to some materials by James White and John Piper which relate to the modern "Reformed" theory on "pre-faith regeneration," or the idea that a person is "born again before, without, and apart from faith."

For the past four years on the Calvinist Flyswatter blog, we have exposed and refuted this theory, as has Brother Garrett on his blog. It is the very core doctrine of Hardshellism, and no one understands this better than an ex-Hardshell advocate such as Brother Garrett. [See one of my primary articles here. Also see here].

Here is an email I sent to Brother Garrett about his recent article:

Stephen,
That's a good article on White & Piper.
I've had a couple of calls from a Primitive Baptist pastor in Georgia, and I think he may have contacted you, too. He has become disenchanted, evidently, with the "pre-faith regenation" notion advocated by many in the "Reformed" camp.

In conversing with him, I referred him tp Dr. W. G. T. Shedd, Vol., 2, pages 492, 494, where Shedd virtually attributes the "Reformed" view on regeneration to Francis Turretin, and says, "We shall adopt this distinction" [made by Turretin] "between regeneration and conversion . . . Regeneration is the origination of life; conversion is the evolution and manifestation of life."

I wonder how many modern "Reformed" Calvinists know that they are advocating "Turretinism" in contrast to what Shedd admits -- namely that "the divines of the seventeenth century [Puritans] very generally DO NOT DISTINGUISH BETWEEN REGENERATION AND CONVERSION, but employ the two as SYNONYMS"? (Shedd, Vol. 2, page 492).

Shedd even cites John Owen, Stephen Charnock, and the Westminster Confession as being of the latter category -- that is, they did not advocate "Turretinism." Shedd alleges that their view "led to confusion of ideas and views" (Vol. 2, page 493), but the Turretin view "arose gradually" to become an accepted concept and, as Shedd admits, was adopted by Shedd himself (page 494).

Do you have Shedd to consult on this?

Bob L. Ross

Spurgeon and "WWJD"

2010-01-23T20:34:00.006-06:00

"What Would Jeus Do?" -- or,
"WWJD" in C. H. Spurgeon's Ministry

Many have no doubt wondered about the origin of the popular "WWJD" abbreviation or acronym. We have some information about it on our website, cited sometime ago by our good friend, Brother Emmett O'Donnell of the www.spurgeongems.org website.

Today, a lady in Beaumont, Mrs. Deborah Ennis, who has undertaken the task of reading thru the entire set of Spurgeon's sermons, has called this to our attention again. I thought that perhaps many of you are not aware of the fact that WWJD at least dates back as far as Spurgeon's sermon in 1880 [#1526, The Fair Portrait of a Saint, Volume 26, Year 1880, page 149).

Here is the excerpt from the sermon:

SPURGEON ON "WWJD"

A very beautiful motto is hung up in our infant classroom at the Stockwell Orphanage, “What would Jesus do?”

Not only may children take it as their guide, but all of us may do the same, whatever our age. “What would Jesus do?” If you desire to know what you ought to do under any circumstances, imagine Jesus to be in that position and then think, “What would Jesus do? for what Jesus would do, that ought I to do.”

In following Jesus we are following God, for in Christ Jesus the brightness of the Father’s Glory is best seen. Our example is our Lord and Master, Jesus the Son of God, and, therefore, this question is but a beam from our guiding Star. Ask in all cases—“What would Jesus do?”

That unties the knot of all moral difficulty in the most practical way and does it so simply that no great wit or wisdom will be needed. May God’s Holy Spirit help us to copy the line which Jesus has written, even as scholars imitate their writing master in each stroke and line and mark and dot.

Oh, when we come to die and have to look back upon our lives, it will be a blessed thing to have followed the Lord fully! They are happy who follow the Lamb wherever He goes. Blessed are they in life and death of whom it can be said—as He was, so were they, also, in this world. Though misunderstood and misrepresented, yet they were honest imitators of their Lord! Such a true-hearted Christian can say, “He knows the way that I take. He tried me and I came forth as gold. My foot has held fast to His steps.” You will avoid many a sorrow if you keep close at your Master’s heels.

You know what came of Peter’s following afar off — try what will come of close walking with Jesus. Abide in Him and let His Words abide in you, so shall you be His disciples. You dare not trust in your works and will not think of doing so, but you will bless God that, being saved by His Grace, you were enabled to bring forth the fruits of the Spirit by a close and exact following of the steps of your Lord.

Three things, then, we get in the first sentence—an exactness of obedience, a tenacity of grip upon that which is good and a promptness in endeavoring to keep in touch with God and to follow Him in all respects. May these things abound in us!

[Copied from the online sermon at
http://www.spurgeongems.org/vols25-27/chs1526.pdf

*****************************************
OTHER REFERENCES IN SPURGEON'S
SERMONS TO "WWJD"

After sending out the item on January 16, 2010 via email about C. H. Spurgeon's reference to "WWJD" -- What Would Jesus Do? -- I received an email from Bob Canaday which listed several other places in Spurgeon's sermons which referred to "WWJD."

Here is the list of sermons provided to me by Brother Canaday:

THE FAIR PORTRAIT OF A SAINT, Sermon 1526, MTP Volume 26, Page 149

EVERYDAY RELIGION, Sermon 1599, MTP Volume 27, Page 287

SUPPOSING HIM TO HAVE BEEN IN THE COMPANY, Sermon 1724, MTP Volume 29, Page 319

RECRUITS FOR KING JESUS, Sermon 1770, MTP Volume 30, Page 154

THE PRIVATE TUTOR, Sermon 1842, MTP Volume 31, Page 293

CHRIST PUT ON, Sermon 2132, MTP Volume 36, Page 123

THE AGREEMENT OF SALVATION BY GRACE WITH WALKING IN GOOD WORKS, Sermon 2210, MTP Volume 37, Page 347

WATCHING FOR CHRIST’S COMING, Sermon 2302, MTP Volume 39 , Page 162

THE PERPETUITY OF THE GOSPEL, Sermon 2636, MTP Volume 45, Page 401

“PEACE! PERFECT PEACE!”, Sermon 3175, MTP Volume 55, Page 602

Thanks, Brother Canaday, for this list. If there are other references that anyone has found, please let us know about them.

MORE CITATIONS:
Pastor Kerry J. Allen provides some other references:

Brethren,

There are at least four more references to WWJD that were missed:

"A heavenly pattern for our earthly life," sermon # 1778, MTP, volume 30, page 252.

"Love's transformations," sermon # 1871, MTP, volume 31, page 635.

An All Round Ministry, page 268.

The Gospel according to Matthew, comments on Matthew 12:46-50.

Best regards,
Kerry J. Allen

New Book of Spurgeon Sermons

2009-12-19T11:30:00.008-06:00

C. H. Spurgeon's Sermons Beyond the Final Volume of
Metropolitan Tabernacle Pulpit

By Doug Kutilek

From: "AS I SEE IT"
Volume 12, Number 12, December 2009

A Truly New Volume of Spurgeon’s Sermons

For 63 consecutive years, week by week, beginning in 1855 and terminating in mid-1917--25 years after Spurgeon’s death!--due only to severe paper shortages in England caused by the Great War, a sermon preached by Charles Haddon Spurgeon was published in London by Passmore and Alabaster.

These weekly sermons were collected into annual bound volumes, the first six called The New Park Street Pulpit, the rest, beginning in 1861, called The Metropolitan Tabernacle Pulpit. These 63 volumes constitute a not-quite exhaustive collection of sermons preached by Spurgeon, stenographically recorded, then edited by Spurgeon (or occasionally by one his close associates) in preparation for publication. [Reprinted by PILGRIM PUBLICATIONS, Pasadena, Texas 77501]

Happy--blessed--is the man who has such a set complete, and happier still if he frequently reads from its contents.

I am indeed a blessed man in both regards; I acquired my first volume of the Metropolitan Tabernacle Pulpit as a 21st birthday gift from my wife in 1973, and in the years since, have added a volume here, several there, until I finally in the last decade purchased the last missing volume or two. (My set is mostly Pilgrim reprints, with a handful or more of Banner of Truth editions, and even a few original Passmore and Alabaster volumes). Though very far from having read the entire set -- I know a couple of preachers who have -- I do read from it more frequently than from all other sermons in my library combined, and if you have read AISI for any amount of time, you have probably noted that I quote from Spurgeon more than any 3 or 4 other writers combined (twice in this issue alone).

When serial publication of Spurgeon’s sermons ceased in 1917, there remained a number of sermons in manuscript that had never been published in the NPSP / MTP series (though the floating reports of as many as 500 additional manuscript sermons seems based on a misunderstanding; most of these manuscripts are apparently of already published sermons), as well as a considerable number that had been published elsewhere, particularly in The Baptist Messenger, where a monthly message from Spurgeon appeared for several decades, but which never became a part of the NPSP / MTP series.

From the manuscripts of unpublished sermons, twenty were published in book form in 1922, in a little volume, Able to the Uttermost (reprinted by Pilgrim Publications in 1985 and still available from them). This was the only collection of new sermon material by Spurgeon published after 1917--all the “Twelve Sermons on XYZ” and other sermon books published in the many decades since were merely selections from the 63-volume set. But now, some truly new sermons that have never appeared in book form have been published. Day One Publications of Leominster, England has published this year C. H. Spurgeon’s Sermons beyond Volume 63: an authentic supplement to the Metropolitan Tabernacle Pulpit, which consists of 45 sermons originally published in The Baptist Messenger periodical, compiled therefrom by Terence Peter Crosby.

The hardback volume of 640 pages is similar to the original sermon set in size and format (it is a few millimeters shorter than my other volumes, but comparable in thickness), and with very readable type and layout on the page. I will be manually adding the relevant information to the complete index of Spurgeon’s published sermons produced by PILGRIM PUBLICATIONS, as I did with Able to the Uttermost when I got that volume some years ago.

The book may be obtained through Pilgrim Publications, PO Box 66, Pasadena, Texas, 77501; phone: (713) 477-4261.

If you thought your set of Spurgeon’s sermons was complete, be assured that you now must have this volume for it to be truly so.
---Doug Kutilek
----------

BOB'S NOTE: This unsolicited review by Brother Kutilek of the new volume of Spurgeon's sermons is an excellent description of the volume. We have already sold out of our original supply and have just this week received another shipment.

We have mentioned this book in a couple of pre-publication emails earlier this year, and we now have the book on hand to fill orders.

PRIICE: $43.00, which includes shipping.

Order by Phone: credit card order line 1-800-411-2061.

Order by Fax: 1-713-477-7561

Order by Email: pilgrimbpub@aol.com

Order by USPS Mail: Pilgrim Publications, P. O. Box 66, Pasadena, Texas 77501

Personal Library Books

2009-10-14T12:55:00.002-05:00

A SPECIAL NOTE ABOUT MY
PERSONAL LIBRARY BOOKS

I have recently been emailing lists of books and Bibles from my personal library which I am offering for sale. If the reader wishes to have those lists and continuing lists as they are mailed, send your email address to: pilgrimpub@aol.com

"Why are you selling your books?" has been asked.

I am 74 years old and do not anticipate the need for them in the future as in the past, and I would like the satisfaction of knowing that other younger people will perhaps profit from them. At this stage, most of my books are on the shelves simply catching dust.

These are not merely "culled out" books, but the very cream of the crop in my library. Several have already been sold and mailed, and we have been getting a steady response to the first few lists. But there are hundreds more yet to be listed and mailed. You may find something you can use. Also, if you want to give me a "want list," I could conceivably have what you are looking for.
-- Bob L. Ross

Burleson Continues Abuse of CHS

2009-10-02T12:06:00.008-05:00

BURLESON CONTINUES ABUSING
SPURGEON ON "DOWNGRADE CONTROVERSY"

In a follow-up criticism of C. H. Spurgeon, Wade Burleson continues to demonstrate either his ignorance or his prejudice in publishing the following false charge:

"Spurgeon sought a doctrinal statement for the Baptist Union that would be more precise in defining the doctrines of grace."

Readers who are interested in Spurgeon's own testimony about this may consult the original documents at the following:

The Downgrade Controversy at Phil Johnson's website. Also, an excellent analysis of the controversy by Dennis Swanson is available on the web at http://www.narnia3.com/articles/ETS%202001.pdf

In none of the major articles on the Down Grade did Spurgeon involve the matter of "Calvinism" on "the doctrines of grace," but he focused upon the core doctrines of the Bible, the basic fundamentals, which are shared by all theological systems which accept the inspiration and authority of the Scriptures.

Here are excerpts from Spurgeon which demonstrate the facts in contrast to Burleson's Burlesque:

The Sword and the Trowel, April 1887, pages 195, 196:

>We care far more for the central evangelical truths than we do for Calvinism as a system; but we believe that Calvinism has in it a conservative force which helps to hold men to the vital truth, and therefore we are sorry to see any quitting it who have once accepted it. Those who hold the eternal verities of salvation, and yet do not see all that we believe and embrace, are by no means the objects of our opposition: our warfare is with men who are giving up the atoning sacrifice, denying the inspiration of Holy Scripture, and casting slurs upon justification by faith. The present struggle is NOT A DEBATE upon the question of Calvinism or Arminianism, but of the truth of God versus the inventions of men. ALL WHO BELIEVE THE GOSPEL should unite against that "modern thought" which is its deadly enemy.<

The Sword and the Trowel, August 1887, pages 397-400:

>Read those newspapers which represent the Broad School of Dissent, and ask yourself, How much farther could they go? What doctrine remains to be abandoned? What other truth to be the object of contempt? A new religion has been initiated . . . The Atonement is scouted, the inspiration of Scripture is derided, the Holy Spirit is degraded into an influence, the punishment of sin is turned into fiction, and the resurrection into a myth, and yet these enemies of our faith expect us to call them brethren, and maintain a confederacy with them! . . . Too many ministers are toying with the deadly cobra of "another gospel," in the form of "modern thought" . . . The case is mournful. Certain ministers are making infidels. Avowed atheists are not a tenth as dangerous as those preachers who scatter doubt and stab at faith. . . . Germany was made unbelieving by her preachers, and England is following in her track. . . . We fear it is hopeless ever to form a society which can keep out men base enough to profess one thing and believe another; but it might be possible to make an informal alliance among all who hold the Christianity of their fathers.<

The Sword and the Trowel, December 1887, page 642:

>Certain antagonists have tried to represent the Down Grade controversy as a revival of the old feud between Calvinists and Arminians. IT IS NOTHING OF THE KIND. Many evangelical ARMINIANS are as earnestly ON OUR SIDE as men can be. We do not conceal our own Calvinism in the least; but this conflict is for truths which are common to all believers. This is no battle over words, but it deals with the eternal verities -- those foundation truths which belong not exclusively to this party or to that. It is of no use attempting to drag this red herring across our path: we can argue other points and maintain Christian harmony at the same time: but with those who treat the Bible as waste paper, and regard the death of Christ as no substitution, we have no desire for fellowship. We have come out in earnest protest, and feel great content of conscience in having done so.< The Sword and the Trowel, February 1888, page 82:

>I would like all Christendom to know that all I asked of the Union is that it be formed on a Scriptural basis; and that I never sought to intrude upon it any Calvinistic or other personal creed, but only that form of belief which has been accepted for many years by the Evangelical Alliance, which includes members of well-nigh ALL CHRISTIAN COMMUNITIES.< The Sword and the Trowel, October 1888, page 563:

>We are represented as wishing to force upon the churches a narrow CREED. Nothing was further from our mind. We do not consider that the demand for agreement to vital truths COMMON TO ALL Christians can be looked upon as a piece of sectarian bigotry. Here is a man [i. e., Spurgeon], who is himself a Calvinist, who does not ask that a Union should draw up a Calvinistic creed, but only begs for one which will let the whole world know that brethren are associated as Christians, and that those who do not agree to the first principles of our faith will be intruders. Is this narrowness?< color="#3366ff">Why does Wade Burleson attempt to discredit with his farrago about C. H. Spurgeon?

What is Burleson's hang-up? Does he think he can embellish his name by trashing Spurgeon on the Downgrade Controversy? Well, I have news for the Wade Burleson Burlesque Company:

Spurgeon's name will continue to shine long after Burleson's has faded into oblivion.

NOTE: Much misunderstanding and misrepresentation about Spurgeon and the Down Grade is probably the result of the Iain Murray's unfortunate inaccuracies about Spurgeon. You may read my refutation of Murray at this link:
http://calvinistflyswatter.blogspot.com/2006/03/bob-ross-spurgeon-misrepresented-by.html

Burleson's Latest Burlesque

2009-10-01T13:31:00.008-05:00

WADE BURLESON MAKES A LIAR
OUT OF C. H. SPURGEON

Pastor Wade Burleson, Enid, Oklahoma, has published a criticism of C. H. Spurgeon (1834-1892) which in effect alleges that Spurgeon was a liar with regard to The Downgrade Controversy in the latter years of his ministry. You can read the originsl documents related to this controversy at Phil Johnson's website at http://www.spurgeon.org/misc/dwngrd.htm
Spurgeon himself declared on the pages of his magazine, The Sword and the Trowel, that the issue was theological:

"Our warfare is with men who are giving up the atoning sacrifice, denying the inspiration of Holy Scripture, and casting slurs upon justification by faith. The present struggle is not a debate upon the question of Calvinism or Arminianism, but of the truth of God versus the inventions of men. All who believe the gospel should unite against that 'modern thought' which is its deadly enemy." (April, 1887, page 195).

