Issue 1, Spring 1998, Volume 16

A Book Review by Vic Reasoner  

Paul M. Bassett, Holiness Teaching: New Testament Times to Wesley, Volume One of Great Holiness Classics (Kansas City: Beacon Hill, 1997), 339 pp.
 
 

In 1950 Leroy Froom published a four-volume set entitled The Prophetic Faith of Our Fathers. It was an attempt to demonstrate that the Seventh Day Adventist approach to eschatology was what the Christian Church had historically believed. Froom declared early in the set, "The early church was distinctly premillennialist in her cherished expectations of Christ's second advent." Those who did not fit this mold tended to be discredited and those who agreed at one point were represented as supporting the Seventh Day Adventist party line. The set crossed the line of historical research and entered into the realm of propaganda.

In 1984 the Church of the Nazarene published the first volume of an ambitious six-volume project entitled Great Holiness Classics. Their purpose was to provide an anthology of holiness literature which demonstrated that the doctrine of entire sanctification, as taught by the holiness movement, was known and exemplified by saints of every age.

The project has proven to be an embarrassment to the publisher and has failed to demonstrate that the particular emphasis of the nineteenth century American holiness movement may be traced back to the early Church.

The editors began by drawing up a statement of doctrine with 27 (later expanded to 28) particular code words. These code words were imposed as headings in the text and supposedly demonstrated that this emphasis had broad acceptance. However, where the text differs from the bias of the editor, the editor simply stated his disagreement with the text. For example, noted Wesleyan theologian Thomas Ralston stated,

It matters but little whether this eminent state of holiness be gained by a bold, energetic, and determined exercise of faith and prayer, or by a more gradual process, whether it be instantaneous or gradual, or both the one and the other.

But editor Richard S. Taylor objected in a footnote, "It really matters a lot! . . . And where are the witnesses to a clear experience of entire sanctification attained by the gradual process?" Both the superficial headings and the contradictory footnotes tend to weaken the attempt of this entire series to make their point.

The history of the Christian Church was divided into six periods for this series. Volume two covered basically the eighteenth century, while volumes three through six cover the remaining two hundred years. It is with particular interest that we focus on volume one which covers the first 1700 years of the Christian Church. After thirteen years, volume one was finally published in 1997. All of the subsequent volumes, in a sense, rest upon this foundational first volume.

Paul Bassett considered 165 authors and works in his research. While he is to be commended for his wide reading and his fresh translation of these early Christian writings, he declared that these "pre-Wesleyan works do not speak Wesleyan language." Wesleyan theology effectively synthesized early Church traditions. Bassett, however, muddies the waters here by confusing Wesleyan theology with that of the later holiness movement which has no historical precedent for much of its theology.

At one point Bassett cautions, "Do not expect to find anything like the rounded, full, theological expressions of the doctrines of entire sanctification and Christian perfection to which you may have become accustomed in reading the literature of the Holiness Movement." At another point Bassett confessed to facing a dilemma: no surviving literature from the second or third century explicitly discussed the doctrine of entire sanctification and Christian perfection.

Specifically, Bassett does not reprint a single classic which either advocates a second crisis experience subsequent to regeneration or equates the baptism with the Holy Spirit with Christian perfection. Instead, the emphasis is on a progressive work of the Spirit and His perfecting grace.

The same theological statement formulated by holiness advocates which appears at the beginning of each volume is found at the front of this volume, but this theological grid cannot be imposed very directly upon the material Bassett handles. Throughout the text Bassett inserts 286 cut-in headings to identify major themes within the text. However, only about 18% of these headings correspond in any way to the 28 code words at the front of the book. Even in some of these cases the heading is forced or strained, not agreeing with the subject matter of the text. Bassett admitted these headings "serve a different role than in the later volumes."

