Chris Anderson's The Scandal of Schism: An Overview by Dr. David Beale

Introduction: Basic Facts to Know Before Reading this Book

      

Dr. David Beale

    Mainline Fundamentalism originated in the northern states. The editor of the Baptist periodical Watchman-Examiner coined the term Fundamentalist in 1920 to describe a group of concerned Baptists who had just met at the Delaware Avenue Baptist Church in Buffalo, New York, to discuss the problem of Modernism in the Northern Baptist Convention.

    New Evangelicalism is the religious mood or attitude that repudiates Fundamentalism’s doctrine of separation from false teachers and advocates theological dialogue with Modernism and greater social involvement. Harold J. Ockenga coined the term New Evangelical in 1948 when he described the movement as a “new breed.”

    By the late 1940s and early 1950s, Fundamentalists began to see the broad umbrella of Evangelicalism emerging distinctly into a New Evangelical movement. Evangelicalism committed to regaining respectability in the eyes of the religious world, even if that meant joining liberals in ecumenical campaigns. By the late 1950s Billy Graham had clearly emerged as the evangelist of New Evangelical. Fundamentalism was now growing and changing in emphasis. They were compelled to practice purity by separating not only from liberal churches and schools, but also from disobedient brethren who preferred to identify with false teachers under broad umbrellas. Many Fundamentalists came to the conviction that with the enemy in the camp, they must separate from evangelical ministries. To separate from the broad Evangelical movement was to renounce “Early Fundamentalism” and embrace “Separatist Fundamentalism.” Fundamentalism had fully changed! But separation is not “secondary.” Sin is sin! Practicing disobedience is sin, whatever or whoever commits it.

    At the 1938 General Association of Regular Baptist Churches meeting at Waterloo, Iowa, the GARBC abolished dual membership and set forth biblical separation. From that time on, separation from all Northern Baptist Convention churches would be the official practice in the GARBC. That was Separatist Fundamentalism.

    By 1967, The New Testament Association of Baptist Churches (NTA) and the Fundamental Baptist Fellowship (FBF) had become completely Separatist Fundamentalists. See: “Shift from Early Fundamentalism to Separatist Fundamentalism,” in David Beale, Baptist History in England and America: Personalities, Positions, and Practices (Maitland, FL: Xulon Press, 2018), 434-47.

    The explicit teaching of passages such as Matthew 18:15–18; 1 Corinthians 5:1–13; and 2 Thessalonians 3:6, 14–15 compelled separatist Fundamentalists to withdraw from New Evangelical ministries. Neo-Liberalism and Neo-Orthodoxy, with conservative sounding rhetoric, lured New Evangelicals directly into cooperation with unbelief. By the mid-1960s, the “Broad” Evangelical movement had almost completely gained control of the Bible colleges and seminaries.

Separatist Fundamentalism: The Standard of Charles H. Spurgeon

    On October 28, 1887, Charles H. Spurgeon registered the official withdrawal of the Metropolitan Tabernacle from the Baptist Union, which was filled with unbelief. Some Union churches, belief in doctrine, refused to separate from Union churches. They remained and identified themselves under the same umbrella as unbelief. Today, there are SBC churches who are belief in doctrine, but under the same umbrella with unbelief. Their identity is unbelief. Chris Anderson would urge any godly Christian to join anything in the Southern Baptist Convention. He says there is nothing to worry about it.

    On the Lord’s-Day morning of October 7, 1888, at Metropolitan Tabernacle pulpit, Charles H. Spurgeon preached his Sermon No. 2047, titled “No Compromise.” Spurgeon, clearly seeking to remain his calling and conscience, explained to his large congregation the biblical meaning of separation—in view of the Judgment Seat of Christ: “When I go back to my Master, if I have faithfully told out His message of free grace and dying love, I shall be clear. I have often prayed that I might be able to ... say: ‘I am clear, I am clear!’ that I might not stultify [invalidate] my testimony, I have cut myself clear of those who err from the faith, and even from those who associate with them. What more can I do to be honest with you?” Spurgeon pleads to his flock: “Clear me in that day of all complicity with the novel inventions [schemes] of deluded men. As for my Lord, I pray of Him grace to be faithful to the end, both to His truth, and to your souls. Amen.” Metropolitan Tabernacle Pulpit (1889; repr., London: The Banner of Truth Trust, 1970), 34:564 (34:553–64). “If there come any unto you, and bring not this doctrine, receive him not into your house, neither bid him God speed: For he that biddeth him God speed is partaker of his evil deeds” (2 John 1:10-11). Spurgeon was a biblical, Separatist Fundamentalist.