Contrary to the word of Spurgeon, Wade Burleson alleges that The Downgrade Controversy was "not theological in nature." While Burleson claims he is a great admirer of Spurgeon, his recent criticism in effect makes Spurgeon a liar. Not only so, but Burleson goes even further and accuses Spurgeon of "unbiblical treatment" of pastors in the Baptist Union who did not share Spurgeon's concern.

Burleson says, "There is, however, one area in Spurgeon's ministry where I believe he made a grave mistake. . . . In my opinion, the controversy between the Baptist Union and Charles Haddon Spurgon was not theological in nature. The problem arose out of Spurgeon's unbiblical treatment of fellow pastors within the Baptist Union."

Burleson has managed to accomplish "making a name for himself" in recent years, as we have had occasion to mention on both The Calvinist Flyswatter and the Reformed Flyswatter (see Archives). Among other things, he has "played footsies" with several sources to demonstrate and call attention to the broadness of his affection for fellowship with those with whom he may have differences.

This recent fool-hardy criticism of Spurgeon just adds to the list of Burleson's peculiar mental and theological burlesque which he has found reason to frequently demonstrate on rather elaborate public stages.

This latest manifestation of his aberrancy about Spurgeon adds to the list of his other aberrant views, such as:

On Landmarkism

On Hybrid Calvinism

On Campbellism

On Tongues

And this is not to mention how he likes to cavort with the anti-inerrantist crowd and the Jimmy Carter-led movement, his obsession with being anti-Southwestern Baptist Seminary, and his obsession with the FBCJax Watchdog ordeal of a few months ago.

Spurgeon's Sermons on Internet

2009-08-20T13:23:00.006-05:00

YOU CAN NOW ACCESS 57 VOLUMES OF
C. H. SPURGEON'S SERMONS ONLINE!

The following report is from Brother Emmett O'Donnell who has for several years been committing C. H. Spurgeon's New Park Street Pulpit and Metropolitan Tabernacle Pulpit to the Internet. He has completed 57 volumes and has only Volumes 58-63 remaining.

August 19, 2009

Brother,

In God’s perfect timing, Volume 57 of Brother Spurgeon’s sermons is now on our site.

And, Lord willing, Brother Allan Roman, of Mexico City, will send me his 337th Spanish translation tomorrow.

Jesus Christ is the ONLY way to God the Father!
Not Mary. Not Moses. Not Mohammed.
JESUS CHRIST is the only way.
(John 14:6).

Brother Emmett O'Donnell
emmettod@ktc.com

Over 3,200 free C.H. Spurgeon sermons in today's language.
http://www.spurgeongems.org

“The Doctrine of Election is not one about which you need trouble yourself just now. Begin to read your Bible and the Gospel according to Matthew, and see there how you are bid to repent and invited to come to Christ. When you have done that, you can go on to the Epistles and read about Election and all the other Doctrines of Grace, but your first business is to repent of sin and to believe on the Lord Jesus Christ!—CHS—Volume 57, Sermon #3262
________________________

Bob's Note:

I am taking the liberty to inform you about the abnormal circumstances under which Brother Emmett does his work of putting Spurgeon's sermons on the Internet. I want you to appreciate the obvious dedication the Lord has given to Brother Emmett to do this work; I just believe you ought to know.

Also, it should be noted that he was neither solicited to do this work nor is he paid to do it; it is strictly a work the Lord laid on his heart to do, and he has never asked for any financial payment for doing it. His reward is the joy he receives from the many thousands of "hits" which his website receives.

Awhile back, I asked Brother O'Donnell to give me an account of his physical state, inasmuch as I knew him to be less than physically "normal" in the use of his bodily parts due to a past injury. Here is what he wrote:

April 18, 2009

Brother Bob,

On August 3, 1981, about seven years before the Lord saved me, He chastised me as I was attempting my second try at “body surfing” in Hawaii. He arranged for a wave to twist my neck so that I was totally paralyzed from my shoulders down. When I left the hospital (SW Memorial) in late February, 1982, I was considered by the medical profession to have “paraplegia” which means I had the partial loss of all my limbs. Many people think I had a stroke because my right side is severely paralyzed, but my right is not. I was 39 at the time — I’ll be 68 in November.

I improved to the point where I was walking with a cane—all in our Lord’s purpose. By 1996 numerous falls necessitated I walk with a walker which I use now in the house. If we go out, which is quite a bit, I use a power chair to get around. With equipment, I am able to drive—our last trip of over 6,500 miles was last summer.

The Lord is keeping me in line with helicopter rides (one) to TexSan Heart Hospital in late March. I have problems with my heart and a few other things. I seem to be OK, heart-wise, now — after about $20,000 for the ride and the care. But our Lord has provided.

I can still type using my right middle finger and three fingers on my left hand and its thumb, though you have no idea how many errors I made in this letter — the Lord provided Spell-check, so that is between Him and me.

Thank you for your kind comments.

Jesus Christ is the ONLY way to God the Father!
Not Mary. Not Moses. Not Mohammed.
JESUS CHRIST is the only way.
(John 14:6).

Brother Emmett O'Donnell
emmettod@ktc.com

****************************************

Permission is granted to copy and use this article.

Pilgrim Website: http://www.pilgrimpublications.com/homepage.htm
By request, names are added to my Email List, or removed.

We are Publishers of original C. H. Spurgeon's Sermons & Other Works.

Send your email and/or snail-mail address for a Price List.

Pilgrim Publications, Box 66, Pasadena, TX 77501

Phone: (713) 477-4261. Fax: (713) 477-7561

VIDEOS ON INTERNET:
"A Pilgrimage to Spurgeon Country"
See the actual scenes related to C. H. Spurgeon's life and ministry in England in the 1800s. This and other Pilgrim videos are now available for viewing on both --
YAHOO Video and GOOGLE Video.

Simply enter "Larry Wessels" in the Search box.

Other Internet Resources:

Selected Writings of Bob L. Ross http://writingsofbobross.tripod.com/1toc1.html

Blogs by Bob:

Calvinist Flyswatter -- http://calvinistflyswatter.blogspot.com/
Reformed Flyswatter -- http://reformedflyswatter.blogspot.com/

King James Only Resource Center: http://www.kjvonly.org/

Spurgeon Gems (Spurgeon's Sermons): http://www.spurgeongems.org/

Spurgeon Archive: http://www.gty.org/~phil/update.htm

"The Prince of Preachers Live!" http://www.charlesspurgeon.net/

Spurgeon sermons in SPANISH: http://www.spurgeon.com.mx/

Spurgeon's Devotionals: http://www.gospelweb.net/table1fcb.htm

CHS' Sermons on CD / Cassette: http://www.chspurgeon.com/

40TH Anniversary of Publishing

2009-07-02T14:50:00.007-05:00

40TH ANNIVERSARY OF
PILGRIM PUBLICATIONS'
PUBLISHING SPURGEON'S SERMONS

In 1955, at the age of 20, I traveled to Chicago with another young preacher who was in charge of a Mission where he preached periodically to a few families which wanted to start a church. It was my first time to be in Chicago, and while there we visited an old used bookstore named Blessing Book Store which had quite a large collection of old books. This store very definitely became a blessing to me! [See "Dreams Do Come True"]

While browsing around the multitude of old books, my eyes fell upon a shelf which had a large number of aging black volumes of considerable size. Upon closer examination, I discovered that the words "Metropolitan Tabernacle Pulpit" and "C. H. Spurgeon" were gold-stamped on the spines which also had an oval-shaped logo or symbol on the front cover, proclaiming "We preach Christ and Him crucified." It was a collection of original Spurgeon volumes, published in the 1800s by Passmore & Alabaster, London, England, during Spurgeon's ministry at Metropolitan Tabernacle.

I had, in God's Providence, become acquainted with the name of Spurgeon the first few days after I was converted in 1953, and I began to try to find some of his books. I found and read some of his sermons at a local Baptist university's library and also at the public library, But I had never seen anything like this huge set of original volumes of his sermons at that Chicago store in 1955, and I immediately was seized with the desire to possess those books.

I enquired of the book store manager about the price of the books, and made arrangements for their purchase.

Looking back at this decision to buy those books I would have to say the purchase was perhaps the most significant and life-influencing purchase I ever made. It seems that everything I have done from that day forward has had a direct or indirect relationship to the books. In fact, many others have had their lives influenced as a result of my buying and later publishing those books.

For example, recently an old friend, Al Smith, who now lives in Georgia, dropped by for a brief visit, and it was one of Spurgeon's sermon volumes we published years ago which brought Al into contact with Loretta, the lady he later married and with whom he raised a family. Al brought me a box of the famous Vidalia Onions, and I would not even have those onions if Al and I did not have a mutual interest in Spurgeon!

Most of my friendships which have developed across the years have been related to the books. Most of the ministers I have been privileged to meet, most of the schools and churches where I have spoken, and most of the traveling I have done resulted from something related to the books. The highlight of my travels was the trip I made with my friend, Boxley Boggs, to England in 1996 when we spent two weeks visiting every place which was known to have been associated with the life and ministry of Spurgeon. You can view the video of this trip to "Spurgeon Country" at this Google Video address -- http://video.google.com/videosearch?q=%22spurgeon+country%3A%22&hl=en&emb=0&aq=f#

Fast-forwarding . . . from 1955 when I purchased the books to 1969 . . . the announcement that Spurgeon's original and unabridged sermon set would be republished was mailed in 1969, dated May 5. It went to several thousand churches, preachers, and other individuals. We received a wonderful response from interested parties, but had they known how little money we had to bring this venture to pass, we might not have had any response whatsoever. We had just enough money to cover the printing of the first volume, and we were counting on advance subcription-type orders to continue republication of future volumes. It took us longer than we expected, but the plan worked.

In July of 1969, we took a booth at the Christian Booksellers Association's annual Convention, meeting that year in Cincinnati, Ohio. The first volume was put on display and we were blessed to have several dozen bookstores sign up for buying the books as they were published.

The Lord blessed, and we were enabled to finish off the entire series in 1980. He has continued to bless the effort through these 40 years.

We wish to thank each of you who has in any way assisted and encouraged the work of publishing Spurgeon's sermons. May the Lord Bless You! Numbers 6:24-26.

-- Bob L. Ross

June 19, 1834 Birthdays

2009-06-19T12:00:00.015-05:00

I was doing some browsing on the web for "June 19, 1834," to see who was born on that date. So far as I found, the foremost person in history born on this day seems to have been Charles Haddon Spurgeon (1834-1892).

Had Spurgeon not been born on this date, it seems this date would have "gone begging" for any significant birth, especially in Christian History.

Spurgeon is the only name mentioned on the Christian History web site, born on this date.

CHS is also the only name on the Encyclopedia Britannica web site.

Selected quotations from people born on this date are exclusively from Spurgeon:

http://thinkexist.com/quotes/top/born-on-year/1834/born-on-day/june_19/

http://www.brainyquote.com/quotes/authors/c/charles_spurgeon.html

In the Providence of God, it seems that this day in history as a birthdate of highly significant persons belongs to Spurgeon.

A small group of us are getting together in Pasadena today to remember the birthday of Spurgeon. All of our lives have been so impacted by the influence of Spurgeon that we have no idea where or what we would have been had we not come into contact with his Christ-exalting sermons and other works. We give thanks to the Lord for this birth which was 175 years ago and what the child born on that day has meant to us with respect to our faith in Christ and understanding the teachings of the Word of God.

He was born in the humble village of Kelvedon, Essex, England, several miles northeast of London. He would eventually be converted in 1850 in the city of Colchester a little further eastward, then soon thereafter be baptized on May 3 in the River Lark near Isleham, preach his first sermon at age 16 in a cottage at Teversham, pastor his first church in the village of Waterbeach in 1851, and be called in 1854 to pastor the church known as the New Park Street Chapel (later, Metropolitan Tabernacle) in London, a pastorate which lasted till his death in 1892. See the Biography page at this web site: http://www.pilgrimpublications.com/homepage.htm

Today, in this age of advanced technology in communications, Spurgeon's sermons and works are known worldwide and easily accessible on the Internet and in other forms. As D. L. Moody said of Spurgeon at a meeting at Spurgeon's church at a Jubilee Service on June 18, 1884:

"You are never going to die. John Wesley lives more today than when he was in the flesh; Whitefield lives more today than when he was on this earth; John Knox lives more today than at any other period of his life; and Martin Luther, who has been gone over 400 years, still lives. Bear in mind, friends, that our dear brother is to live for ever. We may never meet together again in the flesh, but by the blessing of God I will meet you up yonder" (Memorial Volume, Mr. Spurgeon's Jubilee, page 9).

"Ask not . . . "

2009-06-15T10:37:00.004-05:00

Do You Suppose JFK's Speech-Writer Ever Read C. H. Spurgeon?

Metropolitan Tabernacle Pulpit, Volume 51, Year 1905, pages 246, 247:

I once heard a minister speak very grumblingly of the Baptist denomination. He said, “I do not know what the denomination ever did for me.”

I could not help thinking to myself, “Well now, that is a question which has never occurred to me and probably never will. The question that has occurred to me is, What can I do for the denomination?’”

And I think that is the kind of question which every Christian minister ought to ask, not only concerning the denomination, but concerning Christians in general. We ought not to ask, “What can these people do for me?” No, put the shoe on the other foot and say, “What can I do for these people?”

If you want to love a man, you must not get him to do you a kindness, but you must do a kindness to him and then you will love him. You cannot do good to another person without finding growing up in your heart some degree of interest in the person to whom you have done that good. It is possible that a child may forget its mother, forget that it drew its life, its nourishment and all the comforts of its infancy from its mother, but the mother does not forget that she reared it in its weakness and brought it up to strength.

If you want to love a person, do some loving thing for that person and love will spring up in your soul to that person. Our Lord Jesus Christ loved His disciples unselfishly—let us do the same.

Entire sermon is at http://www.spurgeongems.org/vols49-51/chs2936.pdf

Spurgeon makes Reader's Digest

2009-06-02T21:34:00.003-05:00

"They never said that" --
Spurgeon said it.

Pastor Lennie Wilson of Rosedale Baptist Church, Beaumont, Texas, called my attention to an item in the June 2009 Reader's Digest, pages 158, 159.

In the article entitled, "They Never Said That," we find the following;

Just as an exercise, go to your computer's search engine and type in four words: lie, truth, boots, and world. You will get thousands of references to variations of the following quote: "A lie can travel halfway around the world before the truth can get its boots on."

Most will cite Mark Twain as the author of the aphorism. Al Gore has given Twain credit for it. So has Mississippi governor Haley Barbour.

But Twain didn't say it. Charles Haddon Spurgeon did, in 1855, and he attributed the wisdom to "an old proverb." Spurgeon was a mid-19th-century British pastor, as famous in his time as Rick Warren and Billy Graham are today in the United States. But that's the thing about fame: It can be fleeting. -- Carl M. Cannon.

While we appreciate Mr. Cannon's information about the quotation, his comment about fame might come in for some question in regard to Spurgeon's fame. If you enter Spurgeon's name in any form on your web search engine or on the image search, you will find that Spurgeon is still rather famous. There are thousands of links to Spurgeon, and there are many websites which feature his sermons and other writings.

"Tom come lately"?

2009-05-25T11:37:00.004-05:00

Ascol's Critique of SBC's
Cooperative Program Not New

Tom Ascol, director of the "Founders Ministries," has of late been reversing his scope of focus by at least writing favorably about "church planting" and the "Great Commission Resurgence" proposed by Dr. Daniel Akin of Southeastern Baptist Theological Seminary and more recently puffed by Dr. Johnny Hunt, President of the Southern Baptist Convention. Up till more recent times, Ascol's and the Founders' "purpose" has been theological "reform," seeking to make Hybrid Calvinists out of alleged Arminian Southern Baptist pastors and churches.

In Ascol's latest post, the successor of Ernest Reisinger, Founder of the Founders, says the following about the Cooperative Program of the Southern Baptist Convention:

The IMB announcement that financial shortfalls are forcing a reduction in the number of missionaries that we will send to hard places this year highlights the timeliness of the GCR call. I first wrote about this in December 2008, noting that it is time for Southern Baptists to get serious about the allocation of Cooperative Program dollars. Three years prior to that, I showed how money given through state conventions to the Cooperative Program (CP) actually is allocated. The little-known fact is that most CP dollars are used by the state conventions through which they are given. Less that 40% actually reaches Nashville and less than 20% gets to the IMB.
Now the trustees of the IMB are forced to announce (through tears, according to the BP report) that there is not enough money to appoint all of those who are willing, equipped and ready to be sent by their churches. Can we sit back and let this happen? Isn't it past time for Southern Baptists to reevaluate the structures of our convention organization and see how we can improve our financial stewardship?

