The ArminianA PUBLICATION OF THE FUNDAMENTAL WESLEYAN SOCIETY
VOLUME 34 SPRING 2016 ISSUE 1
RICHARD WATSON: METHODISM’S FIRST
SYSTEMATIC THEOLOGIAN Barry W. Hamilton
fter the death of John Wesley in 1791, a he made innumerable contributions to the new generation of leaders rose to prom- young denomination and helped lead her inenceA in the Wesleyan Methodist Church in through a tumultuous period known as Mid- England, figures that included Adam Clarke, dle Methodism. Thomas Coke, Samuel Bradburn and Jabez Born in humble circumstances in Bar- Bunting. During this time, Anglican antago- ton-upon-Humber in 1783, Watson did not nists attacked Methodism from pulpits and in immediately show promise as a church leader. pamphlets. Amidst a throng of Wesleyan he- Yet in time he became converted and sensed a roes came Richard Watson, a gifted preacher call to preach. But his opportunities were limit- and author who defended Methodism against ed, for his parents had apprenticed him as a fur- her enemies. Over the course of his lifetime, niture-maker. After he began to travel at around fifteen years of age, Watson served three or four THE ARMINIAN MAGAZINE circuits until he transferred to the Methodist Volume 34 Spring 2016 Issue 1 New Connection. His habit of debating theol- ogy in front of rustic congregations backfired ISSN 1085-2808 when village gossip branded him a heretic, and Richard Watson: Methodism’s First Systematic Theologian . 1 the young preacher found himself locked out of his charge. The bitter taste of failure lingered Franciscus Gomarus: Arminius’ Adamant Adversary . . . . 3 throughout his adult life and may have motivat- ed him to achievement as salve for his wounds. In Defense of Ten Commandments: The Perpetual In his early adulthood, Watson developed Mandate of Sabbath Observance ...... 5 an extraordinary talent for persuasive speaking. At first sight some churches judged him a mere Reviews: boy, yet his pulpit skill carried the impression Nazarenes Exploring Evolution (Part 2) ...... 6 of divine unction. A precocious young man, Watson also displayed remarkable writing tal- 2000 Years of Spiritual Warfare: Recorded Accounts ents, particularly when debating theology and of Demonic Activity from the 1st to the 21st Centuries . . 9 mustering British patriotism. Finding himself constricted in the New Connexion, Watson Arminian and Baptist ...... 9 thought of returning to the Wesleyan Method- visit our web site at
THE ARMINIAN - Page 2 Franciscus Gomarus: Arminius’ Adamant Adversary John S. Knox
any historical, political, and theological show the defining factors between Arminius factors surrounded Jacobus Arminius and and the Supralapsarians. One such person was Mhis Declaration of Sentiments. Arminius lived Dutch Reformed pastor and Calvinist professor during a period of social complexity that clearly at Leiden, Franciscus Gomarus. influenced both the motivation and transmis- sion of his theological presentations. Yet, just as Franciscus Gomarus: a drama or play is more than the props or the Life and Mission stage setup, so, too, is the situation concerning Arminius greater than mere historical or cultural Born in Bruges, Flanders, one year before matters alone. Jean Calvin’s death (1563), Franciscus Gomarus Thus, a proper investigation of Arminius and his siblings grew up with parents that fol- and his theological assertions should include lowed Reformed thought. A precocious lad, a review of the persons involved in Arminius’ Franciscus pursued a classical education where- life and times (both in he began his studies of theology, philosophy, Gomarus wanted Arminius positively and nega- rhetoric, and the law. tively) in order to aid Like many other Protestants of the time, and his theology to be rejected in a deeper analysis in 1577, the Gomarus family was forced to flee once and for all, but his attack of Arminius and his eastward to Germany because of extremist Cath- work — people that olic and Lutheran oppression. In Strasbourg, had backfired. Arminius alluded to Germany, Franciscus began his classical studies or specifically named under staunch Calvinists like Johann Sturm, in the Declaration who either supported his po- German educator and advisor (1507-1589). sition or whom he claimed had an incorrect un- When more religious persecution and op- derstanding of doctrine and Calvinism. pressive measures were instituted, Franciscus It would be impossible, of course, to investi- moved again to Neustadt, where he received gate every influential individual in Arminius’ life, tutelage from Supralapsarian professors Zach- but one can highlight the people with a vested, arias Ursinus (formerly at the University of personal interest in the Declaration in order to Heidelberg) and Hieronymus Zanchius (at the
Wesley Stories Joseph Beaumont Wakeley r. Wesley was a great redeemer of time, and was always pained at the loss of a moment, as the following an- ecdote, related by Dr. Adam Clarke will show: MIn 1785, with Joseph Bradford, he visited Dr. Clarke on St. Austell Circuit. Says the Doctor: “I was with Mr. Wesley one day when his chaise was not at the door at the time he had ordered it. He set off on foot, and I accom- panied him. It was not long, however, before Joseph Bradford overtook us with it. Mr. Wesley inquired, ‘Joseph, what has been the matter?’ “Bradford explained, ‘I could not get things ready any sooner, sir.’ Wesley replied, ‘You should have urged the people to it.’ Bradford explained, ‘I spoke to them to be in readiness, sir, no less than nineteen times.’ “Mr. Wesley pleasantly remarked, ‘You lost it, you blockhead, for the want of the twentieth,’ thus giving Joseph and his young friend a gentle hint on punctuality and perseverance.”