    Unlike Spurgeon in his day, Chris Anderson teaches to separate (breakaway) from biblical Fundamentalism and go into Broad Evangelicalism. Note Anderson’s title: The Scandal of Schism: A Journey from Sinful Division to Biblical Fidelity. His title would mean that Spurgeon’s separation (schism) was a journey on sinful division (scandal). Anderson has written a shallow book with serious mistakes to pull Christians away from biblical Fundamentalism and into Broad Evangelicalism.

    In March 1891, Spurgeon wrote these words to a friend regarding the Downgrade Controversy, “Good-by, you will never see me again; this fight is killing me.” During April 1891, the “fatal illness commenced,” (C. H. Spurgeon’s Autobiography 1856–1878, vol. 3 (London: Passmore and Alabaster, 1899, 152). Soon, at the Pastor’s College Conference, Spurgeon delivered his “final manifesto,” a powerful message titled “The Greatest Fight in the World.” His text was 1 Timothy 6:12, “Fight the good fight of faith,” published in The Sword and the Trowel 27 (August 1891). The sermon also appeared the following year as Charles H. Spurgeon, The Greatest Fight in the World (London: Passmore and Alabaster, 1892). Fundamentalists fight because they love their people and biblical truth.

The 1985 SBC Dallas Convention Center in Texas

  

On June 10, 1985, I [David Beale] went to Dallas with boxes of my book, S.B.C. House on the Sand (1985). W. A. Criswell, Pastor of the First Baptist Church in Dallas, had arranged for Judge Paul Pressler and me to a one-hour debate on the topic, “Believers staying or leaving liberal SBC churches, or believers cutting off fellowship from those believers remaining in SBC churches, etc.”

    The next few days, June 11-13, 1985, marked the largest annual SBC Convention in Baptist history, which occurred at the Dallas Convention Center in Texas. They drew over 45,000 messengers. Nearby, Brothers and Nobles placed boxes of S.B.C. House on the Sand on their sidewalk tables. Chris Anderson claims that those who remained in their SBC churches were “maligned” by S.B.C. House on the Sand, with Beale “an example.” Anderson adds, “Our SBC brothers fighting error from within should have been prayed for and encouraged.” My prayers and encouragement were for Bible believing Fundamentalist churches. Anderson said that the “call for conservatives to leave the SBC would have precluded the successful conservative resurgence which began in 1979 and purged SBC seminaries of liberalism.” (pages 72-73 and footnote 70). Anderson is totally wrong. The SBC has never seen a “successful conservative resurgence.” Even Judge Pressler in his book, A Hill on Which to Die, placed a chapter on “How the Liberals Fought the Battle.” Moreover, New Calvinism (Reformed Theology) has been as poisonous as the liberals.

The Fall of the Conservative Resurgence

    Dr. J. Gerald Harris, over more than forty years, has served as SBC pastors in North Carolina, South Carolina, Mississippi, and Georgia. He has served as editor of The Christian Index, and he has served as president of the Georgia Baptist Convention. Dr. Harris has recently authored the book, The Rise and Fall of the Conservative Resurgence (2021). On page 64, Harris writes, “When Southern Baptists became secure in their glorious victory in the Conservative Resurgence, the god of this world began to explore ways to once again cripple the greatest evangelistic and missionary force in the world. Remember, the devil never contends for anything that is without value; and I am sure he has crafted a myriad of conspiracies for the dismemberment and destruction of the Southern Baptist Convention.”

    One of the conspiracies is that the Southern Baptist Convention in Indianapolis rejected a proposed ban on churches with female pastors. It was reported that there are about 1,800 women pastors working in the denomination. See Associated Press, 12:24 PM EDT, Wed. June 12, 2024. A perennial joke that SBC pastors tell at meetings is: “If the Convention splits, I'm going with the Annuity Board!”