Yes, Tom, it is "past time." But this is nothing new. You have not made a major discovery of some sort. It has been "time" for years now.

Ascol -- and any others -- who have begun recently to critically evaluate the SBC program are "Johnny-come-latelies," so far as some are concerned. At least a few of us are still around from the 1950s and 1960s who complained about the deficiencies of the Cooperative Program long before the Founders Ministries was born.

For instance, back in the early 1960s, I put together and published a collection of SBC news items and other materials entitled, The Southern Baptist Convention and the Cooperative Program, which documented numerous deficiencies in "The Program." To do this, one merits being branded, "An uncooperating Baptist."

Among other things, there was a photographically-reproduced letter from the Foreign Mission Board of the SBC, headed by Baker J. Cauthen. This letter, dated September 14, 1959, revealed that the "active" or "locatable" SBC membership at that time (9,206,756) gave an average of less than $1.00 per Sunday to "all causes" of which only 15.5 cents per Sunday was for "all missionary causes" -- thru the Cooperative Program.

But more startling was the fact that barely over 3 cents per Sunday ($1.67 average per member, yearly) went to "foreign missions," according to the letter, signed by Eugene Hill.

And what was the prevailing attitude of Southern Baptist leaders and pastors at that time to such depressing stats? They persisted in declaring that the "The Program" was both "scriptural and reasonable" (E. S. James, The Baptist Standard, Sept. 26, 1952). The Alabama Baptist state paper alleged, "Any criticism of the Cooperative Program must stem from jealousy or a spirit of individualism" (Nov. 1, 1962). A tract written by Albert McClellan and published by the SBC pronounced the Cooperative Program to be "the Holy Spirit's way of doing missions."

Chances are, SBC ministers such as Ascol, Johnny Hunt, and Wade Burleson will never really get around to making any serious changes to the Cooperative Program. They will probably "line up" with what the Baptist Standard once said: "The Cooperative Program has made us what we are, and the Cooperative Program will carry us onward, if we stay with it," and with what the Mississippi Baptist Record said, "Were it not for our Cooperative Program our whole misson program would collapse."

An inerrant gospel?

2009-05-20T10:02:00.004-05:00

No Inerrant Scriptures,
No Inerrant Gospel

"The world is on fire and we are putting it out with the gasoline of inerrancy. It's time we focused on dousing the fire with the water of the gospel," according to Pastor Wade Burleson in his May 20, 2009 blog.

Brother Wade seems to be smitten with finding fault with those in the Southern Baptist Convention with whom he disagrees. Now he is harping against those who apparently are viewed by Wade as allegedly being close to "making an idol of the Bible" like unto the Muslims' attitude toward their Koran. Be that as it may [whoever these strange "inerrantists" are], Wade's nit-picking leaves us with a very serious dilemma.

While Wade says we need to be "focused on dousing the fire with the water of the gospel," the fact is, the gospel which is the power of God unto salvation and is capable of dousing the fire is derived from the Bible -- not from sources who downgrade the inerrancy of the Scriptures. Modernists, Liberals, Neo-orthodoxists, and their kind never contributed very much -- if anything -- to the Gospel and its accomplishments such as we find in the case of the inerrantists -- men such as Spurgeon, D. L. Moody, George Whitefield, and other notable men of Christian history.

The question is, if the SOURCE of the Gospel is not inerrant, on what basis may we accept what is affirmed about the Gospel in that source?

Wade's idea reminds me of those who claim they accept Jesus, but they do not accept the views which maintain His virgin birth, deity, substitutionary death, and resurrection.

The Gospel is rooted in the Scriptures, and if the Scriptures are not inerrant, on what basis can we have confidence that the Gospel is everything the Scriptures affirm of the Gospel?

Wade's World

2009-05-11T19:17:00.005-05:00

Did Wade Have "One Too Many"
When He wrote "Hardball Religion?"

Pastor Wade Burleson has a blog item which is critical of Peter Lumpkins' book on the matter of "total abstinence." Peter is for it, and Wade does not approve of Peter's view.

I'm not focusing on this difference between Wade and Peter, but what I found in Wade's article which aroused my curiosity was his statement, "I would much rather be personally led by the Spirit than by a man who claims his view is law for me."

I assume this means that Wade is "led by the Spirit," but Peter is a legalist -- at least, on this particular issue.

After reading Wade's "Hardball" book, I wonder if Wade may have had "one too many" when he put that book together. Surely, Wade does not appear to have been "led by the Spirit" when he tried to manipulate my book on Landmarkism so as to imply that the book supported his twisted presentation. If not dizzy on liquor, Wade was certainly inebriated on something when he tried to pull-off that sleight-of-hand act.

Was Wade "led by the Spirit" when he used a familiar Campbellite device, subterfuge, in his misuse of my book on Landmarkism?

Was Wade "led by the Spirit" when he falsely accused the Campbellite "Church of Christ" in regard to the administrator of baptism? See here.

Was Wade "led by the Spirit" when he said I was "not a Southern Baptist" and then later said that I was a Southern Baptist? Which time was he led by the Spirit?

Was he "led by the Spirit" when he adopted the "born again before faith" Hybrid Calvinist heresy of the Reformed Pedobaptists (baby baptizers)?

Was he "led by the Spirit" when he adopted a One Man Landmaker position by aligning himself with a certain view on the administrator of baptism?

Was he "led by the Spirit" when he wrote a book concerning which the Publisher, Smyth & Helwys, deemed it necessary to attach a "Disclaimer" to what Wade wrote?

Was he "led by the Spirit" when he endorsed the IMB policy on "public" tongues, but rejected the IMB policy on "private" tongues? How can Wade consistently endorse the policy of forbidding "publicly speaking in tongues" but defend "tongues in private"? If Paul's "command" -- forbid not to speak with tongues in 1 Cor. 14:39 - relates to "private" tongues, why not to "public" tongues, also? See here.

Was Wade "led by the Spirit" when he presented an erroneous version of Baptist history? See here.

Perhaps Wade did have one -- or maybe, two -- too many when he was compiling his book, for surely he can't blame the Spirit for these blunders.

Spurgeon sermons on the web

2009-04-18T10:29:00.003-05:00

55 Volumes of Spurgeon's Sermons
Now on the Internet

Forty years ago (1969), we launched the reprinting of C. H. Spurgeon's 63 volume set of New Park Street and Metropolitan Tabernacle Pulpit, Years 1855-1917, a total of 3,563 sermons.

Several years ago, with the introduction of the Internet, Brother Emmett O'Donnell rather quietly and without any fanfare, began the unpaid task of putting the entire set of sermons on the web. Emmett's hand has been on the plough ever since, and he has just reported that he has completed 55 volumes of the set -- a tremendous feat for one who is relatively immobile due to physical injuries received years ago.

When we launched the reprinting of the books in 1969, we never dreamed of the origin of the Internet and that one day the Lord would put it into the mind and heart of someone to put the sermons on the web, and so we stand in awe of how the Lord has used and continues to use his servant, Brother Emmett O'Donnell.

Not only the sermons in English, but Brother Emmett also is responsible for the Spanish sermons being put on the web, as translated in Mexico City by Brother Allan Roman (see earlier post).

Here is Emmett's latest report:

April 18, 2009

Dear Ones,

Rejoice with me that our Lord continues to use me to work on the Spurgeon sermons. By His Grace there are now 55 complete volumes on our site. I covet your prayers that He would keep me faithful to this work.

Jesus Christ is the ONLY way to God the Father!
Not Mary. Not Moses. Not Mohammed.
JESUS CHRIST is the only way.
(John 14:6).

Brother Emmett O'Donnell
emmettod@ktc.com

Over 3,000 free C.H. Spurgeon sermons in today's language.
http://www.spurgeongems.org/

6th anniversary of translating Spurgeon

2009-04-10T09:45:00.008-05:00

Spanish Translation of Spurgeon's
Sermons Started Six Years Ago
in Mexico City

The following is from Allan Roman, Spanish translator in Mexico City, via Emmett O'Donnell here in Texas, who is putting Spurgeon's sermons on the web at http://www.spurgeongems.org/

April 10, 2009

Well, Brother Emmett,

Six years ago today Brother Bob Ross announced the "birth" of your site on the world wide web.

I have been praying that our Father would draw hundreds of millions of Spanish-speaking Roman Catholics to our Master through your site. However many He has drawn, I thank Him and praise Him for using you so wonderfully. -- Allan

[Original announcement of April 10, 2003 by Bob L. Ross:]

SPURGEON'S SERMONS NOW BEING
TRANSLATED INTO SPANISH AND ALSO
PUT ON THE INTERNET [04/10/03]

In November of 2000, we were blessed by a visit by Brother Allan Roman of Mexico City. We had a great time of fellowship together. Allan is a great admirer of the sermons by C. H. Spurgeon, and he is now engaged in the early work of translating into the Spanish language the first few of what is hoped to be hundreds, if not thousands, of these great sermons.

In June of 2002, Allan visited us again, this time accompanied by his co-worker, Bro. Thomas Montgomery. Another great time of fellowship and discussion about the work in Mexico was enjoyed. These two brethren are working together on behalf of the Gospel of Christ in Mexico, translating, publishing, and doing other things to spread the Word of God. We bid them Godspeed!

The first sermons by Spurgeon to be translated will be those 35 sermons which we published a couple of years ago in a book called THE GOSPEL ACCORDING TO C. H. SPURGEON, a project to which Brother Roman made a substantial contribution. Many of you on my list also made donations for this project.

Now in Mexico City, the same Spanish sermons will first be published in individual booklets as the translating work progresses, then when all 35 are finished they will be put into a complete bound book. What a great work, to have these 35 sermons in Spanish!

Here is a message Allan recently sent to us, and as you can see these sermons are now being put on the internet:

>> ALLAN ROMAN writes:

Dear Brother, we are progressing consistently concerning the translations. Six sermons have been translated into Spanish. We are in the process of having a website with the sermons to be incorporated as we translate them. We will start with the six presently available.

The website address is: http://www.spurgeon.com.mx/

It is under construction, but you can visit it now to see how it will look. Your comments will be most welcomed.

I have a new e-mail address just for the purpose of related questions to the sermons.

The address is:
allan-roman@spurgeon.com.mx
Feel free to use it any time.

Once in place, I will ask you to help us let people know, probably through your own site, that the sermons are available in Spanish. Also, I am ready for the next order of Sermons.

God Bless You,
Allan
>>

The foregoing was communicated to us by --

Brother Emmett O'Donnell
emmettod@ktc.com
Over 3,000 free C.H. Spurgeon sermons in today's language.
http://www.spurgeongems.org

BOB'S NOTE: We donate monthly to the translating work being done by Brother Roman. If you wish to contribute, please contact Brother Montgomery at this email:

ThomasMontgomery@compuserve.com

Akin on "Ordo Salutis"

2009-04-06T10:19:00.006-05:00

DR. DANNY AKIN, PRESIDENT OF
SEBTS, ON THE "ORDO SALUTIS"

By Stephen Garrett on BaptistGadfly

Dr. Danny Akin, according to Tom Ascol of the Founders organization, see here, will be guest speaker at the annual Founders breakfast this June in Louisville. I have a suggestion for Dr. Akin and Dr. Ascol. Why not have Dr. Akin talk about how conversion and regeneration are virtually the same, how they are concurrent, and how, if logical priority is to be given to one, it must be to conversion, not to regeneration?

Here is what Dr. Akin has published in his book, A Theology for the Church, on the subject:

"However, the Holy Spirit uses means, and the instruments he employs to achieve regeneration are the gospel (James 1: 18, 21; I Pet. 1: 23) and the messengers who share it (I Cor. 4: 15). If the gospel is not available, the saving, regenerating work of the Holy Spirit is also absent. This disturbing truth gives urgency to the missionary mandate of the Great Commission."

For the rest of this article, go to BaptistGadfly.

Also, see the article which was posted on The Calvinist Flyswatter awhile back:

SBC Seminary President Apparently Denies Hybrid Calvinist Heresy

Burleson's bombastic book

2009-04-03T19:48:00.008-05:00

A Critique of Wade Burleson's Book,
"HARDBALL RELIGION"

It is difficult to find fault with near perfection, yet that is almost the task one faces when confronted with writing a critique of Pastor Wade Burleson's book, Hardball Religion -- that is, if we simply take Wade's word in regard to what he has written. He covers the period of 07/2005--01/2008, giving his one-sided view of his controversial term on the Southern Baptist Convention's International Mission Board.

Despite Wade's high regard for the integrity of what he has written, the publisher, Smith & Helwys, has a very small-typeface "Disclaimer" on the copyright page, stating the publisher takes no responsibility for the "accuracy" of the contents. Evidently, Wade was not all that persuasive with the publisher.

On the whole, I suppose that if one presumes to find a primary fault with this book it probably is the fact that the book is autobiographical in essence, composed by and about one who is depicted as being the only really good egg in the crow's nest. The other eggs are rotten, half-rotten, or nearly so, and the nest smells of a foul odor. Wade is, as it were, "Batman," pitted up against the Joker, the Penguin, the Riddler, Catwoman, and a bevy of unscrupulous associates which plague Gotham City.

Wade reminds me of what I once heard a fellow tell about a visit he made to a mental institution to see one of his former college classmates who was a patient. When the visitor asked his former classmate why people were in the institution, the man said, "They are all crazy . . . and you are crazy, too. I'm the only sane person in this place!"

We don't generally meet with auto-bios which are characterized so prominently by the "I'm the only sane person in this nuthouse" theme, but that's about what you get in Wade's book. He is so pristine that his chronicles of woe become repetitive and boring. You quickly sense in advance just how each episode is going to go. The overall story line is that the IMB is an institution of nutball "Landmark Fundies" run by the inmates -- with the exception of the "courteous" and "gracious" Okie from Enid.

I did not read far until I was assured by Wade that the book and his behavior in his short career on the Southern Baptist Convention's International Mission Board are the epitome of something near perfection -- Wade himself being the ever "gracious" and "courteous" notary who verifies this fact. He often reminds the reader of how he is the ever "gracious" and "courteous" one.

"Everything I wrote is truth," he says, and he "would not change one thing" which he did when on the IMB. If all was so prim, proper, and perfect, one might ask, "Then why did Wade run into so much trouble?"

Well, "it's in the book."

Wade spills the beans about all the hirelings, liars, and Mafia types whom he "graciously" and "courteously" categorizes as "Baptist Fundamentalists" who endeavor to "force uniformity" by "strong-arm tactics" to perpetrate their "stupid decisions" and "Fundamentalist interpretations."

Translation: The IMB trustees responded unfavorably to Wade's objections to a couple of requirements for missionary candidates in regard to Baptism and "Private Prayer Language."

Consequently, there was a 2-year+ battle between Mr. IMB Good Guy and the IMB Bad Guys. Sorta like a Clint Eastwood movie. One is made to wonder, "What's a nice guy like Wade doing in a place like the International Mission Board?"

"Fundamentalists" . . . Again?

If you have already met the "Fundamentalists," Wade will re-introduce them to you.

It seems that Wade's primary device for denigrating the IMB Bad Guys is to peg them as "Fundamentalists," always a sure-fire denigrating term to plaster the enemy. Anything negative which needs a little reinforcement, Wade nails it down by using the word "Fundamentalist" of those with whom he is at war --"Fundamentalist trustees," "sycophant trustees," "Fundamentalist fury," "Fundamentalist Landmarkers," etc.

But he assures us that he did it "courteously" and "graciously" in every instance. No breach of etiquette on Wade's part.

The only book I have seen in recent years to compare with Wade's is the late millionaire John Baugh's corker, The Battle for Baptist Integrity, probably put together by the late psychologist Herbert Reynolds, former president of Baylor and Baugh's adviser on how to spend Baugh's money. But Baugh and Reynolds made no pretense of either graciousness or courteousness. Talk about the Fundamentalists! Baugh and Reynolds put them on an equality with the Nazis! These two crusaders against the "politics of inerrancy," made very extensive use of the term Fundamentalist to excoriate and discredit any Baptist who believes the Bible is the Holy Spirit-inspired, inerrant Word of God.

These two men were the primary architects of the "Texas Baptists Committed" Anti-inerrancy clique in the Baptist General Convention of Texas which allegedly was formed to "save the BGCT from Fundamentalism." This elite clique was responsible for fomenting such antagonistic divisiveness among Baptists in Texas that there was an eventual "split" between the Inerrantists (who formed the Southern Baptists of Texas Convention) and the Anti-Inerrantists (those who controlled the Baptist General Convention of Texas). The TBC clique also found all their enemies to be appropriately labeled, "Fundamentalist Schizophrenics," much like the alleged persona of those with whom Wade served at IMB.

If you like tall tales about behind-closed-doors religious "crimes" written from an anti-Fundamentalist perspective, you will relish reading Wade's book. Even if it's fiction, it is the second-best anti-SBC book to the Baugh-Reynolds screamer.

