The Silent Holocron

Today we begin blogging through Dave Hunt’s What Love Is This? Our selections this time around are from the introductory chapter (“A Brief Word”). I will refer to each chapter by its name. I had originally planned to cover both the introduction and first chapter, but due to the volume of this response I will allow the introduction its own post. Let’s get started.

A Brief Word
This short, one page introduction reveals volumes about the perspective the author takes in this book. This is most apparent in the following quote:

Most shocking of all, however, is Calvinism’s misrepresentation of God who “is love.” It is our prayer that the following pages will enable readers to examine more carefully the vital issues involved and to follow God’s Holy Word and not man. (p. 13)

This is an ironic statement to me. Here we have a mere man claiming that a theological position is a misrepresentation of God, but in the same breath cautioning his readers not to follow the teaching of any man. This is a much overused statement in Christian circles today, one that we really need to get over. Paul was just a man, yet (if we are not liberals or Emergents) we don’t say we need to listen to Jesus (or “the words in red”) and not some man. Our pastors are mere men, yet we don’t say we don’t need to listen to them! Dave Hunt is a fallible man, yet he expects his readers to take his word on Calvinism as Gospel truth. He makes a statement and expects his readers to agree with him, not just to “examine more carefully the vital issues.”

Interestingly, in this brief introduction Hunt claims that

Many sincere, Bible-believing Christians are “Calvinists” only by default. Thinking that the only choice is between Calvinism (with its presumed doctrine of eternal security) and Arminianism (with its teaching that salvation can be lost), and confident of Christ’s promise to keep eternally those who believe in Him, they therefore consider themselves to be Calvinists. (p. 13)

Not only is this claim not true, it is an incredible assumption. If we are to make an assumption about the theological leanings of “many sincere, Bible-believing Christians,” the proper assumption to make is that they are not Calvinists. Expecially given Hunt’s follow-up claim that “It takes only a few simple questions to discover that most Christians are largely unaware of what John Calvin and his early followers of the sixteenth and seventeenth centuries actually believed and practiced.” If these people are “unaware” of what Calvinism believes, is it not a logical leap to say these people are “Calvinists by default?” I myself have always believed in eternal security, but that did not and does not make me a Calvinist. All it means is that I agree with the Calvinist position, no more! On top of that, I (and likely most “sincere, Bible-believing Christians”) was unaware there was such thing as a “Calvinist position” for many years. How could I (and those other Christians) be a “Calvinist by default” if I (and they) had no idea what the “Calvinist position” taught?

Hunt has loaded the deck in his favor by making this assumption. Notice how he does it: he presents only two options (Calvinism or Arminianism), and says most Christians identify with the option that has one common doctrine they believe (Calvinism). Furthermore, he states that most Christians think these are the only two “options” they have. That’s just not true at all. If it were, we would not have so many people whom are not Arminians but whom are not Calvinists, either. I think a more true statement would be to say most Christians don’t even know there are options!

My argment in the above paragraphs is only bolstered by the recent LifeWay studies that show graphically that 90% of Southern Baptist pastors are not Calvinists. From that we can say that 90% of Southern Baptist churches, and by extension the vast majority of Southern Baptists, are decidedly not Calvinists! Hunt has used very sloppy arguments in claiming what he has claimed.

Hunt also tries to portray modern Calvinism as fractured and detached from what Calvin and his followers believed and practiced:

Although there are disputed variations of the Calvinist doctrine, among its chief proponents (whom we quote extensively in context) there is a general agreement on certain core beliefs. Many evangelicals who think they are Calvinists will be surprised to learn of Calvin’s belief in salvation through infant baptism, and of his grossly un-Christian behavior, at times, as the “Protestant Pope” of Geneva, Switzerland.

Okay. Let’s tackle the first statement. Why is it a problem that there is a core agreement and peripheral disagreements? Baptists have core agreements and “disputed variations” as well, yet no one (to my knowledge) claims Baptists “misrepresent God who is love” in their stated theology. The same holds true for Methodists, Presbyterians, Episcopals, and so on. This is a worthless, throwaway statement by Hunt, likely intended to get the reader on his side by attempting to drive a wedge between his readers and Calvinists. “See, Calvinists don’t agree with each other despite common beliefs, therefore they must not be biblical!” This is the same argument Roman Catholics use against Protestantism, and the same argument many of you have encountered while witnessing to the lost. They cannot agree with each other, therefore the whole system must not be true. This is a blatant falsehood.