THE ARMINIAN - Page 3 Casmirianum Academy). In 1582, he traveled to filled with concern for friend and foe alike, pres- England, taking some courses at Oxford Univer- ents quite a contrast. But Arminius was the her- sity, but he finally graduated in 1584 from the etic, and Gomarus stood for the truth.” University of Cambridge. He received his doc- In his response to Arminius’ defense of his toral degree from the University of Heidelberg theology, Gomarus clearly states in Chapter in 1594. XIII, Based on available historical evidence, it is Therefore, also, the object of pre- safe to say that Franciscus Gomarus was Armin- destination to its own ends – to speak ius’ chief theological rival. From the moment accurately and without prolepsis (which, Arminius considered joining the faculty at the when used in this argument, begets ob- University of Leyden, Gomarus seemed to make scurity) – are rational creatures, not as it his responsibility to prevent Arminius from actually about to be saved or lost, to be teaching there and from spreading his brand of created, about to fall or stand fast, or theology. He felt Arminius should not be in that about to be restored; but, so far as re- position of influence in the theological sphere mote and indefinite ability goes, savable, because his theology was “too Pelagian.” damnable, creable [creatable], liable to In no uncertain terms, Gomarus let the gov- fall, restorable. And that is proved, be- ernors know he did not want Arminius appoint- yond controversy, by the nature and or- ed; however, after Arminius had been hired over der of the object and of the cause both the objections of Gomarus, the latter then dog- efficient and final. For the object, in the gedly criticized, confronted, and debated with order of nature, precedes the operation Arminius every chance that he could. He be- of the power attached to it and occupied came essentially what church historian Carl O. about it, and therefore also the object of Bangs calls an “agent of hostility to Arminius.” predestination precedes predestination Observing the active aggression of Gomarus, it itself; nay, and exceeds it in extent also, is easy to conclude that he was simply a bitter as we have shown (in Thesis X): but be- man; however, many would disagree with this ing about to be saved, to be created, to hasty conclusion. fall, to be restored, does not exceed nor In Portraits of Faithful Saints, Herman Han- precede predestination, but follows it: ko sees Gomarus as a man who was a “staunch Therefore it is not the object of it. For, as defender of the faith” and one who “stood for the the creable depends on the indetermi- truth”; however, many thought Gomarus to be nate and absolute omnipotence of God, “obnoxious at times and barely tolerable.” Ei- so what is to be created depends on that ther way, Arminius avoided the conflict when omnipotence determined to creation by he could; but eight years later, he finally stood predestination of the will; and there- against Gomarus in front of the Assembly to de- fore cannot come before predestination, termine if his Declaration or Gomarus’ position which is its efficient cause. was correct. Just as Arminius had provided a full and The end result was not what Gomarus had detailed explanation of the realities and biblical hoped to occur. He wanted Arminius and his foundation of predestination and freedom of hu- theology to be rejected once and for all. Instead, man will, Gomarus presented a thirty-two-part Arminius found an audience willing to listen to treatise on proper Reformed doctrine entitled, his courteous and soft-spoken interpretation of “Of God’s Predestination.” Perhaps he hoped to doctrine. Gomarus’ attack had backfired. As in- sway his audience with a tidal wave of evidence dicated by Bangs, the Assembly members were to refute a substantial foe. As Hanko states, “His “offended by Gomarus’ speech” and “could not opponent, Jacobus Arminius, popular with stu- believe [Arminius] to be the two-faced person dents and ministers, gracious, kind, tolerant, Gomarus pictured him to be.”