Hybrid Calvinism

There is one thing about Burleson which, in my opinion, disqualified him even serving on the IMB, more so than even his antics about the alleged "Landmarkism" of the IMB baptism policy. Burleson is an adherent of the Pedobaptist Reformed Hybrid Calvinist theology which teaches that one is "born again before faith." That is not very good missionary doctrine!

My colleague on the Reformed Flyswatter, Ian Elsasser, called attention to this on The Calvinist Flyswatter blog just a few weeks ago (February 5, 2009). Notice --

Ian: Mr. Burleson seems to affirm the "born again before faith" view, common to many modern "Calvinists" (See "Please Don't Call Me a Calvinist, But..." --
Regeneration, the new birth and quickening are all synonyms for this heart surgery God performs. Before a man will ever repent of his sin and believe on the Lord Jesus Christ, he must be born again. This miraculous act of God, called "the new birth," is a work that He chooses to perform, and it is without conditions.

We have exposed this heresy in particular on The Calvinist Flyswatter for the past three years (2006-2009). Burleson is infected with this heresy.

Southern Baptists are not benefited by such a Hybrid Calvinist serving on the mission board. In my opinion, he should have been given his walking papers on account of his "born again before faith" heresy long ago.

"Landmarkism"

Wade twice approvingly presents a letter from David Rogers, in which Rogers says:

I am not saying that those who approved the new policy change on baptism are necessarily sympathetic on the whole towards Landmarkism. However, I do recognize the policy as reflective of at least one “plank” of Landmarkist argumentation, and a “plank” for which I believe there is no biblical basis. And, it concerns me that we, as a denomination, may be making steps in that direction. (pages 58, 252).

Unfortunately, Wade fails to demonstrate from any source -- including my own book -- that the IMB policy on baptism involves even the "one plank" which is alleged to be "Landmarkist." Wade does not show how the IMB policy corresponds to any statement or source which presents Landmark doctrine. Requiring that your missionary candidates have baptism which is characterized by the attributes specified in the Baptist Faith & Message Article VII does not rise to the level of Landmarkism.

Wade mentions the names of several well-known Baptist leaders whom he accuses of holding Landmark views, and immediately quotes from my book. This seems to imply that my book supports his allegation.

I find the following on page 48 of Wade's book misleading. It might appear to some readers (at least) that I am writing with respect to the persons named and/or their views:

Wade says:

"Many of our SBC’s influential trustee and administrative leaders (e.g., Paige Patterson, John Floyd, Keith Eitel, Bill Sutton, Malcolm Yarnell) over the past few years have had strong Landmark tendencies. Bob Ross gives an excellent overview:

(Ross' quote begins:) "According to Landmarkers," (etc.)

I am rather disappointed in the arrangement of Wade's presentation of my comments.

Does his presentation imply that Ross is writing an "overview" specifically referring to these men as "Landmarkers" and that the "overview" is referring to their views? Is this what Wade intended? If so, he is wrong.

I am not going to accuse Wade of associating these men directly with my comments as if I was referring to them, but I will say that Wade's
reference to these men is a very poor and possibly misleading intro to the quotation which Wade gives from my book.

I have found this "device" (if it may be classified as such) is practiced by some crafty writers who (1) make a statement, then (2) immediately associate it to a quotation from a source -- which at least implies that the source which is quoted has to do with what the person has just previously stated.

I hope these Southern Baptist gentlemen will not think that my remarks were in regard to their views. In the first place, my comments were made in printed materials originally written in 1963, before I even knew these men existed.

Secondly, I am not at all sufficiently familiar with the ecclesiastical views of any one of these men so as to comment on his views.

Therefore, for anyone to assume or conclude that Bob Ross was writing an "overview" of these men considered as "Landmarkers" is completely erroneous. Wade might as well have used my material in relation to the "man in the moon" as to these Southern Baptists.

WHAT IS "LANDMARKISM"?

Peter Lumpkins has observed:

"The only source cited for Landmark views in Wade's new book Hardball Religion is guess who? A man named Bob Ross. Do you know him? Not one mention, not one essay, not one writer except Bob Ross. Bob Ross is there but no other authority on Landmark is mentioned."

Inasmuch as I deny that my book agrees with what I understand to be Wade Burleson's concept of "Landmarkism," and inasmuch as I deny that my book alleges that the policy of the IMB is "Landmarkist," it seems that Wade Burleson is "up the creek without a paddle," doesn't it?

My book makes the effort to define from reputable Landmark sources what really constitutes Landmarkism, and it was written years before the IMB set forth its policy on baptism. There is no way whatsoever that Wade Burleson can rely on my book to support his arbitrary allegation that the IMB policy is "Landmarkist."

I will be happy to defend the book any time, any place, in Public Debate with Wade Burleson or any one of his choosing. I will defend against any proposition which affirms that the policy of the IMB is "Landmarkist," based on either my book or any Landmark source of Landmark doctrine on baptism.

WADE'S ERROR ON CAMPBELLISM

Wade’s book also misrepresents the view of "Churches of Christ" on the administrator of baptism. The book says on page 2, "Landmark and Campbellite (Church of Christ) doctrines have placed emphasis on the qualifications of the baptizer". [See also page 38].

Wrong way Wade -- Campbellites do not condition the validity of baptism on the administrator in any sense.

The fact is, Churches of Christ (Campbellites) will accept any immersion if it is administered in accord with their teaching -- "in order to obtain the remission of sins . . ."

Evidently, Wade tossed in the reference to the Campbellites as if to discredit Southern Baptists. The fact that Wade does not know the view of Campbellites is reason enough within itself to suspect he may not know the view of Landmarkers, either. And he certainly does not know my view, if he thinks I agree with him on David Rogers' "one plank" notion to which he referred.

How paradoxical it is that the one source (my book) to which Wade refers for a summary of Landmarkism does not sustain him with respect to the alleged "Landmarkism" of the IMB policy on baptism.

In a comment submitted by Wade to the Reformed Flyswatter blog, Wade acknowledges that he did not get his view on "Landmarkism" from Bob Ross' book, Old Landmarkism and the Baptists. He says:

"I was calling the IMB baptismal policy Landmark (November 2005, see my blog) long before I ever heard of you or your Landmark book (February 2006, see your email you posted). So, it is obvious that you cannot be my source for whatever understanding of Landmarkism I have. As you know, you and I don't agree on many things, but that does not negate my appreciation for your ministry. . . . Bob, again, you are not the person from whom I learned what Landmarkism is or is not, but I found your book on the subject a good one." [End of quote].

In my reply on the RF blog, among other things I wrote: My book evidently left you with the same defective concept on Landmarkism which you had before you read it, and for that I cannot be pleased.

I am grateful for Wade's "clearing" me of anyone's perception that Bob Ross is in any wise responsible for Wade's defective view of Landmarkism in relation to the IMB policy or any other source. However, the use he has made of the book appears to be an attempt on his part to align his views with my views, and this is not justifiable.

THE IMB'S POLICY ON "TONGUES"

Wade says on page 50:

Regarding the second policy, I have never spoken in tongues and I have no desire for a private prayer language. I fully affirmed the previous policy of the IMB that forbade any missionary from publicly speaking in tongues. We are paying our missionaries to share the gospel intelligently with those to whom they minister. Yet, if a missionary prays in tongues in private, and does not do so in public, then the prohibition of the Apostle Paul, “Forbid not the speaking in tongues,” seems to be an inspired, biblical command from the sacred, infallible text that we ought not lightly dismiss.

The problem here is obvious: Paul makes no distinction between "public" tongues and "private" tongues. How can Wade consistently accept the policy of forbidding "publicly speaking in tongues" but defend "tongues in private"? If Paul's "command" relates to "private" tongues, why not also to "public" tongues?

If "tongues" is indeed a "spiritual gift" for Christians today, why in the world would "tongues" be something to be done only as a "private" practice? And if "tongues" need an "interpreter" (as Paul says) who is going to interpret the alleged "tongue" for the person who is "privately" exercising the gift with no one else hearing what is said?

For Wade's benefit, I want to recommend Brother Norman Sellers' book, Biblical Tongues -- which ought to be required reading for all missionary candidates who will likely be faced by this issue on the mission field. Had Wade read that book, he might have never had any conflict over that issue when he was on the International Mission Board.

Probably no review

2009-04-01T17:48:00.004-05:00

It Is Not Likely That I Will Review
Wade Burleson's Book

Some have wondered if I will write a review of Wade Burleson's book, and that does not appear to be very likely.

First, both the publisher and author do not appear to have any interest in my reviewing the book, and are evidently adamant in refusing to send me a review copy which at one time the publisher offered to send.

Secondly, Wade has indicated that I would have to buy the book if I wished to write a review. To that, I say that there will be no tornados in Oklahoma before I spend money for a book to review it, regardless of who published it or who wrote it.

I only buy books I anticipate keeping in my library, and I doubt very seriously that Wade's book would qualify.

What are the chances?

2009-03-27T12:17:00.006-05:00

Wade Burleson Promoting
His New Book; Where's Mine?

I notice on Brother Wade Burleson's blog that he is actively promoting his book on "Hardball Religion," and he is utilizing some "testimony" type "reviews" to polish the product.

So far, I have noticed no critical reviews of the book. Surprise, surprise?

Also, so far, I have not received a copy for review, although P. K. Gammons, V. P. of the publishers, Smyth & Helwys, told me a few days ago in an email that they would be "delighted" to send me a copy for review. Gammons said he would like for me to review the book on this blog and to "let us know what you think."

S & H has since canceled that offer and Wade Burleson has not sent me a copy, either. I surmise that both S & H and Wade are looking for the type of non-critical "reviews" which Wade is now using to promote the book.

This doesn't seem to "jive" with what Wade is always gabbing about on his blog -- that is, having different points of view and controversial discussions. He even published a recent article which condemned "stifling criticism and dissent."

Yet, even though I accepted the S & H offer of a book for review, Wade informed me that I must "pay for the privilege" to do a review! What are the chances of my ever getting a copy for review? If I do . . .

Will wonders never cease?

Out of town Monday

2009-03-22T22:21:00.005-05:00

Don McKinney Funeral
in Lake Charles, La.

A longtime friend and acquaintance, Pastor Don McKinney of Heritage Baptist Church, Lake Charles, Louisiana, passed away Friday, March 20, 2009. I will be attending the Funeral on Monday, March 23.

We have known Brother McKinney for about 40 years -- as well as his wife, his two sons, Ron and Barry, and his brother, Lamar, and I have had the privilege to be in Brother McKinney's home and with the church.

The last time I saw Brother Don, he was a visitor and guest at Pilgrim Book Store, bringing a couple of young men with him, and they all left with some books.

Here are the details for Funeral Services and related events:

Funeral arrangements: By Johnson Funeral Home, 4321 Lake Street, Lake Charles.

Funeral: Monday, March 23, 2009 at 10:30 a.m. at Heritage Baptist Church, 3501 Ernest Street, Lake Charles, LA, 70605.

Memorial Service: Monday, March 23, 2009 at 6 PM to celebrate the life of Pastor Don McKinney at Heritage Baptist Church Sanctuary.

Officiates for the services: Dr. Ronald W. McKinney, Lamar L McKinney, Paul B. McKinney and Gary James.

Internment and graveside service: Lakewood Memorial Cemetery in Jackson, MS, Wednesday, March 25, 2009 at 11 AM.

In lieu of flowers, Donations may be made in his memory to Heritage Baptist Church Benevolent Fund, 3501 Ernest Street, Lake Charles, LA, 70605, for his widow, Mrs. Marie McKinney.

Words of comfort to the family may be expressed at -- http://www.johnsonfuneralhome.net/.

-- Bob L. Ross, Pilgrim Book Store and Pilgrim Publications, Pasadena, Texas 77503.

Wade's barking dogs

2009-03-22T13:47:00.005-05:00

Wade's Dog Kennel Has
Plenty of Barking Dogs

Since Wade Burleson has assumed the role of defender of the "FBC Jax Watchdog," Wade's blog has become a regular kennel of barking dogs. Like Wade, their bark is probably louder than their bite.

They have now even put a Google "street-view" link in Wade's kennel -- showing Pastor Mac Brunson's home in Jacksonville -- and I suppose this will be eagerly accessed by the dogs as they ogle, bark, foam at the mouth, and knash their teeth.

I don't think in all my life I have ever observed what appears to be a near psychotic obsession with something on this order -- a pastor in Oklahoma sticking his nose into another church's situation hundreds of miles away in Jacksonville, Florida.

This type of thing does not add much by way of credibility to Wade's reputation as a writer, for what he is posting and saying involves a great deal of hearsay. That seems to be Wade's forte.

The fact that his publisher, Smyth & Helwys, tacked a "Disclaimer" onto Wade's book is within itself a warning as to the possible vulnerability of Wade's writings as lacking in validity.

Beware of dogs -- especially the pack from the kennel in Enid.

Enid's "Watchdog" branch kennel

2009-03-21T16:07:00.008-05:00

Burleson, Operating a Branch Kennel
in Enid for "FBC Jax'ville Watchdog"?

Some have noticed that Wade Burleson has been somewhat quiet here of late in regard to his book. Instead, he has become more engaged in running the Branch Kennel in Enid of the so-called "Watchdog" who is obsessed with his campaign against the evils he alleges at the First Baptist Church in Jacksonville, Florida where Mac Brunson is Pastor.

"Very well," you may say, "but Wade is in Enid, Oklahoma. What's the connection?"

It seems that Wade sees himself as some sort of "defender" of the little dog, and he is reaching out to Jacksonville to take sides with the anonymous cur who calls himself the "Watchdog."

I would remind the "Watchdog" of that old adage, "With friends like so-and-so, who needs enemies?" and I would remind Wade of that saying, "Scratch a dog and you'll find a permanent job."

I notice that the WD tosses grateful Wade a few bones as a reward for Wade's operating the Branch Kennel in Enid. Instead of grinning, Wade went wagging his tail!

Be that as it may, helping the WD seems like a convenient indulgence by which Wade can perhaps get a little relief from the "fleas" he has brought on himself by the mess he made with his book, "Hardball Religion."

A Slice of Schlueter

2009-03-21T10:08:00.016-05:00

A Slice of Apostacia -- Also known as

"SLICE OF LAODICEA"?

Ingrid Schlueter runs a blog which is devoted to raking up sundry garbage and scurrilous scum. It is called "Slice of Laodicea," but we constantly find that Ingrid is very selective in her slicing game.

I recently wrote to her and sent her some information about what she is forever neglecting:

"I do not know an error which causes the damnation of more souls than that at the present time. . . . Sacramental efficacy and baptismal regeneration, ALL SPRING FROM THE FIRST ERROR OF INFANT BAPTISM" (C. H. Spurgeon, New Park Street Pulpit, Volume 6, page 168).

Dear Ingrid:
You do very well with reporting on the symptoms, but why not pay more attention to the source. Here's something for your consideration.
-- Bob L. Ross, The Calvinist Flyswatter

I sent her an item, "Thanks to the Pedos," which exposed a slice of the dark history of the Pedobaptist (baby baptizer) Reformed Hybrid Calvinists. Ingrid is a Pedobaptist Reformed Hybrid Calvinist.

Instead of addressing the issue of her ancestral lineage from apostates, Ingrid sliced her a piece of "I Can't Pay You Any Attention" Pie.

Ingrid said --
A Note About Email
Mar 18 by Ingrid Schlueter

Due to the high volume of email I receive here at Slice, email that is in addition to Crosstalk related correspondence, it has been increasingly ~~difficult~~ impossible to respond to everyone.

I try to read everything that comes through, but there are times when I am not able to personally respond. I want to thank every reader who has sent in concerns, links and comments. Please know that an absence of response does not necessarily mean that I have not read what you have sent in.

Additionally, I am unable, for obvious reasons, to engage in discussion with everyone who wants to debate issues, discuss theology, or who wants to argue over doctrine.

Slice is non-interactive because its growing readership can make it, in itself, a full-time job. Thanks so much for your understanding, and again, I deeply appreciate the news items and articles sent my way.

Bob's comment:

O, sure, Ingrid, we "understand." We understand all too well. You enjoy being a part of the "Slice of Apostacia" too much to pay any attention to the historical record of your Pedobaptist Reformed Hybrd Calvinist apostate path thru history.

We understand -- you are too well content to slice away at some of the more obvious modern Pedobaptist apostates but you give a "pass" to the heresy itself that paved the way to their apostasy.

And we also understand, Ingrid, you are just one of the willing participants in the Slice of Apostacia which forever seems to dog those who supposedly are "covenant children" and allegedly get "regenerated" while they are yet sucklings on their mother's breast.

Keep slicing, Ingrid, but watch your nose -- you could cut it off to spite your face.

Smyth & Helwys' "Disclaimer"

2009-03-20T09:30:00.011-05:00

"Fiction" and "Disclaimer" -- Both Mean
That What You Read May Be Untruthful

Our generous and courteous brother from Enid, Pastor Wade Burleson, has furnished us with a little humor.