John Piper: A Neo-Calvinist Spokesman

    Chris Anderson, in pages 29, 47, 68, 85, 101, 164, and 192, tells his readers that John Piper’s books are among the best for God’s people to read. Let us look at Piper’s book, The Legacy of Sovereign Joy: God's Triumphant Grace in the Lives of Augustine, Luther, and Calvin (Crossway, 2000), 40-74. Piper thinks he has found, “The Liberating Power of Holy Pleasure in the Life and Thought of St. Augustine.” Piper insists that “Signs and wonders” and all the spiritual gifts of 1 Corinthians 12:8-10 are valid for today and should be “earnestly desired.” He says, “Prophecy and tongues will continue until Jesus comes.” He declares, Christians must be “seeking this greater fullness of God’s power today,” even “extraordinary signs and wonders.” In Piper’s article, Signs and Wonders: Then and Now, he writes as the Third Wave. See:

https://www.desiringgod.org/articles/signs-and-wonders-then-and-now

    To millions of Christians, John Piper has insisted that they could find sovereign joy and God’s triumphant grace in the life of Augustine (354-430). Let us look at a few of Augustine’s doctrines and practices:

        *He wanted the apocrypha to be in the Bible. See: City of God, Book 18, Chapter 42 and On Christian Doctrine 2:8.12-13.

        *He confused justification with sanctification, “being made righteous.” Source: Alister McGrath, Iustitia Dei: A History of the Christian Doctrine of Justification (Cambridge University Press, 2005), 23-34.

        *He taught that an Old Testament circumcisional regeneration transferred its efficacy into a New Testament baptismal regeneration. See: City of God, 6.26–27; Enchiridion: On Faith, Hope, and Love 43; cf. 93; Sermon 294; and On Forgiveness of Sins, and Baptism 1.27.

        *He taught baptismal regeneration (John 3:5) and damnation of all unbaptized children. See: Epistle 98—To Boniface; Treatise against Two Letters of the Pelagians 3:3:5; Sermon 98 section 2; On the Merits and Forgiveness of Sins and On the Baptism of Infants 1:24, 34, 39.

        *He taught that conversion is a lifetime process, with no possibility of assurance of salvation. See: On Rebuke and Grace 5. 10, 17, 18,22; and On the Gift of Perseverance 5.1.

        *He taught signs and wonders – dreams, miracles, relics, and prayers to martyrs. See: City of God, book 22, chapter 8.

Chris Anderson attempts, Timothy Keller's book, How to Attain Humility

    Donald Arthur (D. A.) Carson (b. 1946) and Timothy J. Keller (1950–2023) were founders of The Gospel Coalition. Carson is Emeritus Professor of Trinity Evangelical Divinity School in Chicago. Keller was senior pastor of Redeemer Presbyterian Church (PCA) in Manhattan, New York, NY. At a Gospel Coalition Conference in 2017, Timothy Keller stated that he had now added two new positions to his ministry: The ordination of women and the ordination of the LGBT. Seven years later, Chris Anderson. on page 59, attempts, with Timothy Keller’s book, how to attain humility See The Christian Post, Wednesday, April 12, 2017, Michael Gryboski, church editor.

Free Masonry and the SBC: Overview of the Issue

    At the June 1992 Southern Baptist annual conference, an unsuccessful attempt was made by a minority of representatives to root Freemasonry out of the Convention. The Home Mission Board was assigned the task of preparing a report, but the chairman of the Board, Ron Phillips, displayed his prejudice when he stated that he did not agree with the conclusion that Masonry is incompatible with Christianity and that he knew many “dedicated Christian men” who are Masons (Christian News, March 15, 1993). 

    It quickly became obvious that the Southern Baptist Convention was more concerned about retaining members and with maintaining harmony than with dealing with false gospels. The editor of an official state paper, The Indiana Baptist for March 16, 1993, reported “fearing the loss of three million members.” The SBC Home Mission Board reported that it would be to each individual Southern Baptists whether to join the secret society. The report documented Freemasonry’s anti-Christian doctrine that many Grand Lodges do not declare Jesus as the unique Son of God; the offensive rituals and “bloody oaths”; “implications that salvation may be obtained by one’s good works”; the heresy of universalism; pagan religions are studied in higher degrees. Despite all this, the study recommended leaving the decision to the individual member.

    At the June 1993 convention in Houston, Texas, the Southern Baptist representatives decided to accept the Mission Board report’s recommendation and leave the matter of Masonic membership to the consciences of individuals.