While at times Bassett is objective, he attempts to read his interpretation of two works of grace back into the ancient ritual of baptism. Over time the ceremony became more complex, but the two major acts were the baptism with water and the anointing with oil. A fourth century document, the Apostolic Constitutions taught that this anointing with oil symbolized the baptism of the Spirit. It does not logically follow, however, that this was meant to symbolize two distinct works of grace. There may be two parts, but it is still one ritual which was initiation into the kingdom of God. Bassett notes that with infant baptism, over time, the anointing was postponed until the child could make his own profession of faith. However, Bassett has no basis for his assertion that the anointing with oil "was the liturgical moment of entire sanctification." If the symbolism means anything it is connecting water baptism and Spirit baptism as two parts of one meaning. In The Apostolic Constitutions the candidate for baptism declares that he is baptized "into the Lord Jesus Christ . . . and I am baptized into the Holy Spirit . . . and into the remission of sins. . . ." The new birth includes both the washing of regeneration and the baptism with the Holy Spirit. Bassett's theological presuppositions is causing him to read something into this document that it does not teach.

Most of the material gathered by Bassett is of a general nature; some does not even address the subject of Christian perfection. Bassett concedes that "one seeks in vain for particular passages of any great length in which Irenaeus expounds his understandings of sanctification and perfection." Bassett asks, "Did Irenaeus speak of or imply a 'second definite work of grace, subsequent to regeneration'? Did he talk of entire sanctification? The answer to both questions is yes and no." Bassett has already conceded that Irenaeus wrote nothing specifically on the question, yet Bassett wants to read into the writings of Irenaeus his own bias that he "seems to be referring to a 'secondness' of sanctification in the context of baptism. . . ." But the symbolism of water baptism is initiation, not something subsequent.

Clement of Alexandria refuted the teaching of the gnostics that there were two sorts of believers - the perfect and the imperfect. He insisted that all believers are perfected in their baptism and that must continue that perfecting throughout their lives.

Symeon the New Theologian taught that "unless one is baptized with the Holy Spirit, he does not become a child of God or a fellow heir of Christ. . . . We are baptized from above and born again and made into children of God."

Walter Hilton asserted, "In the justification of a soul, our Lord Jesus manifest His greatest love to a soul. . . . Such is the greatest thing that He is able to do for the soul."

Peter Riedemann wrote, "For as soon as one believes His Word with a whole heart, God wills to seal the covenant in us with the gift of His Spirit." He further notes that Christ would not send out His disciples until they had received this grace of the Holy Spirit. God gathers His Church through His Spirit. The disciples could not gather the Church until they had received the same Spirit. None of the previous five references, all taken from this book, further the cause of second-blessing holiness.

The truth is that there is no precedent in the early literature to support the contention that Christian perfection must be an instantaneous experience. The Fathers did speak often about perfection, but tended to see it as a gradual process. Bassett does make a distinction between entire sanctification and Christian perfection. His teaching seems to be that entire sanctification is the door into Christian perfection and that while perfection is progressive, we go through the door at a specific time.

This concept is not without merit, but has been exaggerated by the holiness movement. Typically, their teaching has been that "purity" occurs as the result of an instantaneous second blessing and "maturity" is the subsequent growth toward perfection. However, it is much easier in practice to claim an experience than it is to live the life. Many who are "saved and sanctified" demonstrate little of the love described in 1 Corinthians 13. A life of holiness is more important than any number of experiences claimed. It cannot be demonstrated from the literature of the early Church that much emphasis was put on seeking a specific experience. What can be demonstrated from any period of church history, however, is that genuine believers of every theological persuasion have felt an inner compulsion toward Christlikeness.

In mythology is the legend of the Procrustes bed in which everyone who laid on it was either cut or stretched until they fit. With Bassett, it does not matter whether the subject is Augustine or Macarius - they are all portrayed as exponents of the American holiness message. Bassett does not include the statement of Macarius that perfection comes gradually. "Not as some say, 'Off with one coat and on with another.'" Neither does he cite Augustine's interpretation that Romans 7 was the highest state of Christian experience. Whatever material does not fit on Bassett's bed is either omitted or re-interpreted.