Wade enjoys a grin, and I'm sure he won't begrudge our grinning at some of his rather humorous predicaments. Lately, for example, Brother Wade has published the following remark about the book entitled, The Shack:

The Shack is Christian FICTION. What seems humorous to me is the feeling by some that it is necessary to place a Read With Discernment tag on the book. Sometimes I feel we Southern Baptists are the equivalent of second graders spiritually. Here you have a book that is Christian fiction. There is no illicit sex, no foul language, and no promotion of immorality in the book. For heaven's sake, it was written for the author's own CHILDREN. But we stamp a Read With Discernment tag on it. (End of quote).

The "funny thing" about this which will probably make you grin is the fact that while Wade carps about this "Read With Discernment" tag, his new book, Hardball Religion, published by Smyth & Helwys Publishing, carries an even greater "read with discernment" tag.

Wade's book carries a DISCLAIMER ("Christian Disclaimer"?), which is a statement warning you right up front that the contents of the book cannot be presumed to be truthful, historical, factual, reliable, or otherwise trustworthy. The Publisher wants you to know that the Publisher assumes no responsibility for the accuracy and truthfulness of anything the writer has written.

There's one big difference between William Young's book and Wade Burleson's book: Young tells you right up front that the book is "fiction." On the hand, Wade wants you to believe what he has written is truth, but the Publisher evidently has some reservations about it, so the "Disclaimer" is placed up front to ostensibly relieve the Publisher of accountability.

I find that contrast worth a grin -- in fact, in the light of Wade's remarks about Lifeway's "Read With Discernment" tag, this contrast has become a laughing matter.

Reformed fiction

2009-03-19T16:48:00.011-05:00

Regeneration Imparted in Infancy -- A Fiction Unknown to Holy Scripture

C. H. Spurgeon preached a sermon entitled, "Is Conversion Necessary?"

Spurgeon said,
“Except a man is born again he cannot see the kingdom of God.” This birth is not a birth by Baptism, for it is spoken of as accompanied by an intelligent faith which receives the Lord Jesus. Turn to John 1:12, 13, “But as many as received Him, to them gave He power to become the sons of God, even to them that believed on His name: which were born not of blood, nor of the will of the flesh, nor of the will of man, but of God.”

So that Believers are “born again,” and receive Christ through faith—a regeneration imparted in infancy and lying dormant in unbelievers is a fiction unknown to Holy Scripture! In the third of John our Lord associates faith and regeneration in the closest manner, declaring not only that we must be born again, but also that whoever believes in Him shall not perish, but have everlasting life. [End quote from Spurgeon]

In this day and age, we have among professing "Calvinists" and "Reformed Baptists" -- such as Wade Burleson, Tom Ascol, Tom Nettles, and many in the "Founders" movement -- those who endorse the Hybrid Calvinism theology of the Pedobaptist Reformed arm-chair theologians and conference hawkers which would have us believe that Pedobaptist "covenant children" get "born again" as babies, perhaps even before they are born!

Some of our moderns are promoting the idea that Baptists ought to regard these Hybrid Calvinist Pedobaptists (baby baptizers) as being in the "evangelical" category of Christianity, disregarding the fact that they are the primary promoters of what Spurgeon rightly called a "fiction."

I had a call from a "Founders-friendly" pastor recently, and he seemed to be rather disillusioned about those who want to "play footsies" with Pedos. I reminded him that in the "Founders" movement this is a systemic attitude which is traced back to the Founder of the Founders, Ernest Reisinger, who had the Reformed Pedobaptist theological "virus" in his blood.

At the same time, I have lately noticed that Spurgeon is being disparaged by some sources -- including Reformed Baptist James White, who has amazingly and amusingly declared that Spurgeon is "not infallible" -- as if that is of any consequence so far as James' "exegeet'n" is concerned. Spurgeon could have been Humpty Dumpty, but it wouldn't be of any help to James.

I also noticed that of the books being recently recommended by "Founders" assistant pastor, Timmy Brister, nary a one is a Spurgeon book. Brister has consistently promoted Pedobaptist writers rather than Baptist writers. Reckon the Southern Baptist Seminary is proud of their graduate?

New light on history from Enid?

2009-03-19T15:10:00.006-05:00

Wade Burleson's Revision
of Baptist History

I was doing a little "exploring" of Wade's past comments on his blog and stumbled upon what appears to be a revision of Baptist history. A comment by a reader said:

martyduren said...
Wade-
Great post...am I correct in assuming that those who departed the convention were also known as "Campbellites"?
Sun Dec 25, 08:06:00 PM 2005

Wade Burleson said...
Some became "Campbellite" and joined the "Church of Christ" movement, while others separated and became known as Independent Baptists or in some cases "Hardshell Baptists."

Does anyone know if Wade went to either a Baptist college or seminary, and if so, did he take a course in Baptist History?

In context, this person (Marty Duren) was referring to Landmark Baptists, and Wade says some joined the Church of Christ movement and some others joined the Hardshells. He did not offer any source as a reference, and what he says is completely foreign to any history I have read.

Perhaps I missed something? I used to teach Baptist History in a small theology school we once had here, and I have to admit that I have failed, if what Wade says is historical fact.

Until I see his sources, however, I will regard this information as being in the same category as other such phantasmagoria for which Wade has become rather notorious in recent years. The brother seems to have a vivid imagination.

Our combox is open for Wade to give us book, chapter, and page number which verifies what he reported on his blog. Perhaps he has a source which has eluded me and the writers I have read.

Wade's Campbellite practice

2009-03-18T10:24:00.009-05:00

How Wade Burleson Became
A "Campbellite" in His Book

How paradoxical it is that the one source (my book) which Wade quotes on Landmarkism does not sustain him in respect to the alleged Landmarkism of the Southern Baptist Convention's International Mission Board's policy on baptism.

In a comment submitted by Wade to the Reformed Flyswatter blog, Wade acknowledges that he did not get his view on "Landmarkism" from Bob Ross' book, Old Landmarkism and the Baptists. He says:

"I was calling the IMB baptismal policy Landmark (November 2005, see my blog) long before I ever heard of you or your Landmark book (February 2006, see your email you posted). So, it is obvious that you cannot be my source for whatever understanding of Landmarkism I have. As you know, you and I don't agree on many things, but that does not negate my appreciation for your ministry. . . . Bob, again, you are not the person from whom I learned what Landmarkism is or is not, but I found your book on the subject a good one." [End of quote].

In my reply, among other things I wrote: "My book evidently left you with the same defective concept on Landmarkism which you had before you read it, and for that I cannot be pleased."

I am grateful for Wade's "clearing" me of any perception that I am in any wise responsible for his defective view of Landmarkism in relation to the IMB policy or any other source. However, the use he has made of my book appears to be an attempt on his part to somehow align my book as rendering support for Wade's views, and this is not justifiable.

In this act, Wade emulates the device of a number of Campbellites I have met in public debates. These fellows -- all nice and gentlemanly, just like Wade -- were either "blind in one eye with a cataract on the other," or else they knew exactly what they were doing, namely, resorting to the use of subterfuge.

For example, I have had Campbellites lift material from C. H. Spurgeon as if it agreed with Campbellites on baptism, instrumental music, and some other matters. In a debate with Garland Elkins, he quoted A. T. Robertson on a text and tried to align the Baptist Greek scholar with Campbellism on baptism. Another Campbellite debater, Lynn Trapp, did the same thing with H. B. Hackett. I have even had them quote Bob Ross, as if I supported their doctrine! I've heard them quote Baptist manuals, confessions, preachers, debaters -- all as if they somehow supported the Campbellite's view. In fact, I have often thought that the Campbellites would prefer to use something from a Baptist even more than use Scriptures!

That is what we call "subterfuge," a deceptive and misleading device. It's like giving a street address for a vacant lot when no one or nothing is there. It's like giving a phone number for a non-existent person. It's like email spam from Nigeria, empty promises of big bucks.

And that is the kind of thing Wade has resorted to in the use of my book, as if it supports his ideas on "Landmarkism." Wade became a Campbellite in that type of thing -- at least, he has used a device which I have found to be an attribute of many Campbellite debaters -- subterfuge.

I suppose the greatest disappointment I have in Wade is this lack of demonstrating simple ethics. He never even bothered to confer with me in regard to the use of my book. I mean, that book is mine, and to misuse it is just downright meanness.

No, nice guy Wade did not do anything illegal; what he did was just unethical.

I have two dogs which actually demonstrate more ethical respect than Wade has demonstrated. When I put out the food bowls for my dogs at feed'n time, they won't even eat until I give them my approval. When I walk out the front door, my dogs wait until I give approval for them to follow me. Good Dogs develop a great deal of respect. My dogs have more respect and ethics than some preachers I've known!

Wade is perhaps still in the learning stages, for he didn't bother to even communicate to me that he was going to make use of my book. Unfortunately for Wade and his publisher, Smyth & Helwys Publishing, I learned of Wade's subterfuge from one to whom S&H sent a digital copy of Wade's book. The gentleman asked me if I was aware that Wade had used my book in his book, and my immediate thought was, What book? I don't know anything about Wade Burleson's book.

Wade didn't even bother to ask me beforehand if my book supported his concept on Landmarkism. He didn't bother to tell me that he was going to make it appear to his readers that my book on Landmarkism makes Landmarkers out of the members of the International Mission Board as well as some other Baptist leaders. It seems like Wade wanted to get this out there before I had any opportunity to say anything, pro or con, about how he planned to use my book.

The thoughtful brother who let me in on the little secret, wrote me, "By the way, Brother Bob, were you aware Wade was going to rely heavily upon your Landmark essay to sustain his attacks . . .?"

I am disillusioned in regard to Wade's ethics, for he does try so hard to persuade people to believe he is such a nice guy, ethical, courteous, generous, and full of "grace and humility."

From where I sit, that act appears to merely be a facade to be lapped up by Wade's admirers. In my case, he has acted from the old nature, the flesh.

When one tries so hard to paint an impeccable image of himself as Wade does, I am somehow reminded of that old sign on a Used Car lot --

"Honest John's -- I Cheat You Right!"

As nice a guy as Wade wants us to think that he is, he nevertheless admits to total depravity, so as good as he is, he's like the rest of us -- he is not so good as to be above manifesting at least some of the elements of the old carnal nature, and from my perspective he was certainly in the flesh when he decided to use my book as a subterfuge and he said nothing to me about what he was doing.

Maybe this experience will help Wade in his sanctification, and to grow in the grace of ethical, responsible behavior which ideally should characterize Christians, especially a man of the cloth.

Wade, wrong on Campbellism, too?

2009-03-17T20:34:00.003-05:00

Wade Burleson's Error on Campbellite
View as to the Administrator of Baptism

Wade’s book, according to "Reliable Sources" of the "Sources" Family, also misrepresents the view of "Churches of Christ" on the administrator of baptism.

Evidently -- and I stand to be corrected -- Wade's book alleges that Campbellites (aka Church of Christ) emphasize "qualifications" for the administrator of baptism.

If this is the case, then it's apparently "Wrong Way Wade" again. The Campbellites whom I have known and even publicly debated several of their Ministers for nearly 50 years do not condition the validity of baptism on the administrator in any sense.

There are, to my knowledge, a couple of Churches of Christ in Enid, and to my knowledge neither one of them holds to the idea about the administrator which Wade alleges. If I'm wrong, I'm sure Wade can and will correct me.

I have had numerous debates with leading CC debaters, and I know their views "like I know the back of my hand." Wade and his publisher, Smyth & Helwys, will probably receive derogatory comments from Church of Christ preachers about this misrepresentation of their views.

The fact is, CC will accept any immersion if it was administered in accord with their teaching -- "in order to obtain the remission of sins." I would not be surprised if Wade gets a challenge from the Campbellites in Oklahoma for a debate on this misrepresentation.

Evidently, Wade makes reference to the Campbellites as if to discredit Southern Baptists. Instead, the misrepresentation of the Campbellite view only serves to further discredit Wade.

In the future, Wade, lighten up and don't try to discredit more people than those on whom you supposedly "have the goods."

The "apologizing" Hardballers

2009-03-17T11:00:00.007-05:00

"Egg on the Face" of
Smyth & Helwys Publishing

I received the following from a Baptist Historian to whom I send my emails:

Hi Bob, you may be interested in knowing that Smyth & Helwys Publishing was founded by the "Moderates" (i.e. Liberals) of the SBC to counter the influence of Broadman & Holman after it passed into the hands of the SBC conservatives. The publishing company was named after John Smyth and Thomas Helwys, who quite a number of our Baptist historians mistakenly credit with forming the first (General) "Baptist" church in England in 1609. The problem is that neither Smyth nor Helwys practiced immersion and neither did their "Baptist" church until the 1640's - years after the deaths of both men.

Bob's comment:

If I'm the financier(s) ("Money Bags") behind Smyth & Helwys Publishing, I'm going to immediately skuttle the Wade Burleson book before its generates further embarrassment, and I'm going to fire those who are in charge of production and editorial; as the ultimate responsible party, I'm not at all pleased with the "egg on my face" as a result of the fiasco created by Wade Burleson's book, for it certainly detracts from my being competitive in influence with Broadman-Holman of the Southern Baptist Convention.

Aside from the fact that Wade Burleson's use of Bob Ross' book has been denounced in no uncertain terms as non-supportive of Wade's ideas about "Landmarkism" in relation to the SBC's International Mission Board's policy on baptism, Wade has smeared "egg on the face" of S&H by alleging on his blog that S&H has "apologized" to Wade for sending free digital copies to a few people.

Wade says on his blog, I confess to be a little perplexed as to why Smyth & Helwys sent to Peter a digital copy of my book without him having to pay for it.
. . . They apologized to me after the fact.
Sat Mar 14, 05:05:00 PM 2009

It is hard to conceive that an intelligent representative of a publishing company would be put into such a predicament as to apologize to a writer, especially a writer who actually should be apologizing to the publisher for the big mess he has made in a book for which the publisher is paying the expenses of publishing and marketing. But that was the predicament of P. K. Gammons, VP of S&H.

"Apologize" to Wade? . . . for sending a few free copies to prospective reviewers of the book?

Well, "Land O' Goshen!"

And on top of that, Wade later tells Bob Ross that S&H did not send a free copy of the book to Bob Ross since Wade wanted Bob to "pay for the privilege" of reviewing the book! "Will Wonders Never Cease!"

This story looks more and more like a 3-Stooges senario, with Wade Burleson, P. K. Gammons, and Smyth & Helwys Publishing Company being "Moe, Larry, and Curly."

Before this is over, we suspect Smyth & Helwys Publishing will need a crowbar to deal with the egg on its face!
_______________

POSTSCRIPT:

My Baptist Historian brother adds:

Bill Leonard (of the Cooperative Baptist Fellowship) edited a book called, Dictionary of Baptists in America (Downers Grove, IL: InterVarsity Press, 1994). On pages 251-252, in the article Smyth and Helwys Publishing Company,it reads:

"A publishing house organized by Southern Baptist moderates. The press, named for English Baptist founders John Smyth and Thomas Helwys, was founded in 1991 by Cecil Staton and Scott Nash, professors at Brewton-Parker College in Georgia; James Pitts, chaplain at Furman University; and Ronald D. Jackson. Its founding purpose was 'to offer supplemental and alternative materials for Baptists who have become increasingly concerned about the future direction of the [Southern Baptist] Convention Press and Broadman [Press].' The concern was to publish materials for churches disturbed by the fundamentalist control of the Southern Baptist Convention and provide a vehicle for Baptist authors whose works would probably not be published by SBC related presses. In 1991 Smyth and Helwys Publishing began production of formations, a graded Sunday school curriculum written primarily, but not exclusively, for use in Baptist churches. Also in 1991 the company headquarters moved to Macon, Georgia, with Staton as publisher. Bibliography: C. Staton, The History of Smyth and Helwys Publishing, in Walter B. Shurden, ed., of the The Struggle for the Soul of the SBC (1993)."

Concerning John Smyth ( d. 1612) and Thomas Helwys ( d.ca. 1615), H. Leon McBeth in his book, The Baptist Heritage (Nashville: Broadman Press, 1987), page 37, writes, "The method of Smyth's baptism was almost certainly by affusion or pouring; immersion did not become customary among General Baptists for another generation."

McBeth also tells us that Helwys later returned to Holland, "and joined the Mennonites." (page 39). These two non-immersing Separatists (one of whom turned Mennonite) were who the moderates chose to name their publishing company after! Broadman Press, on the other hand, as I'm sure you know, was named after John A. Broadus and Basil Manly, Jr. - two real (immersing) Baptists.
[End of quote].

It seems that Smyth & Helwys Publishing has been somewhat "off track" from the outset, with even its name being identified paradoxically with non-immersing "Baptists." So it should not surprise us that S&H has become associated with the phantasmagorical Wade Burleson.

Hardball Publishers?