THE ARMINIAN - Page 4 Despite this setback, Gomarus immediate- tics the Remonstrant leaders.” This resulted in ly re-challenged Arminius to another debate hundreds of ministers, teachers, and theologians sometime during the next year. However, it in support of the Arminian party being removed was never to occur because Arminius died soon from their respective positions and subsequently thereafter in 1609. Due to the violence that fol- sent into exile or imprisoned. lowed because of riots in several Dutch cities Franciscus Gomarus had finally conquered over the Remonstrants, Gomarus and the other Arminius and his theology—at least for the mo- Supralapsarians found the Synod of 1618 more ment. However, Arminianism arose to become easily swayed in denouncing Arminius’ teachings an important theological movement in Europe as depicted in the Remonstrants’ five points. and the West, but no such large movement of According to church historian Roger Olsen, “Gomarians” sprung forth from his efforts to with the support of Prince Maurice of Nassau, extinguish the dangerous theology of his most the Synod “concluded by condemning as here- dangerous opponent — Jacobus Arminius.
In Defense of Ten Commandments: The Perpetual
Mandate of Sabbath Observance Joseph D. McPherson
he ten commandments are acknowledged spired of God, the prophet wrote: “If you turn to be the backbone of Old Testament moral back your foot from the Sabbath, from doing lawT and thus to be honored and obeyed in all your pleasure on my holy day, and call the Sab- dispensations, including our own. Four voic- bath a delight and the holy day of the Lord hon- es from Scripture have made the meaning and orable; if you honor it, not going your own ways, duty of honoring the Sabbath clearer and more or seeking your own pleasure, or talking idly, understandable. While others could be cited, we then you shall take a delight in the Lord, and I wish to focus on Moses the lawgiver, Nehemi- will make you ride on the heights of the earth; I ah the post-exilic governor of Judah, Isaiah the will feed you with the heritage of Jacob your fa- prophet, and Christ Jesus, our ultimate lawgiver ther, for the mouth of the Lord has spoken” (Isa. and final Judge. 58:13-14 ESV). “Remember the Sabbath day to keep it holy” In his Sermon on the Mount, Jesus makes (Exod 20:8) was, as we all know, one of ten com- very clear what our attitude to the moral law mandments written by the finger of God on should be: “Do not think that I have come to stone and delivered by Moses. In that particular abolish the Law or the Prophets; I have not come context, keeping the Sabbath day holy was ex- to abolish them but to fulfill them. For truly, I pressly applied to the ceasing of physical labor say to you, until heaven and earth pass away, not normally carried out the other six days of the an iota, not a dot, will pass from the Law until all week. is accomplished. Therefore, whoever relaxes one Nehemiah, governor of Judah, following the of the least of these commandments and teaches Jews return from exile, forbad the treading of others to do the same will be called least in the wine presses on the Sabbath, together with the kingdom of heaven. But whoever does them and business of trade and commerce in and around teaches them will be called great in the kingdom the gates of Jerusalem. of heaven” (Matt. 5:17-19 ESV). The prophet Isaiah, however, expands fur- In his Explanatory Notes Upon the New Testa- ther our understanding of what God expects ment, John Wesley renders verse 19 thus: “Who- of us concerning Sabbath day activity. Fully in- soever therefore shall break one of the least of
THE ARMINIAN - Page 5 these commandments, and teach men so, shall and again he makes the point that throughout be the least in the kingdom of heaven: but who- its history, the church has found it perilously soever shall do and teach them, shall be great in difficult to avoid these two extremes and was the kingdom of heaven.” The words, “one of the repeatedly found crashing on one or the other least of these commandments” he observes to be of these rocks while endeavoring to navigate the any “so accounted by men.” Those who “shall be narrow straits. Antinomianism, which means least in the kingdom of heaven” he understands “against law” or “lawlessness,” was a common to be those who in reality “shall have no part characteristic of Calvinists in Fletcher’s day, who therein.” minimized the observance of all moral law. By Jesus faced much criticism and censor from way of reproof, he wrote: “Instead ... of dressing the scribes and Pharisees while repeatedly heal- up the [moral law] as a scarecrow, let us in our ing the sick and crippled on the Sabbath and degree ‘magnify it, and make it honorable,’ as did even defended his disciples when they did what our Lord. Instead of representing it as ‘an intol- was necessary for the satisfying of bodily hunger erable yoke of bondage,’ let us call it, with St. and necessary sustenance. In accordance with Je- Paul, ‘the law of Christ;’ and, with St. James, ‘the sus’ teachings and Scripture in general, we are to perfect law of liberty.’ And,” continues Fletcher, understand, therefore, that the Sabbath or Lord’s “let every true believer say, with David, ‘I love thy Day is to be set aside for rest from the common commandments above gold and precious stones: labor and business of the week while giving our- I shall keep thy law, forever and ever; I will walk selves to activities and pursuit of worship, duties at liberty, for I seek thy precepts.’” of necessity and duties of mercy. Whether the church crashes against the Rev. John Fletcher was the esteemed Vicar rock on the right or that on the left, disastrous of Madeley, England, in the eighteenth century results will inevitably be the same. True evan- and well-recognized apologist for early Meth- gelical faith that brings life to the human soul odist teachings. In his Checks to Antinomianism and church body will be found no longer to exist. he has likened the church to a ship endeavoring How, then, is safe navigation to be made through to navigate the straits between two rocks of error. the straits between Pharisaism and Antinomi- The rock on the left he identified as Pharisaism, anism? While eschewing the role of those who one scriptural example being the “teaching for “teach for doctrines the commandments of men,” doctrines the commandments of men” (Matt. let us embrace a life of loving the moral law, the 15:9). The rock on the right he identified as -An law of Christ and law of love. Remember, it is tinomianism, scripturally defined as “[making] Jesus who reminds all his followers: “If ye love void the law though faith” (Rom. 3:31). Again me, keep my commandments” (John 14:15).