As to his second statement, why should Calvin’s beliefs be surprising? He is, for all intents and purposes, the founder of Presbyterianism. We all know (don’t we?) that Presbyterians believe in baptizing babies (baptismal regeneration), yet we don’t condemn the Presbyterian church as “misrepresenting God” nor do we claim the Presbyterian church is “un-Christian.” We might have objections to this belief, but we do not claim our Presbyterian brethren are not of Christ!

Calvin’s “grossly un-Christian behavior, at times” is another throwaway statement by Hunt. What if I were to write a book purporting to refute What Love Is This? and included as a point of refutation: “Hunt’s grossly un-Christian behavior, at times” as a reason not to believe what he believes? Hunt would rightly accuse me of libel, slander, character assasination, uncharitableness, gossip, backstabbing, and any number of other unbiblical, un-Christian behaviors on my part. Further, some of the greatest thinkers, theologians, pastors, presidents, etc. in history acted in ways that in modern days we might find morally repulsive. One common example is that some of the founders of the Southern Baptist Convention fully supported the institution of slavery. Today we find slavery to be morally repugnant, yet in their time it was believed by many to be morally acceptable. Hunt fails to take Calvin in the context of his time, when heresy meant death by the Roman Inquisition. And in failing to consider Calvin in his social context, he grossly misrepresents Calvin the man.

Finally, Hunt claims that “the first edition of this book was greeted by fervent opposition and criticism from Calvinists.” I know that James White has addressed this book both in print and in debate. I know that many Calvinists have looked on this book with something approaching sadness and pity. But what I have most noticed from Calvinists and my Calvinistic friends is that, to a person, all agree that this book is an insult and caricature of them and what they believe, rather than a serious, well-researched, well thought-out book about Calvinism.

Why would they not “fervently oppose and criticize” it? Hunt has stated that Calvinists “misrepresent God,” that they are fractured and disputatious, that they follow a man and not the Bible, and that the one who first systematized their theology was “grossly un-Christian.” For Calvinists not to fervently oppose and criticize this book would mean that there is some element of truth in what Hunt has written. That they have done so should tell us that there is more to this story than Hunt would have us believe. As Paul Harvey would say, we need to know “the rest of the story.”

Join us next time as we delve into chapter 1, “Why This Book?”

Well, it seems I’ve been tagged by Terry to do a reading meme. You gotta answer 5 questions:

1. What are you reading on Spring reading days?
2. What do you wish you had time to read?
3. What have you decided NOT to read that you were assigned to read?
4. What is one great quote from your reading?
5. Why are you blogging? (You’re supposed to be reading!)

So here are, I guess, my answers.

1. I am reading Jeremiah Burroughs’ The Rare Jewel of Christian Contentment, as well as working on What Love Is This? by Dave Hunt, and trying to finish Eric Van Lustbader’s The Bourne Legacy.

2. I wish I had time to read Eric Johnson’s Foundations for Soul Care as well as going through a Greek grammar.

3. I haven’t been assigned any reading (I’ve long since graduated, nyah nyah nyah). But I have decided not to try reading through my library until I’ve finished the Puritan Challenge (see sidebar) in hopes of curing the reading ADD I seem to have contracted since graduating from Southern.

4. I have to pick only one? There have been hundreds if not thousands. Okay, let’s try this one from Thomas Watson’s The Godly Man’s Picture (p. 201): “If men were not besotted, if their fall had not knocked their brains out, they would see that it is the most rational thing in the world to become godly.”

5. I’m blogging because I just got home from work and needed to wind down.

Okay, people to tag. I tag Ryan Hall, David Graves, Rick Mansfield, Scott Lamb, and Tim Ellsworth.

There, now I’ve satisfied the taggers. Now I am off to bed to get some much needed rest before tackling What Love Is This?

After the big storm last Thursday night, my apartment complex flooded yet again, much like the 2006 Deluge. This time, however, my car (and my wife’s) was safely out of harm’s way. Instead we had another casualty. As I got off work from UPS, I had to park a half mile away and walk to my apartment in the heavy rain due to the flooding of the street. I had my copy of The Godly Man’s Picture in a pocket of my raingear that I thought was sealed. Think again.