2009-03-16T09:46:00.006-05:00

It's Official: Wade's Publisher Won't Send
a Copy of the Book for Review Purposes

That's right . . . I received an email today from P. K. Gammons, VP of Smyth & Helwys Publishers informing me that I will not be sent a digital copy of Wade Burleson's forthcoming book, Hardball Religion, for review.

Gammons had offered me a digital copy of the book several days ago, and at the time I turned him down. Later, I realized that in writing a review for this blog, it would be more convenient to have a digital copy to facilitate copying any material to be quoted; therefore, I notified Gammons that I would like to have the digital copy.

Now, however, it seems to be too late. I have "missed the boat." I have "crossed the deadline" . . . "the day of grace is over."

Gammons indicates that his offer was good only so long as the book was still at the press. Evidently, that time has passed and so Gammons says S&H will not send me a digital copy for writing a review. How convenient.

This is what some might call a "Hardball Publisher."

I really wonder -- does S&H really want me to review the book? I seriously doubt it. They are aware of what has already been published on this blog, and they probably realize by now that they most likely have a first-class "dud" of a book in their lap.

It won't take too long for the news to get around that Wade's one-and-only source on Landmarkism has repudiated the book's misappropriation of my writings. They evidently realize that any further comments by me in a review could only tend to dissipate sales potential.

S&H may be hoping that there are enough "suckers" out there who have not read my comments about the book, and sales to the naive and unsuspecting will still be possible -- at least enough sales to recover the money S&H invested in the project.

NOTE: Feel free to utilize this article and any other which may serve your purpose -- on blogs, web sites, print-outs for distribution, etc. I have no restriction on the use of my writings other than that they be used ethically in an appropriate manner. Some who have used my writings have not always used them appropriately, such as some Campbellites, Hardshells, Hybrid Calvinists, Preterists, "King James Onlyites," and in the most recent case, Wade Burleson. -- Bob L. Ross

What is "Landmarkism"?

2009-03-15T16:01:00.007-05:00

What is "Landmarkism?"

One might naively expect Wade Burleson to at least define from reputable Landmark sources --
(1) what he understands to constitute "Landmarkism," and to
(2) demonstrate from the International Mission Board's policy on baptism exactly how it is that the IMB policy is "Landmarkist."

However, no one evidently need expect to find this in Wade's book, according to one who has read it. It appears that if you do not know what really constitutes Landmarkism, you may be no nearer to understanding it after reading what Wade says.

Peter Lumpkins has observed:

The only source cited for Landmark views in Wade's new book Hardball Religion is guess who? A man named Bob Ross. Do you know him? Not one mention, not one essay, not one writer except Bob Ross. Bob Ross is there but no other authority on Landmark is mentioned.

Inasmuch as I deny that my book agrees with what I understand to be Wade Burleson's concept of "Landmarkism," and inasmuch as I deny that my book alleges that the policy of the IMB is "Landmarkist," it seems that Wade Burleson is "up the creek without a paddle," doesn't it?

My book, Old Landmarkism and the Baptists, makes the effort to objectively define from reputable Landmark sources what really constitutes Landmarkism, and it was written years before the IMB set forth its policy on baptism. There is no way whatsoever that Wade Burleson can utilize my book to ostensibly support his arbitrary allegation that the IMB policy is "Landmarkist."

I will be happy to defend the book any time, any place, in Public Debate with Wade Burleson or any one of his choosing, and I will deny any proposition which affirms that the policy of the IMB on baptism is "Landmarkist," based on either my book or any Landmark source of Landmark doctrine on baptism.

Of course, after having had some "exchanges" with Wade on this blog, I really don't expect him or any of his supporters to engage in a public discussion (debate format) on the matter. Despite the fact that Wade has been known to frequently upbraid others for not engaging on controversial issues, I simply cannot conceive of Wade's being willing to expose his arguments to rebuttal by one whom he has quoted in his book as being a good source on the subject of Landmarkism.

"The emperor has no clothes."

Was it a pre-pub sales promotion?

2009-03-15T14:07:00.008-05:00

Was It Just an Advertising Device
By Wade and Smyth & Helwys?

There are certainly different and crafty ways to advertise books for sale, especially those that are not yet released and thus not available to be examined by a potential customer before deciding to make a purchase. This is known in the book publishing industry as "pre-publication advertising."

One pre-publication device is to generate controversy about a book beforehand, hoping to seduce potential purchasers to order the book in advance. It seems now that this was perhaps the device used by Wade Burleson and his publisher, Smith & Helwys, for promoting advance sales for his "Hardball Religion" book. Even this article on this blog which mentions the book was written due to this device, as I would not be writing it but for the past few days of attention to Wade and his book.

I am suggesting this as being what Wade and S&H had in mind all along in view of the fact it has lately been brought to light that S&H has already been engaged in sending digital copies to certain parties. This has the marks of a pre-publication promotional sales effort. In fact, S&H even offered to send me, Bob Ross, a digital copy and invited me to review it on my blog.

Vice-President P. K. Gammons of Smyth & Helwys wrote, "I would be delighted to send you a digital copy for your review. We welcome you to review the book on your blog and let us know what you think." (Email of March 11, 2009).

It has recently been revealed that S&H has already sent digital copies to some others, inviting their reviews. Wade himself is apparently now feigning ignorance about the matter, particularly complaining somewhat that these digital copies were sent "free"! He does not seem to be a bit unhappy that the copies were sent, however; his only gripe seems to be that there won't be any money made off of these copies.

It all seems to indicate that this was probably a pre-publication device for the purpose of getting some attention for the book to the point of generating pre-publication orders.

So why has S&H not sent me a copy? I turned down their initial offer, but later I twice sent an email to P. K. Gammons accepting the invitation for S&H to send me a copy. They have not responded; they have not sent the digital copy which they offered me in their first contact. Why not? They have sent copies to others . . . why not Ross?

I may be overestimating the significance of my recent posts, but nevertheless the thought has somehow crossed my mind that S&H now may realize that they have a potential "dud" on their hands. In fact, a "little bird" has whispered in my ear that S&H is taking the position that "the less Bob Ross has access to the book, the better for pre-publicaton sales"!

In other words, S&H fears that a negative review by Bob Ross would possibly inflict damage upon the advance sales of Wade's book. Such a review would possibly influence some potential customers to take a "wait and see" approach, meaning they would wait to examine the book after it is released rather than making an advance purchase.

If that is not the reason why S&H has thus far evidently reneged on their offer to me, what is the reason for their not fulfilling their own offer to me and not responding to my acceptance of their offer?

John Calvin vs Hybrid Calvinism

2009-03-14T22:38:00.004-05:00

Stephen Garrett on
Calvin's view

Our brother at the Baptist Gadfly, Stephen Garrett, continues to call attention to sources which are contrary to the modern Pedobaptist Reformed Hybrid Calvinism view that one is "born again before faith."

In his latest, Stephen presents material on John Calvin's view. Stephen writes:

I have cited numerous quotations from John Calvin to show that he did not believe that regeneration preceded faith. Those who insist that this is the view of the first Calvinist reformers are in error and are generally unwilling to acknowledge their error even when shown the proof of it.

Clearly, as one can see from this citation, John Calvin did not put regeneration before faith. Calvin put faith before repentance and regeneration and he did not become Arminian in doing so. He did not relinguish a view in "total depravity" or a belief that faith was the gift of God.

For the rest of Stephen's article, go to BaptistGadfly.

Burleson's Hybrid Calvinism

2009-03-14T10:31:00.009-05:00

Southern Baptists Didn't Need
A Hybrid Calvinist on the IMB

There is one thing about Wade Burleson which, in my opinion, disqualified him from ever even being appointed to serve on the IMB -- a doctrinal error which is much more significant than his antics about the alleged "Landmarkism" of the IMB baptism policy.

Burleson is an adherent of the Pedobaptist Reformed Hybrid Calvinist theology which teaches that one is "born again before faith." Basically, this is essentially the doctrine on "regeneration" of the Primitive Baptist or Hardshell Church which split from regular Baptists in the 1830s and has been an opponent of missions ever since.

My colleague on the Reformed Flyswatter, Ian Elsasser, called attention to this error on The Calvinist Flyswatter blog just a few weeks ago. Notice --

Ian's comment:

Mr. Burleson seems to affirm the "born again before faith" view common to many modern Calvinists. See "Please Don't Call Me a Calvinist, But..." -- [Quote from Burleson's blog below]

"Regeneration, the new birth and quickening are all synonyms for this heart surgery God performs. Before a man will ever repent of his sin and believe on the Lord Jesus Christ, he must be born again. This miraculous act of God, called 'the new birth,' is a work that He chooses to perform, and it is without conditions".

Bob's comment:

This is the heresy spawned by Pedobaptists of the past and taught by many of the modern Pedobaptist (baby baptizers) who are for the most part "arm-chair theologians," conference or seminar speakers, and it is taught by some of their followers among the Baptists who describe themselves as "Reformed" -- such as Tom Ascol of the "Founders Ministries," Tom Nettles and Thomas Schreiner at Southern Seminary, James White, a "Reformed Baptist" in Arizona, and numerous bloggers on so-called "monergism" and "Reformed" web sites.

We have exposed this heresy in particular on The Calvinist Flywatter for the past three years (2006-2009), not to mention my long record of opposition to it dating from the 1950s when I first encountered it.

Unfortunately, Wade Burleson is infected with this heresy.

I don't believe Southern Baptists are benefited by having a Hybrid Calvinist on the mission board. Hybridism breeds more Hybrids, and Hybrids do not help the cause of evangelism and missions. The "Founders" have not planted a church in their entire history from 1982. They recently claimed they are planting a church in Florida . . . we will wait and see what becomes of the tender "plant."

In my opinion, Wade should never have been appointed, but after he was appointed, in my opinion he should have been given his walking papers on account of his advocacy of the "born again before faith" heresy.

One Man Landmarkism in Enid?

2009-03-13T18:17:00.013-05:00

Wade Burleson's One Man
Landmarkism?

As can be seen in the Comments of my previous article, Invitation to Wade Burleson, it seems that Brother Wade favors what might be classified as "One Man Landmarkism" -- if we accept Wade's concept on what constitutes
"Landmarkism."

Wade has said in one of his comments on this blog:

"I believe John Gill gives the finest explanation of Christian baptism, as defined by Scripture, within Baptist literature."

Wade has aligned himself with a quotation from John Gill which prescribes that the
"administrator" of baptism is the person who is qualifed or scripturally authorized to "pass-on" or receive "satisfaction" with respect to a person's profession of faith. Then, after the profession is deemed "satisfactory" by the administrator, the administrator will procede to administer baptism to that person, thereby qualifying the person to become a member of the church thereafter.

Dr. Gill is quoted by Wade:
"Admission to baptism lies solely in the breast of the administrator, who is the only judge of qualifications for it, and has the sole power of receiving to it, and of rejecting from it; if not satisfied, he may reject a person thought fit by a church, and admit a person to baptism not thought fit by a church; but a disagreement is not desirable nor advisable."

This puts the "administrator" squarely in front of the "door" to the church as to church membership, and unless a person "passes muster" with the administrator so as to qualify to receive baptism, he will just have to hoof-it on down to the O'Hairite Berean church where baptism is not even practiced.

If Gill's view is what Wade puts into practice at his church in Enid, Oklahoma, it appears to be the strictest "Landmark" entity I have ever heard of. If Wade does the baptizing at his church, this makes Wade the "only judge" and the"sole power" who "authorizes" or is "satisfied" with one's profession as authentic, and it makes Wade the sole "authority" for approving of the baptism of that person and his qualification for church membership, or rejecting that person.

My, how far we have strayed from original Landmarkism which made the validity of baptism simply depend upon the corporate authority of a church which has a linked-chain succession back to Jesus!

O, for the good ole days!

Invitation to Wade Burleson

2009-03-13T10:36:00.016-05:00

Wade, Will You Please Let Us
in on the "Secret" Source?

Brother Wade, I wonder if perhaps you have lately been waking-up in the wee hours of the morning, audibly mumbling aloud, "What on earth have I done!"

Then, as you lie there in bed, your churning thoughts can't help but reflect back to the more than two years (2005-2008) of controversy and "hard feelings" which characterized your tenure on the Southern Baptist Convention's International Mission Board, as it has at last dawned upon you that all the while you "never had a leg to stand on."

Your mind goes on to recall -- as you toss around and begin to perspire -- how you continuously carried on a badgering agenda toward your fellow IMB trustees for their alleged "Landmarkism." But now, as you wait to spring your book on the matter to the public, the one known source you have quoted to ostensibly verify and authenticate your charge of "Landmarkism" denies that the IMB policy on baptism is "Landmarkist"
(as you alleged), but rather that source says the IMB policy is perfectly consistent with the SBC's Baptist Faith & Message Article VII.

I just wonder, Wade, since you evidently did not have my book, Old Landmarkism and the Baptists, when you first broached your charge that the policy of the IMB on baptism is "Landmarkist," where in the world did you get that idea?

Even if you had my book at that time (2005), you would not have imbibed that idea from that book, for you can't quote a single line from the book, citing the chapter and page number, which would identify the IMB policy as being "Landmarkist."

Do you remember, Wade, that TV show called "I've Got a Secret"? Is it perchance the case with you, that you also have a "secret"? Do you reveal your "secret" source in your new book, Wade -- perhaps a source we do not know about, which perhaps is a "Landmarkist" source -- which supports your view on this?

I wish to invite you, Wade, to please share with the readers of the Reformed Flyswatter what that "secret" is -- what "Landmarkist" source you relied on in 2005 and thereafter which substantiates the allegation you made in the controversy about the policy of the IMB in regard to baptism?

I have scores of Landmark writings in my library, Wade, from J. R. Graves to the modern Landmark advocates who consider me a "heretic" -- books, pamphlets, tracts, magazines -- and I personally was involved for several years in my church affiliation with, and in the advocacy of, Landmarkism, -- as I have related in my book -- and I have never yet come upon anything which would categorize the IMB policy as being "Landmarkist."

To put it bluntly, Wade, you evidently found something which I never heard or read -- something which is a "secret" so far as my knowledge of Landmarkism extends.

Will you please share that "secret" information with us on this blog? Our "front page" is wide open to you, Wade. Please reveal your "secret" source.

Wade's book

2009-03-12T12:30:00.003-05:00

Just for the Record
About Wade Burleson

I read Wade's remark on Peter Lumpkins' blog that I (Bob Ross) had never seen nor read his book, "Hardball Religion."

Thanks to Wade's publisher, Smith & Helwys, I will receive both a digital copy of the book and the printed book when it is released.

The fact is, S&H wants me to review the book. P. K. Gammons, Vice President of S&H, has told me, "I would be delighted to send you a digital copy for your review. We welcome you to review the book on your blog and let us know what you think."

Let me make it clear, I have no objection whatsoever to anyone's using my writings either with or without my permission. What I am saying about Wade's case is this:

If he has appropriated any of my writings in such a manner as if they endorse Wade's allegation that the International Mission Board's policy constitutes "Landmarkism," it is a misappropriation of my material and contrary to my views.

My book, Old Landmarkism and the Baptists, was written back in the 1960s, long before the IMB policy was put into play. Naturally, neither Wade's name nor the IMB is mentioned in the book.

Also, what was written in an email to Wade three years ago said nothing whatsoever about the IMB's policy constituting "Landmarkism." I sent Wade a free copy of the book, hoping it would perhaps be of some degree of help in giving him a better understanding of Landmarkism and thereby assist in his properly evaluating matters at IMB which he related to Landmarkism.

Frankly, at the time, I was rather sympathetic to Wade because, on the basis of what he was writing on his blog, it seemed to me that he did not really have thorough grasp of what constitutes Landmarkism, even if it did exist at IMB. As I read Wade at that time, to me he was apparently
portraying himself as a victim of Landmarkism at the IMB, and if that were the case, and if there indeed were really hardcore, "hardball"
Landmarkers and Landmarkism at IBM, my book might be of some benefit to him in the controversy.

In retrospect, it now appears that Wade overstated the case, and while he may have us believe he is a victim of Landmarkers and Landmarkism at IMB, I believe it is more consistent with the elements of this unfortunate controversy to regard Wade as a victim of his own making -- due to his misunderstanding of what constitutes Landmarkism.

Wade is evidently a good preacher, devoted pastor, and gifted writer. The best thing he could do, in my judgment, is to somehow "get over" the experience at IMB, and focus upon the ministry to which God called him -- preaching the Gospel, endeavoring to reach lost souls in Enid and any other places to which he has access to preach the Word.

Wade's talents are too great to be consumed in a negative effort which never had a solid basis in the first place.

Who does Wade endorse?

2009-03-11T22:08:00.003-05:00

Why the IMB Policy on Baptism
Is a Good Policy vs Wade Burleson's

The Southern Baptist Convention's International Mission Board policy requiring its missionaries to have been baptized by immersion in relation to a Baptist church or some other church which similarly practices immersion and believes in salvation by grace, is obviously a good policy to one who believes that Baptist doctrine is scriptural doctrine.