REVIEWS
A MONSTROUS INVERSION: Review of Nazarenes Exploring Evolution, Part Two
Let a man question the inspiration of the believe; he edits, amends, strikes out, adds at Scriptures and a curious, even monstrous, inver- his pleasure; but always he sits above the Word sion takes place: thereafter he judges the Word and makes it amenable to him instead of kneel- instead of letting the Word judge him; he de- ing before God and becoming amenable to the termines what the Word should teach instead Word. — A. W. Tozer of permitting it to determine what he should
THE ARMINIAN - Page 6 [It] is “dangerous ... to depart from Scrip- we see. And that the creator has providentially achieved ture, either as to language or sentiment;” and I his purposes via Darwinian pathways, meaning that believe that most of the controversies which have humans and beasts are the same biological continuum. disturbed the church, have arisen from people’s Thus, what separates the NEE’s model of origins from wanting to be wise above what is written, not secular university textbook orthodoxy is NEE leaves contented with what God has plainly revealed room for a divine foot in the door; though unfortunately there. —Letter from John Wesley to Joseph Benson it’s never explained how “divine agency” is ferreted from the raw scientific data. Here NEE basically asserts that, When wrestling with inerrancy in the 80’s, John D. “It doesn’t matter HOW God created ... as long as one Woodbridge’s Biblical Authority: Infallibility and Iner- affirms THAT God created” (pp. 16, 45, 53, 64, etc). But rancy in the Christian Tradition was particularly anchor- as we’ll see, the “how” factor is deeply relevant for a num- ing for this reviewer. J. I. Packer noted it laid bare the ber of reasons. “shoddy scholarship” behind two faulty theses. Faulty Many in NEE and Church of the Nazarene [COTN] higher education don’t hide their embrace of evolution- thesis one: The Scriptures are authoritative in areas of ary ideas nor their denial of inerrancy. This transparen- faith and practice, but not in non-salvific matters like cy is rare and refreshing for progressives in confessional historical minutia, chronology, geography, zoology, or schools. But those who’ve fallen prey to the aforemen- other scientific details. tioned two faulty towers don’t always stop there. A denial Faulty thesis two: Inerrancy is a novelty of the nine- of inerrancy is so often followed by the “monstrous in- teenth century. Once, when pressed in an interview for version” noted by Tozer. No one familiar with Wesley can my stance on Scripture, I recall a curmudgeonly gate- conceive of him invoking scientific dogmas to determine keeper at a confessional school labeling my inerrantist which Scriptures are binding or how they’re to be exe- view as “a late nineteenth century Princetonian con- geted. Early Wesleyan tradition is not perfect, but who struct.” I’m guessing it wasn’t meant to flatter, and in the would doubt that the key thinkers in those days were ensuing fifteen years at this college I encountered allies characterized by a complete submission to the incarnate for both faulty towers above; artful dodgers very clev- Word and inscripturated Word—striving to submit to er at quarantining their personal credo from “handbook the best exegesis of special revelation, and not beholden dogma;” and camouflaging their true convictions from to the imprimatur of extrabiblical entities. easy detection. How this comports with any meaningful The COTN Manual doesn’t have a commitment to integrity is a question to be picked up below. strict inerrancy, though many in the rank and file do. And Packer praised Woodbridge’s book as a series of thus many COTN academics who defend neo-Darwin- “knock-out blows” and a “nasty job” that needed doing. ism bristle at any suggestion that the denomination ever A Woodbridge or two would be needed to tackle the held to anything like full inerrancy, wanting to put as diverse topics, misconceptions, distractions, and cam- much daylight as possible between themselves and fun- ouflage in Nazarenes Exploring Evolution (NEE). This damentalism. Square Peg: Why Wesleyans Aren’t Funda- reviewer is no Woodbridge – a deficit amplified all the mentalists, edited by Al Truesdale, is dedicated to this more since a review can’t counter a work 100 times larg- point. But being embarrassed by or denying fundamen- er. Compounding matters further is the fact that our fi- talist roots and inerrancy-like commitment to Scripture eriest emotions seem to incubate in wait for exchanges does not mean they are not there, as shown in McCarthy, on origins. That’s a confession