I got into my apartment and took the book out to find it was saturated with water. Soaked. Ruined. And I was almost finished. Being the book lover that I am, I could have wept. Yes, I’m just being a big baby.

The next day I made a special trip to The Christian Book Nook (see my Books page for the address) to replace it. After picking up the replacement copy, I browsed the store looking for a gift book for a friend who is getting serious in her study of the Bible. And sitting innocently there on the shelf, to my utter surprise, was a copy of the 2006 3rd edition of What Love Is This? by Dave Hunt!

My jaw immediately hit the floor. I yanked it off the shelf and tucked it under my arm. It was going home with me. Didn’t hurt that it was El Cheapo, either. You see, depending on who you read or listen to, What Love Is This? is either the definitive refutation of Calvinism or it is one of the most egregious caricatures of Calvinism that has to date been written. Weighing in at a robust 590 pages, it contains an introduction, 31 chapters, a conclusion, a bibliography, and two indices; this book has been expanded by more than 100 pages from its previous editions.

After reading the first couple of chapters, I am not quite sure how to articulate my thoughts on what I’ve read. So I’m going to do something I don’t think I’ve ever done here on The Silent Holocron: I’m going to blog through this book chapter by chapter. I have not seen anyone in the blogosphere review this book in like manner. This will be, hopefully, the definitive non-Calvinist review of What Love Is This?.

A few ground rules will guide this ongoing series. First, the reading and blogging of this book is of secondary importance to the Puritan Challenge (see sidebar for details). This challenge is my primary reading commitment for 2008. In addition, my primary area of study this year is pastoral ministry. As such, I will read and post on each chapter as I get to it. It may even become bathroom reading. I feel no compulsion to churn out posts on it. Second, each chapter will be reviewed fairly and with due consideration to the author’s point of view. I will attempt to give Dave Hunt a fair hearing, considering his statements as presented. Criticism or praise will be based entirely on what is read and not on any preconceived notions I or any others may hold. As I have read many books for and against the doctrines of grace over the past 3 years (and own several of them as well), I will be able to cross-check things if I feel it necessary. Third, this series will not become a debate in the posts or in the comments about Calvinism. Anyone attempting to start debate will be dealt with swiftly and with the Dark Side of the Force. This is a discussion about a book, not yet another unproductive blog debate. So if you participate, please confine your comments to the book and its contents. I reserve the right to delete any and all comments that violate this ground rule, unless I think they are germane to the discussion. Fourth, since this is a long book, I will regularly provide a compilation post linking all the reviews done to date. I’m thinking every four or five chapters I will update and republish said post with a current date so that everyone can follow along.

Tomorrow I will write the first post in this ongoing series, to cover the introduction and first chapter. Join us tomorrow!

Timmy Brister has just informed us of a schedule change to the 2008 Puritan Reading Challenge (see sidebar for more info). Here’s the skinny:

Many of you (I am told around 300) have purchased the P&P special from RHB which includes all twelve Puritan Paperbacks in a set. Well, not quite all twelve. As you know, Thomas Brooks’ book, Precious Remedies Against Satan’s Devices, has been sold out and back-ordered for a couple of months. While I have been informed that they are close to filling those orders in the near future, it appears that the books will not be available in time for the beginning of April which is the month dedicated to reading Brooks. Therefore, I have decided to make a schedule change.

Please help me get the word out on this. There are so many people from so many corners of the internet that I cannot possibly connect with everyone. So if you can, please help me get this announcement out. I am looking forward to digging into Burroughs next month with you as we learn about great gain of godliness with contentment.

I hope that, if you have not already, you will take up the Puritan Reading Challenge! Click the button in the sidebar for details!

This is how I plan on spending February:

Join the 2008 Puritan Reading Challenge by clicking this link or the button in the sidebar!

Today at long last we will take a look at Richard Sibbes’ work, The Bruised Reed.