Baptists don't want a missionary on the field who has to admit he was immersed by the Campbellites, for example. Campbellite baptism is the baptism of a person who, according to the Campbellites, was not even yet saved prior to baptism thru believing in Christ.

Baptists don't want to send a missionary who has to say he was immersed by a Pedobaptist Presbyterian whose baptism is represented by the Presbyterian Church to be a "sign and seal" of a covenant which includes the regeneration of infants in infancy.

They don't want to send a missionary who was immersed by Primitive or Hardshell Baptists whose baptism is associated with the idea that regeneration is "by the Spirit alone" apart from hearing and believing the Gospel.

They don't want a missionary who was immersed by Pentecostals who teach that baptism is necessary to salvation, speaking in tongues, and "entire sanctification" (sinless perfection).

They don't want a missionary who was immersed by the Assembly of God whose baptism is considered bo be just one of the good works which is necessary to gaining ultimate salvation.

They don't want a missionary who was immersed by the Lutherans whose baptism is supposed to be related somehow to one's regeneration.

They don't want a missionary who was immersed by some cult whose baptism is related to a false gospel.

They don't want a missionary who was immersed by the Roman Catholic Church whose baptism supposedly puts one in the RCC and in subjection to the Pope.

Just whose immersion does Wade Burleson want Southern Baptists to endorse as OK for SBC missionary candidates? Would he please supply a list of the approved sources?

Burleson -- A Landmarker?

2009-03-11T11:35:00.006-05:00

Has Pastor Wade Burleson
Become A Landmarker?

Pastor Wade Burleson of Emmanual Baptist Church in Enid, Oklahoma made himself of reputation a few years ago when he staunchly opposed what not a few Southern Baptists regard as a couple of doctrinal improvements on the part of the Southern Baptist International Mission Board.

Because of Wade's differing with the policies adopted on Baptism and "Tongues," he basically "blew it" with the IMB and was eventually removed as a board member after some period of controversy.

I understand from sources close to Smyth & Helwys publishers, that Wade's new book, "Hardball Religion," among other things focuses on these two doctrinal issues, and Wade takes the IMB to task over (1) what he alleges to be "Landmarkism" on Baptism, and (2) the IMB's negative policy as to "Private Prayer Language" (aka "praying in tongues").

After I read Wade's book, I may review the book and it is probable that I will have to "clear" myself in regard to Wade's unapproved use of materials from my book on Landmarkism. I anticipate this probability inasmuch as it appears to me that Wade does not seem to really have a grasp of "Landmarkism" -- at least so far as I have discerned in his writings -- and it is conceivable that he misappropriated my materials in relation to the IMB, etc.

So far as I understand the IMB policy of insisting on their "missionary candidates" having received immersion (by a Baptist church or some other church which immerses and holds to the doctrine of eternal security), this does not within itself appear to constitute Landmarkism -- at least not the Landmarkism I was involved in for several years, nor the Landmarkism about which I wrote my book, OLD LANDMARKISM AND THE BAPTISTS.

No Landmarker on earth known to me would approve of the IMB policy on baptism as constituting the doctrine of Landmarkism as to valid baptism. Landmarkers would only partially agree with this policy, for more is required for "valid" or "scriptural" baptism in Landmarkism.

If a partial agreement by Landmarkers on a matter constitutes that matter as being "Landmarkism," then it seems that Wade Burleson qualifies as a "Landmarker."

Notice -- On his blog for March 11, 2009, Wade says "the kingdom of Jesus Christ includes people from all denominations."

Every Landmarker I ever knew would agree with Wade. In my book, I refer to some Landmarkers who define the kingdom in the very same manner as Wade defines it (pages 11, 16). Does that constitute Wade a "Landmarker."

As for the "tongues" issue, I understand that Wade approved of the policy forbidding public speaking in tongues, but he disagreed with the IMB on the matter of "private praying in tongues." He relied on Paul, who said, "forbid not to speak in tongues," as justifying "private praying in tongues."

But if Paul's words justify "private praying in tongues," why does Wade reject Paul's word as being applicable to publicly "speaking" in tongues?

Our Combox is open to Brother Burleson for what he calls his "gracious and civil comments."

Cooperation, Burleson style?

2009-03-09T13:55:00.006-05:00

Wade Burleson Believes in Cooperation in the SBC

In his ongoing protagonist ax-grinding deprecation of the "Baptist Identity Movement," Pastor Wade Burleson of Enid, Oklahoma, is taking a very strong stand for "cooperation" in the Southern Baptist Convention.

Wade is opposed to what he describes as "a road of isolationism and separation from the evangelical community at large," a road he believes is paved by the Baptist Identity advocates. Wade likes a multi-lane freeway, a "differ and let differ" cooperation . . . but how wide is this freeway?

Wade says on blog:

"The implications of this Baptist Identity philosophy are far reaching and severe. If a change in the SBC bylaws or a change in the SBC BFM occurs, then the Baptist Identity adherents say you should maintain your Christian convictions and GET OUT of service to the SBC, rather than making other Southern Baptists aware of the problem within your conscience and staying in the SBC. Do you disagree with closed communion? Leave. Do you disagree with the BFM statement on war? Leave. Do you disagree with the statement that nobody is guilty of sin until they actually sin? Leave. Do you disagree with ___________ (fill in the blank)? Leave. That, in essence, is the spirit of Baptist Identity these days.That is also the kind of spirit we Southern Baptists must resist. We are a Convention of cooperation, not conformity.

The true Southern Baptist, confident in his identity as a Christian first, would stay in the SBC, maintain his integrity as a believer by voicing his disagreement with anything he sees as unbiblical and unchristian, and then letting those brothers and sisters in Christ who see things differently know that the disageement will neither affect his love for, service to, or cooperation with, those Southern Baptists of a different persuasion. That is the true identity we need as Southern Baptists."

Very well, Brother Wade, let's fill in the blank and ask if Southern Baptists ought to be in cooperation with those in the Convention who would disagree with fellow Southern Baptists on the following points of doctrine and practice:

Baptism of infants.
Administration of baptism by sprinkling and pouring.
Adding baptized infants to the church membership roll.
Teaching that children born to believers are regenerated in infancy.

I wonder if Wade would encourage cooperation in the SBC with churches and/or pastors who favor and implement the foregoing teachings and practices?

This is hardly facetiousness on my part, for after all such cooperation with such churches and pastors is apparently what is being approved by the Flounders and "Great Commission Resurgence" promoters. It has long been the practice of the Flounders (aka "Founders Ministries") to cooperate with Pedobaptist churches/pastors which hold to the foregoing beliefs and practices.

We have "filled in the blank," Wade. Do you approve of this type cooperation within the Southern Baptist Convention? If so, would it perhaps be appropriate to change the name of the SBC to the "Southern Bapbyterian Convention"?

This would seem to be cooperatively appropriate as a descriptive name, and the SBC would not even have to change its initials!

Tale of Reformed statistics

2009-03-07T10:20:00.013-06:00

Pedobaptist PCA [Presbyterian]
Statistics & Dr. Mohler's "Triage"

The Presbyterian Church in America is often proclaimed to be the epitomy of conservative Reformed theology. And occasionally we read or hear about a Baptist who is so obsessed with "Reformed theology" that he decides to join the PCA because of some alleged intolerable conditions he is encountering in his Baptist affiliation, leading to his preferring being Presbyterian rather than remaining a Baptist.

Also, the PCA is frequently embellished by some Baptist sources which promote their authors and speakers -- such as Dr. Albert Mohler, Dr. Tom Nettles, and Pastor Tom Ascol have done.

Dr. Mohler's recently discussed "theological triage" would most likely categorize PCA members and churches as inclusive in his "first tier." If so, this again raises the question in our minds as to "how?" Dr. Mohler could validate this categorization for this Pedobaptist denomination.

We have in the past taken note of the PCA's own statistical report of its membership and baptisms. The lastest we can find by the PCA is found here.

2007 Total Membership -- 345,582
5-year, total baptisms -- 39,743
5-year, adult baptisms -- 12,952 (32.59%)
5-year, infant baptisms -- 26,791 (67.41%)

If this 5-year rate is taken as a statistical standard, this indicates that 232,957 members (over 67%) of the reported total membership of 345,582 were baptized in infancy.

According to Pedobaptist Reformed theology, those baptized infants received baptism as the "sign and seal" of their inclusion in the "covenant" which allegedly includes their "regeneration." They were added to the membership roll on this pretext and regarded as "born again covenant children," according to the Reformed theologians.

While baptism itself is not regarded as contributing to their "regeneration," nevertheless baptism is regarded as the "sign and seal" that those baptized are "regenerated" in infancy -- before, at, or shortly after their baptism -- and their names are entered on the church roll as members.

Dr. W. G. T. Shedd says:
"The infant of the believer receives the Holy Spirit as a regenerating Spirit, by virtue of the covenant between God and his people . . . . The infant of the believer, consequently, obtains the regenerating grace by virtue of his birth and descent from a believer in covenant with God, and not by virtue of his baptism. God has promised the blessing of the Holy Spirit to those who are born of his people. The infant of a believer, by this promise, is born into the church, as the infant of a citizen is born into the state. . . . They are church members by reason of their birth from believing parents . . . Baptism is the infallible sign of regeneration, when the infant dies in infancy. All baptized infants dying before the age of self-consciousness, are regenerated without exception. Baptism is the probable sign of regeneration when the infant lives to years of discretion. . . . So a baptized child, in adult years, may renounce his baptism and church membership, become an infidel, and join the synagogue of Satan; but until he does this, he must be regarded as member of the church of Christ" (Dogmatic Theology, Vol. 2, pages 576, 577).

By Baptist confessional standards, such as the Southern Baptist Convention's Baptist Faith & Message, these infants were not regenerated and therefore they did not qualify for church membership.

I suppose that Dr. Mohler even agrees that unregenerate baptized infants do not qualify for church membership. Certainly, we should at least expect that Pastor Tom Ascol ("Founders Ministries") would agree on this, especially in the light of his "Resolution" on regenerate church membership which was presented and approved at the 2008 annual Southern Baptist Convention.

On the whole, the PCA statistics mean that infant baptism is primarily the method by which the PCA sustains its membership -- baptizing unregenerate infants and adding them to the church membership roll.

As a denominational entity, how can Dr. Mohler and those who endorse his "theological triage" -- such as the "Founders" and the "Great Commission Resurgence" -- include the Presbyterian Church in America as "first tier"? With over 67% of the membership baptized as unregenerate infants, how can the PCA as a denomination be regarded as a "first tier" Gospel-preaching entity?

Is their infant regeneration gospel much different than the Campbellite gospel, the Mormon gospel, the Pentecostal gospel, the Roman Catholic gospel, etc.?

Dr. Mohler's "triage"

2009-03-04T22:51:00.011-06:00

Flounders Associate Summarizes
Dr. Mohler's Theological Triage

Timmy Brister, Tom Ascol's associate pastor, writes on his blog:

Reviewing Theological Triage
First, we need to review the idea of theological triage. Dr. [Albert] Mohler makes the case for three tiers of determining the weight of various doctrinal issues, noting that without such distinctions there can be no “theological seriousness and maturity.” First-tier doctrines are those “most central and essential to the Christian faith” and include “the Trinity, the full deity and humanity of Jesus Christ, justification by faith, and the authority of Scripture.”

Mohler goes on to say the following:

“These first-order doctrines represent the most fundamental truths of the Christian faith, and a denial of these doctrines represents nothing less than an eventual denial of Christianity itself.”

At the heart of first-order doctrines is what it means to be Christian. At the heart of being a Christian are matters pertaining to the gospel, such as substitutionary atonement, justification by faith, and full deity & humanity of Christ.

Bob's comment:

Without evaluating the items specified in Dr. Mohler's triage, what we wonder about this theoretical triage is this:

How does Dr. Mohler manage to include under this theoretical cloak the Reformed Pedobaptists and other Pedobaptists who hold to the ridiculous doctrine that INFANTS born to believers are REGENERATED IN INFANCY, or regenerated even before they are actually physically born, as held by some Pedos?

Does Dr. Mohler consider that notion to be an acceptable form of "the Gospel."

Please understand, no one here is alleging that Pedobaptists are excluded from salvation on account of this false doctrine, for whoever really believes in Christ for salvation is saved. Rather, we just find it hard to classify Pedobaptist doctrine about the supposed regeneration of infants as being any part of the Gospel.

If Dr. Mohler, who is President of Southern Baptist Theological Seminary, or Timmy Brister, or Tom Ascol, head of the "Founders Ministries," or any one who approves of this "triage" is inclined to favor us with some light on this bewildering question, he is welcome to post it on this blog.

C. H. Spurgeon on pedobaptism:

"I do not know an error which causes the damnation of more souls than that at the present time. . . . Sacramental efficacy and baptismal regeneration, ALL SPRING FROM THE FIRST ERROR OF INFANT BAPTISM" (New Park Street Pulpit, Volume 6, page 168).

Changes

2009-03-04T21:23:00.003-06:00

A FEW CHANGES IN THE
FLYSWATTER'S FEATURES

With the addition of Brother Ian Elsasser to the Reformed Flyswatter comes more "know how" than I possess about managing a blog. This is my very first blog to have as Administrator, and I have not really made much effort to get past the simplest items in the operation.

But that will be changing, as Ian will be doing more in regard to the appearance and features, and will also be making his usual insightful comments on various subjects related to this blog's basic purpose.

I believe our readers will appreciate the contributions Ian will make in improving the image of the Reformed Flyswatter. -- Bob L. Ross

Welcome, Ian!

2009-03-01T23:21:00.001-06:00

IAN ELSASSER ADDED AS
CONTRIBUTOR

I am happy to announce that Brother Ian Elsasser has been added to the Reformed Flyswatter Team. He has made several posts on the Calvinist Flyswatter and his observations have always been impressive.

I am confident that the addition of Ian to the blog will prove to be a means of broadening the information and opinion for fulfilling our purpose. -- Bob L. Ross

Reisinger's compromise with Pedos

2009-02-28T12:39:00.000-06:00

REISINGER'S COMPROMISE PASSED
ALONG TO THE FLOUNDERS' SECT

The evident infatuation which the Flounders (aka "Founders Ministries") have for the Pedobaptists (baby baptizers) is perhaps primarily due to the early compromise of Flounders' Founder Ernest Reisinger with the Pedobaptists who own and operate the Banner of Truth Trust in Great Britain (See Ermest C. Reisinger, A Biography, page 106).

Iain Murray, head of the BTT and virtual "godfather" of the Flounders, saw in Reisinger a great asset in promoting sales of Banner of Truth books in the United States. Reisinger had earlier formed "Puritan Publications" in Carlisle, Pennsylvania to promote sales of BTT publications, and Puritan Publications eventually became the Banner of Truth USA branch for BTT publications.

Murray evidently wanted to make that association with Reisinger secure by having Ernest to serve as a "trustee" of the BTT. This was enacted in 1968, and the British company has subsequently made a small fortune from USA sales, thanks primarily to the promotional efforts of trustee Ernest Reisinger and his associates at Carlisle, Pennsylvania and later with the Flounders.

When being considered for installation as a trustee of the BTT, Reisinger was informed by Iain Murray that Pedobaptist dogma would be the final authority, and any dispute would be "governed by the Westminster Confession and John Calvin's Institutes . . . the [Banner of Truth] Trust deed is not strictly neutral on the point of baptism" (ibid, page 106).

This doubtlessly demonstrates why at least the Flounders' leadership has always maintained a rather cozy attitude and relationship with the Pedobaptists; the Flounders were originally rooted in Reisinger's compromise with the Banner of Truth Trust Pedobaptists and have remained sensitive about maintaining the status quo ever since.

Thus, Reisinger-related endeavors in the USA have been perhaps the most active literary disseminators of Pedobaptist dogma on this continent. While maintaining his Southern Baptist affiliation, Reisinger and the Flounders have "straddled the fence" on doctrinal differences, soft-peddling with the Pedos and never making baptismal issues to be major "tests" of ecclesiastical relations. "Unionism" with the Pedobaptists has been the "rule" rather than the "exception." The Flounders have a record of reaching-out to the Pedos, tolerating any differences for their greater cause -- the promotion of Pedobaptist Reformed Hybrid Calvinism.

The current discussion on some of the Southern Baptist blogs pertaining to "Baptist Identity" and "Great Commission Resurgence" is rooted in the Reisinger compromise, as it is perpetuated by the current Flounders led by Tom Ascol. This compromise is now apparently infecting some Southeastern Baptist Theological Seminary leaders as they contemplate a compromising "consensus on Calvinism" which would be palatable to both Pedobaptists and the Flounders' types.

Hybridism's abuse of terms

2009-02-26T15:28:00.000-06:00

MISLEADING TERMINOLOGY BY
THE HYBRID CALVINISTS

The Reformed Hybrid Calvinists of this day and age have hijacked several terms under which they are in the habit of propagating their evoluted theological views.