    

    The Southern Baptist Convention has long been tied in closely with Freemasonry despite its clear pagan beliefs and false gospel. The Scottish Rite Journal in February 1993 stated that “Masons believe in the Fatherhood of God and the Brotherhood of man...” In the 1990s, 14 percent of SBC pastors and 18 percent of deacons were Masons (Calvary Contender, June 1, 1993). We don’t know the statistics today, but Freemasonry remains well entrenched. In 1992, an attempt to root Freemasonry out of the Convention failed decidedly. The chairman of the Home Mission Board, Ron Phillips, stated that he did not agree with the conclusion that Masonry is incompatible with Christianity and that

he knew many “dedicated Christian men” who are Masons (Christian News, March 15, 1993). It quickly became obvious that the Southern Baptist Convention was more concerned with retaining members and maintaining harmony than in dealing with false gospels and spiritual compromise. Southern Baptist physician Dr. James Holly, who led the attempt to root out Freemasonry, said, “Southern Baptists have become the first Christian denomination that essentially blesses the Masonic Lodge” (Christian News, Dec. 20, 1993).

    The author of the Home Mission Board report, Gary Leazer, joined the Masons a couple of years later. See Gary H. Leazer, Fundamentalism & Freemasonry: The Southern Baptist Investigation of the Fraternal Order (New York: A & B Publishers Group, 2000).

James L. Holly, The Southern Baptist Convention and Freemasonry, 3 vols. Beaumont, TX: Mission and Ministry to Men, 1994. See- https://pulpitandpen.org/series/freemasonry/

Singing Popular LGBTQ Anthems

    Church by the Glades, in Coral Springs, Florida, is a Southern Baptist Convention church and in their directory. The Dissenter, April 15, 2024, “SBC Megachurch Starts New Sermon Series on ‘Family’ by Worshiping to Popular LGBTQ Anthem by Sister Sledge.”

David Hughes, the president and CEO of Church by the Glades in Coral Springs, Florida, has successfully turned the organization into a highly profitable carnival act. Rather than providing spiritual sustenance through the gospel, Hughes is preoccupied with putting on a spectacle. Week after week, we have reported that this church, which remains in fellowship with the Southern Baptist Convention and the powers that be, blasphemes God with its worldly performances and secular music. This past weekend, Church by the Glades opens a new sermon series on ‘Family’ by worshiping to a popular anthem that is used to open the vast majority of ‘pride’ festivals around the nation. According to one article in Rhino, the band Sister Sledge openly embraced the fact that their song had become such a popular LGBTQ anthem. ‘When Joni Sledge died in 2017, the website TheOutFront.com opened their obit of the singer by saying, ‘Every gay man who’s ever been on a dance floor or attended a Pride Parade knows the words to ‘We Are Family’. In fact, it’s practically required for getting one’s official Gay Card.

Conclusion:

Chris Anderson has written a shallow book with serious mistakes to pull Christians away from biblical Fundamentalism and into Broad Evangelicalism.

    Some preach the gospel and say that identification is non-essential. They say, “Associations are non-essential.” That is a path that God forbids. Indifference is dangerous! “Earnestly contend for the faith which was once delivered unto the saints. For there are certain men crept in unawares” (Jude 3-4a). We are defined by those with whom we are affiliated. “Take heed therefore unto yourselves, and to all the flock, over the which the Holy Ghost hath made you overseers.... After my departing shall grievous wolves enter in among you, not sparing the flock. Also, of your own selves shall men arise, speaking perverse things, to draw away disciples after them” (Acts 20:28-31).

    We must never entangle the message of the gospel with man-made organizations and institutions that harbor false gospels. This seriously applies to our personal condition when we stand before Christ. Identification within Broad Evangelicalism lends constant credibility to false teachers who preach another gospel. “For he that biddeth him God speed is partaker of his evil deeds” (2 John 1:10-11). Our view of Christ or His gospel will determine our associations: “Look to yourselves, that we lose not those things which we have wrought, but that we receive a full reward” (2 John 8).

It is better to be divided in truth, than united in unbelief!

