Interview with Dr. Curt Daniel (part 3 of 4)

Interview with Dr. Curt Daniel (part 3 of 4)

Questions 4-8: (SW – Sam Waldron, CD – Curt Daniel)

SW: “I have talked with people who believe that in your dissertation you assume Amyraldianism or Four Point Calvinism as your own position.  In reading your dissertation I could easily conclude the same. Is this assessment of your position true?  If not, why not?”

CD: “I am neither 4 point Calvinist nor Amyraldian. At the time of my dissertation I bordered on those views but did not actually hold them.”

SW: “Have your views of the atonement developed since you wrote your dissertation?  To be specific, are you now more comfortable with identifying yourself with limited atonement or particular redemption?  Please explain why?”

CD: “Since then I have continued to research the subject. I hold to particular redemption (also called definite atonement or limited atonement). As I have been researching a book I am writing on the extent of the atonement, I am amazed at how many biblical proofs there are in favor of particular redemption—more than one may realize.”

SW: “With the increasing support for and commitment to the 1689 Baptist Confession, it has become an important touchstone in terms of Reformed Baptist orthodoxy.  Do you hold the Confessional view on the subjects related to the atonement and the free offer of the gospel?”

CD: “I agree with the 1689 Confession in upholding particular redemption and the free offer of the Gospel.”

SW: “In your view does the Confession teach limited atonement or particular redemption?”

CD: “The 1689, like the Westminster Confession, teaches particular redemption, though not as explicitly as the 1644 Baptist Confession.  Particular redemption may be found in the 1689 in 3:6 and 8:5 and 8:8.”

1689:3:6 As God hath appointed the elect unto glory, so he hath, by the eternal and most free purpose of his will, foreordained all the means thereunto; wherefore they who are elected, being fallen in Adam, are redeemed by Christ, are effectually called unto faith in Christ, by his Spirit working in due season, are justified, adopted, sanctified, and kept by his power through faith unto salvation; neither are any other redeemed by Christ, or effectually called, justified, adopted, sanctified, and saved, but the elect only

1689:8:5 The Lord Jesus, by his perfect obedience and sacrifice of himself, which he through the eternal Spirit once offered up unto God, hath fully satisfied the justice of God, procured reconciliation, and purchased an everlasting inheritance in the kingdom of heaven, for all those whom the Father hath given unto Him.

1689:8:8 To all those for whom Christ hath obtained eternal redemption, he doth certainly and effectually apply and communicate the same, making intercession for them; uniting them to himself by his Spirit, revealing unto them, in and by his Word, the mystery of salvation, persuading them to believe and obey, governing their hearts by his Word and Spirit, and overcoming all their enemies by his almighty power and wisdom, in such manner and ways as are most consonant to his wonderful and unsearchable dispensation; and all of free and absolute grace, without any condition foreseen in them to procure it.

SW: “What does the Confession mean when it affirms particular redemption in 3:6 and 8:5 and 8?  Is there any way in which you would like to supplement or qualify the confessional statements of particular redemption?”

CD: “As I hope to show in a book I am writing on the extent of the atonement, I would agree with the old formula that Christ died sufficiently for all but efficiently only for the elect. I have discovered many leading Reformed scholars who taught that there is a universal dimension as well as a particular dimension to the atonement (Hodge, Shedd, Edwards, Iain Murray, many others). This is not Amyraldianism, for Amyraut taught that Christ died “equally” for all men. He does not seem to have placed any limitation in the atonement. I do. We need to delineate just what the universal dimension is without denying particular redemption.”

 

Interview with Dr. Curt Daniel (part 2 of 4)

Interview with Dr. Curt Daniel (part 2 of 4)

Questions 1-3: (SW – Sam Waldron, CD – Curt Daniel)

SW:  “You wrote your dissertation for the University of Edinburgh in 1983 on “Hyper-Calvinism and John Gill.”  That’s an interesting choice–especially way back then at the beginnings of the Reformed Baptist movement.  Why did you choose this subject?”

CD:  “I chose the subject of Hyper-Calvinism for my dissertation because it would give me the opportunity to study pertinent issues that I was hammering out in my own theology. There was relatively little current literature on the subject at the time. Having been involved in evangelism as a young Christian (I was saved at 20 and began my doctoral studies at 24), I was curious as to how and why some Calvinists misused the doctrines of grace in order to stultify evangelism.”