more than an accusation. “Nazarenes and the Authority of the Bible, 1908-1988: No one likes “nasty jobs” and I genuinely have no in- Eighty Years of Changing Definitions in the Church of tent to alienate, hurt, demean, oversimplify or misrep- the Nazarene,” and Reasoner, The Importance of Inerrancy. resent. Where I fail, please extend forgiveness. Spoiler If any NEE authors hold to full inerrancy, they hide it alert: straight talk, generalizations, and inelegant lopping very well. If any draw a line in the exegetical sand de- off of corners ahead. fending a literal Adam and Eve, or a literal primal act First off, the term “evolution” (and “Darwinism”) is of disobedience in a literal garden, followed by a literal hotly debated, so it’s unfortunate that NEE leaves the curse (resulting in things like thorns that didn’t exist pri- burden on the reader to cobble together a definition. It or to the fall), their voices are drowned out. For the most seems the writers hold to a God-ordained evolutionary part, evolutionary creationists don’t go out on a limb to process as the best explanation for all the diversity of life defend Adam and Eve as literal persons. And when they
THE ARMINIAN - Page 7 do, they hasten to qualify that the Edenic pair weren’t that the evidence is undermining Creation-Fall-Redemp- created out of dust and a rib, but in fact had hominid tion theology” [italics added]. He has even said that he is “parents” who had evolved via some Darwinian path- “happy to concede that science does indeed trump reli- way. Adam and Eve are at best reduced to a Neolithic gious truth about the natural world.” To be clear, he did couple on whom God chose to stamp His imago dei and not contribute a NEE chapter, but his long-time pro- establish covenant. The growing trend in TE (theistic moting TE ideas in Nazarene academia is evident in the evolution) is to see Adam and Eve as mere metaphorical pages. Consider this excerpt from Saving Darwin, where representations instead of real people. Many recent books he gloats: grapple with the quest for a historical Adam. This is a watershed issue for today’s church, and NEE is a wake- Most evangelical colleges teach evolution, up call for the looming crisis in Wesleyan circles. The albeit quietly, carefully, and often tentatively, al- matter is critical simply because it is tethered to larger though there are exceptions.... Those of us teach- issues of soteriology, hermeneutics, theodicy, and the au- ing evolution at evangelical colleges are made to thority of Christ. feel as if we have this subversive secret we must In the ivory towers of COTN the claim that Gen- whisper quietly in our students’ ears: “Hey, did esis 1-3 is “a mythological version of a historical reality” you know that Adam and Eve were not the first seems to have moved past mere exploring to now being humans and never even existed? And that you considered the better part of theological valor and so- can still be a Christian and believe that?” called “settled science.” Thankfully, as NEE acknowledg- es (and laments), the laity is acting as a firewall against This reviewer found precious little in NEE challeng- such encroachment. But how could a denomination ing this subversive tactic, and a good deal that dovetails historically known for its faithfulness to Scripture shift with it. One wonders, with Al Mohler, whether donors, so quickly? A partial answer to this mammoth question uninformed constituencies, and “parents who send their must reckon with the long shadows of influential profes- offspring to Eastern Nazarene College have any under- sors at COTN schools – those often and fondly referred standing of what is taught there – and with such bold- to with gratitude in NEE. ness and audacity.” Having doubts is part of growing up, Trevecca Nazarene’s Fred Cawthorne contends else- but deliberately promoting and instilling doubts is beyond where that, “Evolution by no means contradicts” Gen- subversive. It is sinister. esis, and “it should strengthen, not threaten, our faith.” In a 2009 BioLogos article, Giberson claims he knows Olivet Nazarene University scientist Rick Colling of “no one who has ever lost their faith” in his classes. once referred to those who “aggressively ignore or deny But elsewhere he actually boasts of the many students many scientific concepts and principles, especially in he’s “converted” to evolutionism. He then adds that these the domain of evolution,” adding that in so doing, they “scientifically informed” graduates often became so dis- “squeeze God into small, rigid boxes.” He believes God satisfied with their home churches that they withdrew, “cares