Review
The Bruised Reed seems to be primarily a work of pastoral care. The book is based off of Isaiah 42:1-3 — “¹Behold my servant, whom I uphold; mine elect, in whom my soul delighteth; I have put my spirit upon him: he shall bring forth judgment to the Gentiles. ²He shall not cry, nor lift up, nor cause his voice to be heard in the street. ³A bruised reed shall he not break, and the smoking flax shall he not quench: he shall bring forth judgment unto truth. (KJV, emphasis mine)” This passage is applied to the work of Christ, and Sibbes believes it involves two things: first, the calling of Christ to his office; and second, the manner in which he carries it out.

Christ, who is called “God’s servant,” is a chosen and choice servant. His service, Sibbes says, was to do and suffer all by the Father’s will. For this reason God counts the work of our salvation by Christ to be his greatest treasure, for it shows God’s love to us. Because of this, Christ is the only safe place towards which we can look when temptation comes. Our natural inclination is to turn inward, focusing on our troubles, but Christ alone has the special power of comforting the soul, for God’s authority and love are in him. Our comfort as believers is wholly based on being “in Christ,” therefore our faith must be built on the Savior and nothing else. Remember, Jesus said “I am the way, the truth, and the life (John 14:6a).” He seeks bruised reeds and smoking flaxes, the sick rather than the healthy.

What is a “bruised reed?” A bruised reed, Sibbes states, is a person in some misery. Misery brings this person to see sin as the cause of it, and he sees no help in himself. Therefore he seeks relief elsewhere, and he mourns and hopes for mercy. Sibbes says this bruising is necessary before we can be saved, for it allows the Spirit to make way for himself, brings low all proud thoughts, and brings us to understand what we are by nature — that is, that we are sinners. Bruising also makes us set a high price on Christ. This allows the gospel to truly be the gospel, which makes us more thankful, more fruitful, and more firmly sets us in God’s ways. Bruising further reminds us that we are reeds, not oaks; that is, we are small and weak, not large and mighty. We live by the mercy of God alone. As such, Sibbes contends we must not be too hard on ourselves or others when we experience bruising, for by this bruising we are being conformed to Christ, who was “bruised for us (Isaiah 53:5).”

What is a “smoking flax?” From reading the book, I believe Sibbes considers a smoking flax to be a new Christian. He states, “In smoking flax there is but a little light, and that weak, as being unable to flame, and that little mixed with smoke. The observations from this are that, in God’s children, especially in their first conversion, there is but a little measure of grace, and that little mixed with much corruption, which, as smoke, is offensive; but that Christ will not quench this smoking flax (p. 16).”

So it seems pretty obvious that new believers are those whom have “but a little light, and that weak, as being unable to flame, and that little mixed with smoke.” They are like firestarters for a campfire — they are only able to take a spark at the moment. If they were put to a flame, they would be immediately consumed. If they were smothered or drenched, they would immediately be put out. New Christians are delicate things that must be treated with the utmost care, just as a firestarter.
Read more…

Colin Adams has presented a list of 20 Reasons to Read (Good Christian Books). It’s worth the read as it follows very closely the major reasons why I believe modern “Christian” bookstores are full of nothing but FLUFF. “Fluff” is the enemy of every Christian seeking to become spiritually mature. With no further ado, Colin’s list:

1. You will grow in your knowledge of God, yourself and the world around you.
2. You will gain a better understanding of the bible, the book of books.
3. You will broaden your English vocabluary, helping you to express similar truths to your congregation in fresh ways.
4. You will have an improved imagination and actively engage your mind in a way that probably won’t occur when watching TV.
5. You will be able to sit at the feet of some of the great Christian teachers and minds over the centuries (even if you have few ‘living’ teachers to assist you).
6. You will be forced to cease from incessant activity and think.
7. You will receive a historical perspective on current problems and spot present day blindspots.
8. You will have some of your questions answered and confront other questions you hadn’t even thought of.
9. You will be able to practically apply Paul’s command to think upon “wholesome” things.
10. You will develop a sense of how arguments are constructed and be able to weigh both strong and weak arguments.
11. You will enjoy spiritual input during the week, not just on a Sunday (if not a pastor).
12. You will (if a pastor) be able to enage with other issues beyond this week’s text, thus broadening your perspective.
13. You will be able to mull over a subject. You will be able to put the book down to think, chew over a sentance or re-read a paragraph. You will be able to exploring an issue at length, rather than brush over a topic too quickly.
14. You will be better prepared for the task of evangelism, after reading clear presentations of the gospel by great communicators.
15. You will be better prepared for the task of discipleship, having a good way to open up discussion about Christian life issues (what are you reading?).
16. You will be made aware of how Christians interpret and apply Scripture differently in various cultural contexts.
17. You will gain information for your ignorance, inspiration for your weariness, and insight for complex problems.
18. You will be better equipped to lead in your church, marriage and family.
19. You will be stimulated, as in a good conversation, to new lines of thinking.
20. You will be drawn to worship God, especially when the book centres on God not man.