SW:  “Do you believe that Gill was a Hyper-Calvinist?  On what basis? And exactly what do you mean by this?”

CD:  “John Gill has been considered the main Hyper-Calvinist by many writers. I showed that he fit the definition—he denied the free offer, and duty faith, restricted common grace, and denied the universal saving will of God in the gospel.  The purpose of my dissertation was not just to define Hyper-Calvinism, but also to investigate it and explain it. I was not allowed by my professors to refute Hyper-Calvinism, but I did show how Fuller and others did so. I plan to write a long book on Hyper-Calvinism in which I will refute it.”

SW:  “Why is it important to understand correctly the issues you addressed in your dissertation?”

CD:  “It is still important to consider these issues because Hyper-Calvinism is still with us. It has always been a tiny movement, but its proponents are quite vocal on the internet and in print. Some young Calvinists are attracted to it because of an over-reaction to Arminian abuses.”

 

Part 3 coming soon.

Interview with Dr. Curt Daniel  (part 1 of 4)

Interview with Dr. Curt Daniel (part 1 of 4)

Introduction:

I have been surprised over the last several years to sense a rise of views which I associate with Hyper-Calvinism or “Half-step Hyper-Calvinism.”  Forty years ago I with my wife were new members of the Reformed Baptist Church of Grand Rapids (now called Grace Immanuel Reformed Baptist Church).  This church was one of only a handful of Baptist churches in the United States espousing the doctrines of grace.  And we were staunch five-pointers.  So we were called, of course, Hyper-Calvinists.  We always thought this odd because to us five-point Calvinism was just Calvinism and thus could not be Hyper-Calvinism.

As the years wore on, the church grew.  More and more of our members began to come from various Dutch Reformed denominations in the large Dutch Reformed community in Western Michigan.  We began to be aware that there were folks in that large Dutch Reformed community who really did at some level deserve the name Hyper-Calvinists.

We had discovered the 1689 Baptist Confession of Faith.  It was the Confession of our church.  In it were not only the doctrines of grace (including particular redemption).  In it also we had discovered the doctrines of the free offer of the gospel (chapter 7, paragraph 2) and common grace (14:3).  More study assured us that both these doctrines were in the original confessional statement of the doctrines of grace, the Canons of Dort.

Yet at least one of the local Dutch Reformed denominations not only denied the free offer and common grace.  It was built on a denial of those doctrines.  Its leaders continued in a vehement polemic against the free offer and common grace (Spurgeon’s so-called two track theology) which affirmed both the dimensions of God’s will (known variously as secret and revealed or better as decretive and perceptive).

For this reason, the leaders of RBCGR were frequently engaged in a two front war.  We had to fight the Arminianism of the local Baptist churches and institutions, but also the Hyper-Calvinism or Half-step Hyper-Calvinism of the Dutch Reformed denomination mentioned above.  We were confident that our Reformed Baptist brethren shared with us our position.

Now, however, I am aware of blogs and brothers which have if not verbally, at least virtually, have adopted substantially the views of the Hyper-Calvinism or Half-step Hyper-Calvinism mentioned above.  Brother Curt Daniel has a couple of times invited me to speak at the yearly conference of his church in Springfield, Illinois.  Since he wrote his dissertation on the subject of Hyper-Calvinism, I talked to him about my concerns.  One of the results was the interview which I want to share with you in three blog posts that are to follow.

Dr. Sam Waldron

“21 Misunderstandings of Calvinism”—The Twentieth and Twenty-First Misunderstandings of Calvinism

A little apology is due here.  I estimated that this blog series would number about 20, but this post is the twelfth in this series, and will be the last.  I now deal with two misunderstandings related to the Perseverance and Preservation of the Saints.

V.  Misunderstandings related to Perseverance and Preservation

(1)     The Perseverance and Preservation of the Saints means that, once men are saved, it does not matter how they live, they will still go to heaven!

In our degenerate age this is actually how many professing Christians understand what they call eternal security.  Eternal security is a corrupt form of the doctrine of the perseverance and preservation of the saints.