enough about creation to harness even the forces “taking their enlightenment with them.” He admits that of [neo-Darwinian] randomness.” his best students “have completely abandoned their faith Darrel Falk, Professor Emeritus of Biology at Point traditions,” and yet blames the churches! One can only Loma, and past president of BioLogos, believes the mass marvel at the shunt across his critical pathways, willfully of data across the scientific disciplines for the past 150 oblivious to the impact of his secret subversion for twen- years “is absolutely clear and equally certain. The earth is ty-seven years at Eastern Nazarene University. It’s bit- not young, and the life forms did not appear in six twen- ter-sweet when subversives part ways with their schools; ty-four-hour days. God created gradually.” a blessing that new students have one less proselytizer Lastly, Thomas Huxley seems to be enjoying a brief for neo-deism, but incalculably bitter when thinking of reincarnation as Karl Giberson, formerly of Eastern all those who’ve already had traditional views of Genesis Nazarene, who thinks evolution is not only true, but ac- purged from their minds. Giberson’s over-reach contrib- tually “an expression of God’s creativity.” He has famous- uted to his ousting. In outing themselves, NEE may also ly stated that “genetic evidence has made it clear that alert university applicants, parents, apologist-pastors, Adam and Eve cannot have been historical figures, at God-fearing board members, and donors that the trum- least as described in the Bible. More scientifically informed pet’s clarity has waned (Matt. 7:15; 1 Cor. 14:8). evangelicals within conservative traditions are admitting -Thane Hutcherson Ury
THE ARMINIAN - Page 8 Daniel R. Jennings, 2000 Years of Spiritual Warfare: Recorded Accounts of Demonic Activity from the 1st to the 21st Centuries. Sean Multimedia, 2015. ISBN: 978-1505579017. 213 pages.
C. S. Lewis warned that we must avoid the extremes Jennings believes that many cases from the Middle of the magician and the materialist. The magician refers Ages were exaggerated, having been passed on orally and to the pagan worldview in which everything is explained probably embellished over time. For me, this healthy by the supernatural. The materialist refers to the secular scepticism gives credibility to Jennings. or Enlightenment worldview in which everything is ex- Jennings has previously published The Supernatural plained by science. Occurrences of John Wesley (2012) and The Supernatural Jennings has produced a source book of cases across Occurrences of Charles G. Finney (2012). Thus, he has a 2000 years of church history which demonstrates that working knowledge of the phenomenon in the eigh- demons do exist and that Christians have authority over teenth and nineteenth centuries. He also has a balanced this realm of darkness. Jennings begins with the record of view of speaking in tongues, acknowledge it both as a Scripture itself. His footnotes are generally illuminating. legitimate gift of the Spirit and as a counterfeit demonic Jennings presents cases from the era of the early manifestation. church, noting that with the establishment of Christi- Most of his examples from the modern era tend to anity by Constantine demonic activity declined. This is come from pagan culture, but the book closes with two a very profound observation. It has been generally as- examples from his own ministry. Jennings portrays a ma- sumed that Constantine’s conversion was not legitimate. ture position which is neither the categoric rejection of However, Peter J. Leithart challenged this assumption in the supernatural by the old-line intellectual modernist Defending Constantine: The Twilight of an Empire and the or the naive acceptance of the supernatural by the classic Dawn of Christendom (2010). charismatic. If it is true that the acknowledgment and influence In addition to this source book, I would also recom- of Christianity resulted in the decline of demonic activi- mend Appendix A, “Demons and Exorcism in Antiqui- ty by the fourth century, then the rejection of Christian- ty” and Appendix B, “Spirit Possession and Exorcism in ity by our courts and culture in the twenty-first century Societies Today,” 87 pages in the massive, two-volume will result in an increase in demonic activity. I believe work on Miracles by Craig Keener (2011). However, Jen- that explains the spate of random killings, the attraction nings gives a representative cross-section of church his- of terrorism, the growing anarchy, and the sexual perver- tory in just 213 pages. sion which consumes our news. -Vic Reasoner