On my Books page, I provide links to some of the best places to get good Christian books. Please take a few minutes (or an hour or two!) to browse the links and find books that actually will meet your needs as a growing believer!

HT: Justin Taylor.

As I continued reading through The Bruised Reed yesterday, I found a statement in chapter 10 that perfectly summarizes the purpose of Richard Sibbes’ book:

The comfort intended in this text is for those that would fain (<– means “gladly”) do better, but find their corruptions clog them; that are in such a mist, that often they cannot tell what to think of themselves; that fain would believe, and yet often fear that they do not believe; and that think that it cannot be that God should be so good to such sinful wretches as they are, and yet they do not permit these fears and doubts in themselves.

When I read this, I was immediately reminded of the title of a rather popular book written by Rabbi Harold Kushner, When Bad Things Happen to Good People. Not only does Sibbes’ book answer this question, but it also answers its reverse, asked by many a Christian who struggles with sin: “Why is God good to me, a sinner?”

I have a suggestion. Instead of buying Rabbi Kushner’s book, I beg each of you to put The Bruised Reed in the hands of all your friends and family members who are struggling with sin, personal crises, crises of faith, and any other struggle you could think of. This book will do them more good than Rabbi Kushner’s book ever could.

In the meantime, go over to Timmy Brister’s and take part in the discussion on The Bruised Reed in this post.

I plan to finish the book this weekend, take notes during the upcoming week, and post my review by the weekend. Stay tuned!

Now that power has been restored to the Deaf Jedi Temple, let me quickly point you to a Puritan Challenge 2008 update.

Timmy Brister has given us a major update on this year’s Puritan Challenge. If you have decided to join the challenge, Timmy requests that you add your name to what is now the “official” list of those participating by clicking on the button below (or in the sidebar) and leaving a comment with your first and last name.

By joining you will be “on the list” so Timmy can be aware of those who are involved and/or posting on this challenge, possibly (he didn’t say) be included in a compilation at some point, and be eligible for this month’s gift in the Puritan Challenge’s monthly giveaway (see details on the above linked post).

Also included in Timmy’s update are his intentions for posting regarding the challenge and a heads-up on some great discounts that are being offered for those participating in the challenge. Again, go sign up for the challenge on this post over at Timmy’s blog and take advantage of the discounts to get your Puritan Paperbacks, if you haven’t already! Otherwise you can order them from most of the places in my Books page. In fact, if you order them from here, do it from the Monergism Books button in the sidebar and support my reading habit — I get store credit for every click on the button!

A few days ago, I wrote that I plan to give a brief bio at the beginning of each month on the Puritan we are reading, and hopefully a short synopsis (which I currently plan to find from an outside source) of the month’s book. After I finish each book, I will post a review here in which I will (1) review the book, (2) give my personal reflections, (3) explore ministry application, and (4) give recommendations for readers from the content (a sort of brief devotional).

It’s my hope that this challenge will also spur readers of this blog to take up the Puritan Challenge as well and begin reading books that actually are good for the Christian’s health! Don’t wait — sign up for the Puritan Challenge 2008 today!

As a rider to my last post, I’d like to point you towards Tony Reinke’s excellent 13-part series entitled The Puritan Study.

While Tony’s series is primarily centered around building a library of Puritan writers, there are some great tips on how to read the Puritans scattered throughout each post. A quick-look of topics covered in the series include:

• Benefits and difficulties of reading/studying the Puritans
• CD-ROM compilations vs. print titles
• The importance of using a KJV Bible while reading the Puritans
• Utilizing print and electronic resources
• How to quote the Puritans
• How to build a Puritan library

He also includes several reviews of full sets of Puritan literature.

I hope you’ll spend the rest of the year going through Tony’s series in preparation for Timmy’s “Puritan-a-Month” challenge!