The historical fact is that at the time of the Synod of Dort and the writing of the 1689 Baptist Confession, neither mainstream Calvinists nor Arminians believed such a horrible doctrine.  Neither the Calvinists who wrote the Canons of Dort, nor the Arminians who forced them to write the Canons, would ever have dreamed of teaching anything akin to the idea that once you are a Christian, you will be saved no matter how you live.  Both Calvinists and Arminians believed that the perseverance of the Saints was a necessity.  They only disagreed as to whether it was a reality and a certainty!

Listen to these excerpts from the Canons of Dort:

Those whom God, according to His purpose, calls to the communion of His Son, our Lord Jesus Christ, and regenerates by the Holy Spirit, He also delivers from the dominion and slavery of sin …. But God is faithful, who, having conferred grace, mercifully confirms and powerfully preserves them therein, even to the end. (5th Head; Articles 1 and 3)

Saved people are delivered from the dominion and slavery of sin and are powerfully preserved in that deliverance to the end.  This is the authentic and original doctrine of the Perseverance of the Saints.

(2)     The Perseverance and Preservation of the Saints means that God’s people can have no assurance of salvation until after they have persevered!

Nothing could be further from the truth.  It is only the doctrine of the perseverance and preservation of the saints that grounds assurance of salvation.  Only a salvation bestowed by sovereign election and in which every true Christian will certainly be preserved provides any ground or hope of authentic assurance of salvation.

And furthermore assurance of our perseverance does not have to wait until after we have persevered.  It can be gained from the marks of special grace which accompany all true faith.  The 1689 Baptist Confession affirms this clearly in chapter 14, paragraph 3:

This faith, although it be different in degrees, and may be weak or strong, yet it is in the least degree of it different in the kind or nature of it, as is all other saving grace, from the faith and common grace of temporary believers; and therefore, though it may be many times assailed and weakened, yet it gets the victory, growing up in many to the attainment of a full assurance through Christ, who is both the author and finisher of our faith.

Once more and finally, listen to the Canons of Dort:

FIFTH HEAD: ARTICLE 9. Of this preservation of the elect to salvation and of their perseverance in the faith, true believers themselves may and do obtain assurance according to the measure of their faith, whereby they surely believe that they are and ever will continue true and living members of the Church, and that they have the forgiveness of sins and life eternal.

“21 Misunderstandings of Calvinism”—The Eighteenth and Nineteenth Misunderstandings

In this blog post, I’ll take up misunderstandings related to the fourth of the five points of Calvinism: Irresistible Grace.

IV. Misunderstandings related to Irresistible Grace

(1)     Irresistible grace means that God saves men against their will!

Exactly not!  Irresistible grace means rather that God makes people willing in the day of His power!  The text often quoted by Calvinists here is Psalm 110:3: “Your people will volunteer freely in the day of Your power.”  The 1689 (10:1) makes this matter abundantly clear:

Those whom God hath predestinated unto life, he is pleased in his appointed, and accepted time, effectually to call, by his Word and Spirit, out of that state of sin and death in which they are by nature, to grace and salvation by Jesus Christ; enlightening their minds spiritually and savingly to understand the things of God; taking away their heart of stone, and giving unto them a heart of flesh; renewing their wills, and by his almighty power determining them to that which is good, and effectually drawing them to Jesus Christ; yet so as they come most freely, being made willing by his grace.

(2)     Irresistible grace means that men never resist the Holy Spirit!

Of course, if irresistible grace meant this, then irresistible grace would not be biblical.  The Bible is explicit that some men do resist the Holy Spirit.  Acts 7:51 reads:  “You men who are stiff-necked and uncircumcised in heart and ears are always resisting the Holy Spirit; you are doing just as your fathers did.”

Irresistible grace, however, does not mean that men never resist the Holy Spirit.  As I showed in a previous post, according to the 1689 Baptist Confession Calvinism teaches something known as common grace.  The wooings and workings of common grace are not irresistible. As I also showed in a previous post, The Canons of Dort and the Confession both make clear that there is also such a thing as the general call of the gospel.  In common grace and the general call of the gospel, the Holy Spirit speaks to men and sincerely calls them to come to Christ.  Such common grace and general calls of the gospel are frequently resisted by men.  However, the special grace and the effectual call of the Spirit actually create the response to which men are summoned.  That grace and that call are, therefore, irresistible!

The 20th and 21st Misunderstandings of Calvinism

Pin It on Pinterest