For example, terms such as --

"Calvinism," "Monergism," "Classical Calvinism," "Historic," "Founders," "Doctrines of Grace," etc. are all frequently used by the Hybrids as if to imply that Hybrid Calvinism is an expression of the views implied by those terms.

This is one of the greatest misconceptions on the theology market of this age. To buy into this is to by-pass what is taught in the standard theological sources of original Calvinism.

Hybrid Calvinism is not taught in the standard creeds and confessions of the past. It is a later development, as admitted by writers such as Shedd, Berkhof, and Packer. We have cited these references before, but here they are again, evidence of what we have stated:

This heart of Hybrid Calvinism is what they call the "ordo salutis," and its evolution is traced by Dr. Shedd to Pedobaptist Francis Turretin.

W. G. T. Shedd, Dogmatic Theology, Volume 2, pages 492-494:

The divines of the seventeenth century very generally do not distinguish between regeneration and conversion, but employ the two as synonyms. Owen does this continually: On the Spirit, III. v. And Charnocke likewise: Attributes, Practical Atheism. The Westminster does not use the term regeneration. In stead of it, it employs the term vocation, or effectual calling. This comprises the entire work of the Holy Spirit in the application of redemption. . . . But this wide use of the term regeneration led to confusion of ideas and views. As there are two distinct words in the language, regeneration and conversion, there are also two distinct notions denoted by them. Consequently, there arose gradually a stricter use of the term regeneration, and its discrimination from conversion.

Turretin (XV. iv. 13) defines two kinds of conversion, as the term was employed in his day. . . . After thus defining, Turretin remarks that the first kind of conversion is better denominated 'regeneration,' because it has reference to the new birth by which man is renewed in the image of his Maker; and the second kind of conversion is better denominated 'conversion,' because it includes the operation and agency of man himself. . . . We shall adopt this distinction between regeneration and conversion. . . . Regeneration is a cause; conversion is an effect."

J. I. Packer :

Many seventeenth century Reformed theologians equated regeneration with effectual calling and conversion with regeneration . . . LATER REFORMED THEOLOGY has defined regeneration more narrowly, as the implanting of the "seed" from which faith and repentance spring (I John 3:9) in the course of effectual calling.

Louis Berkhof also acknowledged that the theory had post-Creedal development:

It is true that some Reformed authors have occasionally used the term 'regeneration' as including even sanctification, but that was in the days when the ORDO SALUTIS was not as fully developed as it is today" (Systematic Theology, page 468).

These are well-known "Reformed" Pedobaptist sources, and they are revealing that the "ordo salutis" of modern Reformed theology, which puts "regeneration" prior to faith, is in fact a hybrid development which arose "later" than Calvin, Owen, Watson, Sibbes, and the seventeenth century divines (Puritans) who regarded regeneration and conversion as synonymous.

It should be significant for a Baptist to take note of the fact that many, if not most, of the current notable advocates of Hybrid Calvinism are from the Reformed Pedobaptist (baby baptizers) camp. And even those who are not Pedos generally have been significantly impacted in their thinking by the influence of Pedobaptists. Hybrid Calvinist advocates have never been especially noted for emphasis upon evangelism, soul-winning, and witnessing, but they have made reputations for themselves via their academic writings and "registration fee required" conference appearances.

Spurgeon's non-Reformed likeness

2009-02-23T20:05:00.000-06:00

C. H. SPURGEON -- NOT MUCH
OF A "REFORMED BAPTIST"

While his theoretical views in theology were creedally Calvinistic, in many respects C. H. Spurgeon does not fit the "Reformed" model of our day and age. In fact, I have yet to come upon where Spurgeon even referred to himself as "Reformed," nor of his conforming to any of the Reformed peccadillos with which we meet in our time.

For example, we often meet with terminology and practices in his sermons to which the modern Reformed folks frequently object -- such as "accept Jesus," "open your heart," "decision," use of the "sinner's prayer," the "inquiry room," "simple Gospel," and the enthusiastic endorsement of the evangelistic work of D. L. Moody .

But even more significant was Spurgeon's emphasis upon the unrestricted universality of the Gospel, such as in the following excerpts:

Spurgeon:

Jesus Christ said, “Go you into all the world and preach the Gospel to very creature. He that believes and is baptized shall be saved, and he that believes not shall be damned.”

If we had to look for some price in the hands of the creature, or some fitness in the mind of the creature, or some excellence in the life of the creature, we could not preach mercy to every creature—we should have to preach it to prepared creatures—and then that preparation would be the money and the price.

I am sorry that some of my Brothers entertain the idea that the Gospel is to be preached only to certain characters. They dare not preach the Gospel to everybody—they try to preach it only to the elect. Surely, if the Lord meant them to make the selection He would have set a mark upon His chosen. As I do not know the elect and have no command to confine my preaching to them, but am bid to preach the Gospel to every creature, I am thankful that the Gospel is put in such a way—that no creature can be too poor, too wicked, or too vile to receive it—for it is “without money and without price.” That is going to the very bottom!

Surely, that takes in the most degraded, debased and despised of our race—whoever they may be! If before I preach the Gospel I have to look for a measure of fitness in a man, then I cannot preach the Gospel to any but those whom I believe to have the fitness. But if the Gospel is to be preached freely, with no conditions or demands for preparations or prerequisites—if this is the Gospel, that “whoever believes in Jesus is not condemned”—then may I go to the most degraded Bushmen, or savage Ashantees, or untameable Modocs and tell them the Good News! We may speak of mercy to harlots and thieves—and we may carry the gladsome message into the Guilt Garden and Hangman’s Alley! We may penetrate the jungles of crime and cry with the same entreaty from Heaven—“Let the wicked forsake his way, and the unrighteous man his thoughts, and let him turn unto the Lord, for He will have mercy upon him, and to our God, for He will abundantly pardon.”

The fact that the mercy of God is “without money and without price” enables us, by His Grace, to preach it to every man, woman and child of woman born! -- Metropolitan Tabernacle Pulpit, Volume 20, Year 1874, Sermon #1161, pages 140, 141.

This is such an Atonement made by Christ upon the Cross that it presents a warrant for every sinner born of woman to come to God and say, “Lord, forgive me, for Christ has died.”

When we preach the Gospel it is in no stinted terms, looking about and thinking that perhaps there might be half a dozen in the building to whom the Gospel might honestly be spoken. But looking every man and woman in the face, we preach reconciliation by Jesus Christ to them and point them to the atoning blood.

“For God so loved the world that He gave His only begotten Son, that whoever believes in Him might not perish but have everlasting life.” -- Metropolitan Tabernacle Pulpit, Volume 19, Year 1873, Sermon #1124, pages 427, 428.

Spurgeon versus Hyperism

2009-02-21T20:39:00.000-06:00

SPURGEON BROKE THE SPELL
OF HYPERISM IN ENGLAND

Baptist churches in the London of the early 1850s were what some might regard as relatively "dead" or "dying." Most of this seems to have been due to too great an emphasis on "Calvinism," and Spurgeon had to overcome a great deal of resistance from its advocates.

When Spurgeon came to London to the spiritually and architecturally "gloomy" New Park Street Chapel from distant Waterbeach, near Cambridge in the Fen country where he had just about single-handedly been used of the Lord in converting the entire village, it was like the crashing of a red-hot meteor into a stagnant pond of water — things began to "snap, crackle, and pop."

Spurgeon says --

"In a very short time after I began to preach in London, the congregation so multiplied as to make the chapel, in the evening, when the gas was burning, like the Black Hole of Calcutta" (Autobiography, Vol. 1, page 369).

Spurgeon felt so stifled that when the deacons ignored his request to do something about the upper windows, he took matters into his own hands. Later, in regard to the mysteriously missing windowpanes, he said, "I shall have to confess that I have walked with the stick which let the oxygen into that stifling structure" (ibid).

He not only knocked the windows out, his soul-winning preaching virtually knocked down the old edifice itself. The sparsely attended church began to grow in attendance at such a pace that the building could not contain the crowds. Even an enlargement would not hold them, so they had to build the new Metropolitan Tabernacle, and at times even it was inadequate.

Appropriately, the 673rd sermon of his ministry — but the very first he delivered at Park Street Chapel on December 18, 1853 to a congregation he described as "a mere handful" (Metropolitan Tabernacle: Its History and Work, page 71) — was rather prophetic of his own entrance upon the London Baptist scene:

“Every good gift and every perfect gift is from above, and cometh down from the Father of lights, with whom is no variableness, neither shadow of turning.” — James 1:17.

Spurgeon himself proved to be a "good gift" — even if not perfect — to the Christianity of his age, and especially at the New Park Street Chapel where they were in such desperate need of spiritual blessings.

The Baptist preachers and churches of Park Street Chapel variety were mostly either hyper-Calvinists or ultra-Calvinists, and did not have anyone to lead them in any other direction. The killing effects of "mere doctrine" and too great an emphasis upon "the Calvinist system" had virtually choked out any aggressive evangelistic efforts such as the "going into the highways and hedges and compel them to come in" approach.

Spurgeon's success in preaching the "simple Gospel" made him the object of resentment, jealousy, criticism, and even cynical ridicule by some of the "ultra-fine" Baptists, especially some of the "scribes and Pharisees" among the "high Calvinists." At least one of the notable leaders of the time even questioned Spurgeon's conversion!

Spurgeon said in one of his New Park Street sermons, "I do not hesitate to say, that Phariseeism is mixed with Hyper-Calvinism more than with any other sect in the world" (New Park Street Pulpit, Year 1860, #336 — STRUGGLES OF CONSCIENCE, page 403).

In a letter to his family, Spurgeon wrote of the "high" Calvinism which prevailed at the church at that time. "It is the Calvinism they want," he said:

“December __, 1853.
“My Dear Father, ...
“Should I be settled in London, I will come and see you often. I do not anticipate going there with much pleasure. I am contented where I am; but if God has more for me to do, then let me go and trust in Him. The London people are rather higher in Calvinism than I am; but I have succeeded in bringing one church [at Waterbeach] to my own views, and will trust, with Divine assistance, to do the same with another. I am a Calvinist; I love what someone called ‘glorious Calvinism,’ but ‘Hyperism’ is too hot-spiced for my palate...

“My people [at Waterbeach] are very sad; some wept bitterly at the sight of me, although I made no allusion to the subject in the pulpit, as it is too uncertain to speak of publicly. It is Calvinism they want in London, and any Arminian preaching will not be endured. Several in the church are far before me in theological acumen; they would not admit that it is so, but they all expressed their belief that my originality, or even eccentricity, was the very thing to draw a London audience. The chapel is one of the finest in the denomination; somewhat in the style of our Cambridge Museum. A Merry Christmas to you all; a Happy New Year; and the blessing of the God of Jacob! —
Yours affectionately,
C. H. SPURGEON.”

Spurgeon not only knocked out the windows of the chapel, and knocked down the building in consequence of the need for greater seating capacity for the crowds, he would soon strike blow-after-blow at what he often called the "false Calvinism" of his "ultraists" brethren.

One of the innovations which Spurgeon put to good use, out of the practical necessity for the hearing of confessions of Christ by those responding to his evangelistic preaching, was the use of inquiry-rooms. Spurgeon's doctrine and practices had a great effect upon the American evangelist, D. L. Moody (1837-1899), who purposely made his way to London to observe Spurgeon's work and methods.

Moody was gifted with the love of evangelism, not with a deep theological inclination or with a seminary education, yet one finds a great deal of the theology advocated by Spurgeon in the small books by Moody, manifesting at whose feet Moody learned. In this regard, Moody was indeed a sort of "Timothy" in relation to C. H. Spurgeon.

Moody — after he started his own preaching ministry — began to adopt many of Spurgeon's means of implementing the work of the Gospel, including starting a Bible Institute similar to Spurgeon's Pastor's College, a colportage or publishing work similar to Spurgeon's, preaching to the masses in large halls as did Spurgeon, and using the inquiry-room to deal with converts, as did Spurgeon.

The inquiry-room method, in its essential elements, became the forerunner of what we today call the "public invitation." It evidently derives from C. H. Spurgeon.

This method did not derive from Charles G. Finney's "anxious seat," as some Hybrid Calvinists allege, for the inquiry-room was not on that order at all. Moody never even heard Finney preach, nor saw the "anxious seat" used in a Finney revival meeting. By 1860, Finney could not even travel, much less hold revival meetings, and that was long before Moody even started preaching. [See Spurgeon and Finney vs. the Founders, and Timmy Brister Bristling From "Finneyitis," and Frame of Mind on Finney].

But Moody did hear Spurgeon, followed Spurgeon, reading everything of Spurgeon's, and he saw how Spurgeon dealt with souls. He adopted Spurgeon's methods.

If the only "C. H. Spurgeon" you know about is the disfiguration presented in several contexts in Pedobaptist Iain Murray's "The Forgotten Spurgeon," you are still very much "in the dark." Mr. Murray's purpose, seemingly, is often to take snippets from Spurgeon which he can utilize in the promotion of what Spurgeon might regard as a form of the "rigid system of Calvinism." The greatest barriers to evangelism Spurgeon ever encountered in London were the "rigid" Calvinists, embellishing soundness in doctrine as of more importance than evangelism.

In fact, if certain laborious features in Mr. Murray's version of Spurgeon is all you know of him, it might be more healthy for your knowledge of Spurgeon if the "Spurgeon" of Mr. Murray's writings were indeed simply "forgotten." If the only "D. L. Moody" you know about is the one presented by Mr. Murray, you can also most likely improve your mind's concept of Moody by simply "forgetting" that image of Moody. That also applies to Mr. Murray's image of John Gill in his "Spurgeon v. Hyper-Calvinism." Pedobaptist Murray seems to have a peculiar distaste for some of our Baptistic heroes!

We grant that Mr. Murray is a very knowledgeable, widely read, and crafty writer, but unfortunately his devotion to his Pedobaptist theology and practice apparently encumbers his noteworthy abilities from always accurately rendering objective, impartial facts and theological views. He ofttimes, we think, practices the refined literary craft of creating the figure he desires "after his own image." He will have his own "Spurgeon" and his own "Moody," clipping a patch here, and a patch there, and pasting all the snippets together to compose the images desired.

Today, there are all too many who have failed to read Spurgeon and have a warped image from reading the writings of Murray. To read more about how Mr. Murray has disfigured Spurgeon, go to this website and consult my articles: Selected Writings of Bob Ross.

Also, you may consult some materials at our Pilgrim Publications website: Spurgeon & Public Invitation System

Piper vs Hybrids?

2009-02-19T11:45:00.000-06:00

JOHN PIPER VERSUS
HYBRID CALVINISM?

Pastor John Piper has a new book, Finally Alive, published by Christian Focus. It deals with the New Birth, and apparently is consistent with the view for which we have been contending on the Calvinist Flyswatter blog for the past three years -- namely, the New Birth takes place in conjunction with
simultaneous union with Christ through faith.

Pastor Bruce Oyen recently called my attention to an excerpt from Piper's book which is posted at a website in an item entitled Ransomed, Raised, and Called -- How Does God Regenerate Us?

Here are few selected remarks from the excerpt at that website:

>>
Jesus said we must be born again (John 3:3). The Holy Spirit has to work a miracle in our hearts and give us new spiritual life. . . . The way this happens, as we have seen so far, is that the Spirit of God supernaturally gives us new spiritual life by connecting us with Jesus Christ through faith. The new spiritual life that we receive in the new birth is not separate from union with Jesus, and it is not separate from faith. When God in the riches of his mercy and the greatness of his love and the sovereignty of his grace chooses to regenerate us, he gives us new life by uniting us to Christ. “God gave us eternal life, and this life is in his Son” (1 John 5:11). Our first experience of this is the faith in Jesus that this life brings. There is no separation of time here. When we are born again, we believe. And when we believe, we know we have been born again. When there is fire, there is heat. When there is new birth, there is faith. . . .

. . . God causes us to be born again. 1) He ransomed us from sin and wrath by the blood of Christ and paid the debt for sinners to have eternal life. 2) He raised Jesus from the dead so that union with Jesus gives eternal life that never fades away. 3) And He called us from darkness to light and from death to life through the gospel and gave us eyes to see and ears to hear. He made the light of the glory of God in the face of Christ shine in our hearts through the gospel. And we believed. We embraced Christ for the Treasure that he is.
>>

These statements are consistent with what was posted on the Flyswatter awhile back, which you may consult here -- Is John Piper Correct on the New Birth?

If we understand Piper correctly, his view is certainly distinguishable from the Hybrid Calvinist "regeneration precedes faith" view advocated by Hybrids such as R. C. Sproul, Tom and Bill Ascol of the Flounders, Wayne Grudem, Tom Nettles, Thomas Schreiner, J. I. Packer, Iain Murray, Ernest Reisinger, James White, and featured in the systematic theologies of W. G. T. Shedd and Louis Berkhof. If this is the case, we hope Piper's influence for the Creedal view on Regeneration will be felt among those who erroneously use the term "monergism" to refer to the "regeneration precedes faith" teaching.