J. Matthew Pinson, Arminian and Baptist. Nashville: Randall House, 2015. ISBN: 978-0-89265-696-7. 262 pages.
In his book, my friend Matt Pinson lists five species Helwys (1575-1616) was the first Baptist and that he was of Arminianism: also an Arminian. “Reformed Arminian” is his preferred label. Essen- tially Pinson defends the consistency of Baptists to also However, as Pinson wrote in A Free Will Baptist be Arminian. Historically, he demonstrates that the six- Handbook, p. 12: teenth and seventeenth century English General Baptists were Arminian and that the Free Will Baptists also hold The tendency among General Baptists in to this doctrinal heritage. Pinson concludes that Thomas England and America for the first 250 years of
THE ARMINIAN - Page 9 their existence was, if they erred, to err on the side Charles Finney’s theology. I would prefer to exclude of Calvinism rather than on the side of extreme Finney on the basis that he is more properly a Pelagian. Arminianism, such as Wesleyanism or Campbel- Pinson and I both reject Openness Theology, as de- lism. veloped by Clark Pinnock and articulated by Thomas Oord, as outside the bounds of orthodox Arminianism. In his book, A Free Will Baptist Handbook, p. 12, Pin- We agree that denying God’s foreknowledge as a means son explained that there was the publication of a confes- of solving the problem of Calvinism only results in larger sion of faith which has come to be known as the 1812 problems since the Scriptures clearly teach God’s fore- Former Articles. According to Pinson, this confession of knowledge. faith is a condensed and revised version of the 1660 En- The rest of this review is the result of an ongoing dia- glish Baptists Confession of Faith. Article Ten establishes log between Dr. Pinson and myself, in which I will com- that General Baptists of this era were Calvinistic in their pare and contrast early Methodist Arminianism with his view of perseverance. It states, “We believe that the Saints Reformed Arminianism. shall persevere in grace, and never finally fall away ( Jn. 10:27-29).” Pinson told me that this statement was “an 1. Points of Agreement anomaly and mystery” in Free Will Baptist history that We agree that the Bible is our final authority. As disappeared in subsequent printings of that confession. the Word of God, it cannot err. The defining mark of a Baptist is that they insist upon We agree that the doctrine of total depravity the ordinance of believers’ baptism by immersion. While means human inability to save ourselves. Thus, salva- this was not the position Arminius held, Pinson affirms tion is not the result of our free choice but the result both this Baptist distinctive as well as an Arminian view of God’s grace. of salvation. We agree that the atonement is universal. We “Wesleyan-Arminian” is my preferred label. How- also agree that the atonement should be understood ever, I must express my profound concern that there are in terms of the satisfaction of divine justice and not in significant differences between early Methodist theology terms of a governmental theory. These terms are often and the later American holiness movement. This prob- misunderstood and must be defined. Hugo Grotius lem is confounded by the fact that the American holiness was a Remonstrant who first articulated the gov- movement claims to be “Wesleyan,” but is much closer to ernmental theory of the atonement after Arminius. Finney. I would agree with most of Pinson’s rejections of This theory was revived by John Miley, an American “Wesleyan” doctrine and would attempt to explain that Methodist, a hundred years after John Wesley. The Wesley himself did not teach much of what has been governmental theory holds that God could have for- identified with him. Thus, I am attempting to do for Wes- given sin without the death of Christ on the cross, but ley what Pinson is doing for Arminius. that his death was intended as a deterrent against sin. “Stone-Campbell Restoration Arminian” refers to the theology of Barton Stone, Thomas and Alexander Camp- 2. Points that deserve further dialog bell in their quest to restore apostolic Christianity. His- While we both believe that election is condition- torically, this emphasis has been referred to as the Camp- al, I am more prone to see it as corporate while Pin- bellite movement. Pinson and I would be concerned son sees it as individual. that they were actually teaching baptismal regeneration While we both affirm that justification is imput- through immersion. In fairness, however, Jack Cottrell is ed righteousness, I am more prone to link imputed always careful to distinguish his position from the baptis- and imparted righteousness. mal regeneration position. This would also be true of Tom While we both affirm that apostasy is a defection Thatcher and Jon Weatherly. from the faith, I also hold that there are degrees of Anabaptist Arminians. This strain would encompass apostasy. Here, again, sin must be defined. While I Amish, Mennonites, pietism, mysticism, and a separation do not believe that one deliberate act of sin causes from civil government - including pacificism. the loss of salvation in a believer, I am concerned that