Related Reading by Dr. Beale:

FACTS: An Enlarged Discussion

Chris Anderson's Book Reviewed by George Zeller

Archival Series: It's Called "Calvinism," & It's Not That Long of a Line

 Nearly two years ago [2019] I heard a radio broadcast of a sermon series by Pastor Steve Lawson.1 The message title is, The Long Line Continues.2 In the message Pastor Lawson makes frequent use of the phrase, “the doctrines of grace.” What does this phrase “the doctrines of grace,” mean? Very simply “the doctrines of grace,” is a new way of introducing a centuries old theology popularized by the French theologian John Calvin (1509-1564). That theology is commonly known as “Calvinism.”

What is Calvinism? Calvinism is best known for its emphasis on five distinct doctrines. These are technically known as the “Five Points of Calvinism.” The five points are commonly recognized and defined from the acronym T-U-L-I-P. Taking each in turn, the letters of the acronym stand for:

1. Total (Human) Inability
2. Unconditional Election
3. Limited Atonement
4. Irresistible Grace
5. Perseverance of the Saints

The whole of Calvinism rests on these five points, and they are inseparably linked. So that you have a basic understanding of Calvinism’s five points, following this article I will be providing definitions for each under the heading, Defining Calvinism’s TULIP? Here we will demonstrate the terminology that Steve Lawson, essentially representative of every Calvinist, uses to rename Calvin’s T-U-L-I-P.

• Total Inability is renamed, “Total Depravity,” or “Radical Corruption.”
• Unconditional Election is named the same or “Sovereign Election.”
• Limited Atonement is renamed, “Definite Atonement,” or “Particular Redemption.”
• Irresistible Grace is renamed, “Effectual Calling,” or “Sovereign Regeneration.”
• Perseverance of the Saints is named the same or “Persevering or Preserving Grace.”

I do not believe it wise to accept and/or adopt in our language the evolved labels for John Calvin’s theology. We do not want to allow for terminology that tends to cloud, confuse or camouflage the theology of Calvinism’s T-U-L-I-P.

Compounding Error Upon Error
A fundamental understanding of Scripture makes clear that Calvinism is held together by forcing into or extracting from the Bible things that are not there. Calvinism proper, therefore, has spawned numerous theological errors.  Among them for example Steve Lawson said, “They [the doctrines of grace] are completely counter intuitive…are entirely antithetical to the natural mind…We would naturally reason that you must first believe and then you will be born again.” Lawson is saying that to believe on the Lord Jesus Christ and thou shalt be saved (John 3:16; Acts 16:31), is solely based on our own human reasoning.

The Calvinist believes man is so “dead in trespasses and sins” that he must first be regenerated: That is to say, be born again (initial justification), made alive by the Spirit of God, indwelled by the Holy Spirit, and given the new nature prior to and apart from personal repentance toward God and faith in Jesus Christ (Acts 20:21).3 Furthermore, even faith, according to Calvinism, is the gift that was given to him after he has been regenerated (Eph. 2:8-9).4 These are two examples of egregious errors rooted in Calvinism.

Just How Long is That Line?

Pastor Lawson gives the impression that Calvinism’s “long line” can be traced back to the Pentateuch, as far back as Genesis and throughout the Old Testament. He believes the “long line continues” through the New Testament, on to the church fathers, the Reformers and beyond.  He said,

“These teachers of the doctrines of grace [Calvinism] really began with Moses and Joshua and Samuel…. As we come to the New Testament we see Jesus Christ Himself…proclaimed and taught the doctrines of grace [Calvinism]…. Peter, on the day of Pentecost, began teaching the doctrines of grace [Calvinism]…the Apostle Paul became a chief author and architect of the doctrines of grace [Calvinism]….”

What we find, however, is that the “long line” of Calvinism is not so long after all. Calvinism traces directly from Augustine (4^th century). New Calvinists say Calvin merely re-iterated Augustine. Any placing of the five points of Calvinism to Genesis would be based on the idea that the church began in Genesis and continues to today.

Steve Lawson’s message sheds light on how he arrives at five-point Calvinism. What we find is in the answer to the question, “What is Rationalistic Fatalism?”