THE ARMINIAN - Page 10 unconfessed sin starts a process in motion that must one being to another; nor does he punish or re- be aborted or the believer is liable at some point to ward one for the deeds of another.... We are not apostasy. Thus, I see at least an indirect connection to believe, then, that the obedience of Christ was between sin and apostasy. imputed to men; but that in consideration of this While Pinson rejects the Wesleyan doctrine of obedience God can justly dispense pardon to be- entire sanctification or Christian perfection, I would lievers, and accept them for Christ’s sake.... The assume that he actually rejects the holiness distortion personal righteous of Christ cannot become the of that doctrine. At a popular level, it is understood personal righteousness of any other being [Lec- as “sinless perfection,” a term which Wesley explicitly tures in Systematic Theology, 248 – 249]. rejected. However, the Free Will Baptist Treatise of 1842 taught that one should seek entire sanctification Pinson explained to me that these northern Free- in this life, now! I concede that Pinson knows Baptist will (one word) Baptists were a different group than the history better than I do, but I am particularly inter- Southern Free Will (two words) Baptists. The northern ested in his chapter 6, “Atonement, Justification, and branch was started by Benjamin Randall and were orig- Apostasy in Wesley.” inally labeled “freewill” by Calvinists. Essentially, there were two strands of Freewill/Free Will Baptists and the Pinson’s thesis is that Wesley was influenced by John northern group either merged with the southern group in Goodwin, while Reformed Arminians follow Thomas 1935 or merged with the Northern Baptist Convention Grantham more closely. Pinson is correct in his assess- in 1911. ment that Wesley held to a form of penal satisfaction In 1942 Free Will Baptist Bible College began. The in his view of the atonement. Pinson is also correct that head of the Bible college was L. C. Johnson, a graduate of Wesley did not regard the active obedience of Christ as Bob Jones University, who brought with him the Calvin- the basis for our salvation. istic teaching he learned at Bob Jones. In 2012 the college The active obedience of Christ refers to his sinless life, changed its name to Welch College and Dr. Pinson cur- while the passive obedience of Christ refers to his atoning rently serves as its president. death. The Wesleyan understanding is that faith is imput- Pinson wrote, “The Free Will Baptists of the South ed for righteousness. Our concern is that an emphasis on defined themselves theologically in debate and interac- the imputation of both the active and passive righteous- tion with Calvinistic Baptists rather than other types of ness of Christ, without imparted righteousness, leads to Arminians.” But some of the earlier strands of freewill antinomianism. Wesley denied that the righteousness of Baptists were more Wesleyan. Christ is imputed in lieu of any subsequent obedience. I think Pinson also misunderstands Wesley’s state- Pinson also makes a distinction between past and fu- ments on imputed righteousness. He did not reject imput- ture sins in the theology of Wesley, but I think he mis- ed righteousness but always wanted to keep it connected understands Wesley at this point. While all sins, past and to imparted righteousness – connecting justification with future, are potentially atoned for through the death of regeneration. Christ, we are forgiven of past sins at the moment of jus- Pinson concluded that Wesley was more works-ori- tification – not future sins. ented in contrast to the more grace-oriented emphasis of However, J. J. Butler and Ransom Dunn, two leading Reformed Arminians. The point is not that I must defend educators of the early Freewill Baptist movement wrote my man Wesley while Pinson defends his man Grantham. in the first Freewill Baptist theology: Certainly both men were fallible. But both men exemplify how modifications in doctrine have practical outcomes. We do not understand that Christ’s personal Ultimately, we must all turn to the Holy Scriptures to set- righteousness is imputed to the sinner, and that tle such issues. this constitutes his justification. No such doc- Essentially, Reformed Arminianism is guarding trine of imputation is taught in the Scriptures. against legalism while Wesleyan-Arminianism is guard- God never imputes either the sin or holiness of ing against lawlessness. Both extremes must be kept in
THE ARMINIAN - Page 11 PRSRT STD The Arminian Magazine AUTO 541 Broughton St . U.S. POSTAGE PAID Orangeburg, SC 29115 SHOALS, IN PERMIT NO. 18
balance. I can only testify that as a college student read- ly, the Wesleyan-Arminian strain is more Reformed in ec- ing Wesley’s sermons for the first time, I discovered more clesiology and eschatology than the Reformed Arminian. grace than I had ever heard preached previously. But these differences need not rend our fellowship. While As much as anything, this review illustrates the need labels can divide, if we look past them we may find that for proper definitions. I do not understand how Pinson our differences are substantial or that they are simply the result of misunderstanding each other. can be confessional but not creedal. We could also discuss -Vic Reasoner such distinctions as sacrament versus ordinance. Ironical-
Just Released! Just as New as Christianity An Early Methodist Critique of Modern Holiness Teaching by Joseph D . McPherson
“Joseph McPherson has carefully examined some of the more popular, though erroneous, teachings of the modern holiness movement through biblical, histor- ical and theological lenses.” -Dr. Kenneth J. Collins “This book represents the fruit of Joseph McPher- son’s scholarly study and reflection. His goal is to present early Methodism’s clear teaching on debat- ed issues in the larger Wesleyan tradition: water and Spirit baptism, new birth, spiritual senses, experi- mental religion, entire sanctification, and Christian testimony.” -Dr. Christopher T. Bounds $19.99 Order from Amazon, Kindle or