“Rationalistic fatalism is understandable in light of dictionary usage.  According to Franklin’s Dictionary and Thesaurus, ‘rationalistic’ is literally: ‘reliance on reason as the basis for the establishment of religious ‘truth,’ and ‘fatalism’ is the ‘belief that fate determines events.’ Of course, ‘fate’ is a cause beyond human control to determine. Looking at that statement in this light demonstrates that those referred to rely solely on reason rather than revelation as the basis for their theological moorings. The ‘circle logic’ of five-point Calvinism is just that for the whole system crumbles when a single link in the chain is broken. One must approach the system with reason rather than faith. That of course leads to the fatalism, which holds that God has predetermined the destiny of human souls and that all the witnessing, praying, and missionary effort in the world will not change the outcome.”5

Close:
Those who reject Calvinism should avoid falling into the trap of accepting and agreeing to the new terminology.  In any discussion about or debate over Calvinism, no matter how many times the term, “doctrines of grace” appears, we will refer to and reiterate the historic, unambiguous label, “Calvinism.” Calling the theology of John Calvin “the doctrines of grace” does not change the theology of what we know today as “Calvinism.” Our priority is to equip uninformed and/or unsuspecting believers to first recognize the so-called “doctrines of grace” as Calvinism, and then be able to reject it from the Bible.

Yours faithfully,


LM

(Originally published Sept. 20, 2021)

Among the many works available refuting Calvinistic theology the most recent, comprehensive and compelling I am aware of would be Forewarned and Forearmed: Preparing for Battle Against the Errors of Calvinism by Dr. Chris Shepler. 

"Forewarned and Forearmed will walk you through the five major tenets of Calvinistic theology of represented by the acronym TULIP. It will explain what Calvinists mean and teach by each of them. It will also expose Calvinism's error and show how it is truly misaligned with the clear teaching of the Bible."

Footnotes:

1) Steve Lawson: Professor of Preaching at The Master’s Seminary (John MacArthur, chancellor emeritus), member of The Gospel Coalition. 

For the 2023 BJU Foundations Conference five-point Calvinist Steve Lawson was presented as a keynote speaker. This was further evidence that BJU has adopted Calvinism and Reformed theology are core doctrines to be taught and promoted in the college and seminary. See also, An Analysis of BJU's Position Paper on Calvinism, Arminianism & Reformed Theology.

2) The Long Line Continues (Feb. 6, 2019 edition).

3) The key to understanding Calvinism’s irresistible grace is that the Holy Spirit regenerates the elected individual, thus, they can then receive the Word and exercise faith. This regeneration can occur years before exercising their act of faith. Some Calvinist’s define this regeneration as taking place at conception, others at physical birth, and others at some later time. But ALL Calvinist’s teach it occurs prior to and independent of any act of faith or any foreseeing by God of their eventual faith. When thought through, biblically to be regenerated, literally meaning to “be born again,” means that the elect one possesses or is indwelled by the Holy Spirit at that point. For further study see,
The Danger of Teaching That Regeneration Precedes Faith

4) The Danger of Teaching That Faith is the Gift of God

5) Dr. David L. Cummins, in an email to me answering the question, what is rationalistic fatalism.  Dr. Cummins response appears on pp. 261-262 of In Defense of the Gospel: Biblical Answers to Lordship Salvation, 1^st edition only, 2006.

Related Reading:

After reading Bob Jones University’s position paper, I feel that it reflects a style commonly employed by many New Calvinists. Their writing typically skirts issues to avoid offense or exclusion, while maximizing inclusivity. They achieve this by allowing the reader to supply his or her own theological definitions rather than offering clear-cut ones that would reveal Calvinist views. The fact that BJU’s paper appears to use a similar strategy concerns me. I see this tendency through the paper. For example, it contains the term “exercise faith” four times. (Dr. Rob Congdon: An Analysis of Bob Jones University’s Position Paper on Calvinism...)

Oops! I Thought I Was a Four-Point Calvinist & An Alternative View of Election

New Calvinism’s Upside-Down Gospel

Defining Calvinism’s T-U-L-I-P?

Following is a succinct definition of T-U-L-I-P. Following each of the five-points we will reiterate the way Calvinists rename each of the five points.

T- Total (Human) Inability
The Bible teaches man’s human depraved nature, human depravity, – that is all have sinned and come short of the glory of God (Rom. 3: 23). All are sinners and separated from God.  Calvinism added the term “total” to the term human depravity, to indicated that apart from God’s intervention through the regeneration of the Holy Spirit prior to faith, man can never understand, accept, react, or respond spiritually in any way to God, His Word, and the work of the Holy Spirit. (Jer. 17:9; Romans 3:10-12; Eph. 2:1)

Lawson renames Total Inability, “Total Depravity,” or “Radical Corruption.”

U- Unconditional Election

For the Calvinist God has elected only a select group of the world’s population for Heaven, while all the rest enter this world headed to an eternal existence in Hell. Some Calvinists explain God taking an active role in bringing the elect to salvation, but as for the rest, He is completely passive toward, and essentially abandons them on the road to Hell. (2 Cor. 5:18-19)

Many Calvinists, however, teach that God elected some to heaven and some to hell – in other words, He did not just extend grace to some, the elect, and allow the others to follow their own path, independent of God’s electing them to Hell. It should be noted that most people believe in Calvinistic Unconditional Election or Arminianism, which allow them to reject God later after first trusting Him. It is important to realize that the Bible’s use of the term “election” always refers to service and never salvation; hence there is a third view of election, independent of both Calvinism and Arminianism.
Lawson retains “Unconditional Election,” or “Sovereign Election.”

L- Limited Atonement

Limited Atonement is the most controversial of the five points. Many in the Reformed camp back away from this point of Calvinism and call themselves four-point Calvinists. Many five-point Calvinists consider those who do not fully embrace a limited atonement as falling short of being a true Calvinist. The five-point Calvinist believes Christ died only for the elect; the shed blood of Christ and His atoning work on the cross were intended only for the select group chosen for salvation. This means Christ’s substitutionary death paid the penalty of sin only for certain sinners, and not for the sins of all mankind past, present and future. (Isaiah 53:6; John 3:16; 1 Jn. 2:2)
Lawson renames Limited Atonement, “Definite Atonement,” or “Particular Redemption.”

I- Irresistible Grace

Calvinism teaches that the Holy Spirit extends a special inward calling, but only to those elected to salvation. Through this calling the sinner is irresistibly drawn to Christ and the Spirit causes the sinner to cooperate. The lost man may have no desire for Christ, no interest in the claims of the gospel, but he has no choice in the matter. Because he has been unconditionally elected for salvation the Spirit puts the choice in his mind, removes any barrier or hindrance and compels him to respond to the gospel invitation.

Many indicated it is not necessary to respond to a gospel invitation. They describe an eventual realization that they are elect and rather than an act of response, they merely believe their spiritual interest and/or acknowledgement of Christ indicates they are elect. The Calvinist often uses the term “exercise faith” rather than trust in Christ alone for their salvation.

This irresistible grace cannot be rejected and does not depend on man’s cooperation. The ability of individuals to reject Christ’s offer of salvation answers Calvinism’s irresistible grace. The Bible teaches that man can be reproved over and over, and resist the working of the Holy Spirit in his heart. (Gen. 6:3; Prov. 1:24-26; 29:1; Matthew 23:37; John 5:40; Acts 7:51-52)
Lawson renames Irresistible Grace, “Effectual Calling,” or “Sovereign Regeneration.”

P- Perseverance of the Saints

There are two views on Perseverance of the Saints. The traditional position is found in Reformed confessions of faith. The non-traditional view is typically found in some Baptist and Evangelical circles. The common denominator is that the elect are eternally secure and will persevere in the faith. The way Perseverance commonly addresses those who fall away is to conclude they were never saved in the first place or will return eventually. In its most extreme form Perseverance is articulated (for example by John Piper and Kevin DeYoung) as the only way to ensure “final salvation,” of final justification, to reach heaven, i.e., glorification.

To the Calvinist, a person must persevere their entire life by doing good works and spiritually living to demonstrate at the Great White Throne Judgment that they are truly elect. Thus, all men will appear at the Great White Throne Judgment (Rev. 20:11-15). Notice they are judged by their works. You often read in Calvinistic writing that a person cannot truly know they are righteous or the elect until the day they die, but Scripture says you can know you have eternal life right now (1 John 5:13). For the true believer who has accept God’s gift of salvation by faith alone, he does not have to persevere but depends upon God to preserve Him as promised in Jude 1 and Jude 24.

Thus, a saved man’s eternal security, his assurance and position in Christ are not dependent on how he performs as a Christian. He is saved and secure because of what Jesus Christ has done for him. (John 10:28-29; Eph. 1:13; 2 Tim. 1:12; 1 Peter 1:3-9) Lawson retains “Perseverance of the Saints,” or “Persevering or Preserving Grace.”