While this volume may provide additional fodder for the holiness preacher, it will not convince those who have not accepted the presuppositions of the holiness movement. In fact, if this is the best material that can be produced, the case is a lot weaker than most of us ever realized.

John Wesley's teaching on Christian perfection not only summarized the teaching of Scripture, but it synthesized the various emphases within the Christian Church. The later nineteenth century American holiness movement claimed Wesley, but instead followed Phoebe Palmer and Charles Finney. Their reduction of holiness to a standardized formula broke continuity with the past and Paul Bassett is unable to demonstrate historic precedent for their emphasis. Instead of more attempts to rewrite history, why doesn't someone put the 50 volumes in John Wesley's Christian Library on a CD-ROM?
 
 

Joseph D. McPherson  

Jesus' words to Nicodemus found in John 3:5 are not only startling, but strongly enforced. Verily, verily, I say unto thee, Except a man be born of water and of the Spirit, he cannot enter into the kingdom of God.

One hears now and then an interpretation of the words born of water as a reference by Jesus to physical birth. Those who maintain this view like to believe that because the human embryo prior to birth is suspended in an enclosure of water and is brought into the world with an accompaniment of that element, Jesus must have had physical birth in mind as He spoke of the necessity of being born of water. This interpretation is not found exclusively in any one Christian sect, but is observed to have its advocates within various denominations, particularly those of the holiness movement. It has long been a favorite view of those who feel greatly driven to combat what they like to call "baptismal regeneration."

Because so many have been baptized by water without any observable accompaniment of the Holy Spirit's work in the heart and without any evidence of a transformed life, there seems to have evolved an attitude that minimizes the value of this sacrament and too often questions it necessity. It is assumed among some that water baptism is essentially an unnecessary religious ritual and that a profession of having been baptized by the Holy Spirit is sufficient enough. Nevertheless, do we not find in the "great commission" Christ's commandment not only to teach and make disciples of all nations, but also to baptize all nations? (Matt 28:19).

It is essential for us to keep in mind that the disciples and the clergy of all ages who have followed them, could only baptize with water, which is the divinely designated sign and symbol of Spirit baptism. Jesus alone baptizes with the Holy Ghost. On the authority of the Scriptures, therefore, it is clear that when afforded the opportunity, believers are commanded to be baptized by water. Therefore, taking Jesus' words born of water as referring to physical birth seems to be another attempt to support the attitude that water baptism is non-essential.

The third chapter of John shows Jesus to be in serious dialogue with a man who had already been physically born many years before. Jesus is stating the conditions necessary for entrance into the kingdom of God. Can it be thought reasonable to suppose that Jesus would really make physical birth a condition for entrance into the kingdom of God? In accordance with such an interpretation, could not physical birth be considered also as a condition for going to hell and everlasting perdition? Does not such a thought and interpretation come close to being ridiculous, if not altogether absurd? Dr. Rob Staples shows that the Apostle John had no thought of physical birth in this passage.

Against it is John's own declaration in 1:13 that birth from God has nothing to do with human birth. More importantly, in 3:3 Jesus tells Nicodemus that "no one can see the kingdom of God unless he is born again" (or "born from above," as the Greek phrase may best be translated). After Nicodemus' expression of incredulity, Jesus explains the meaning of this by using the phrase "born of water and the Spirit" in verse 5. Thus "born from above" (or "born again") is the equivalent of "born of water and the Spirit." The expression in verse 5 defines that of verse 3. The whole expression "of water and the Spirit" defines the manner in which one is born from above.

No human being ever chose to be physically born. Therefore no conditions were ever met thereby. We are either physically born or we do not exist. It is only after we come into this world and achieve sufficient maturity that we have the capacity to make choices and fulfill conditions set forth by the Master.

It is clear that Jesus was enforcing His conditions for entering into the kingdom of heaven upon a man who, as we formally noted, was physically born many years before. Nicodemus is being told of conditions he has not yet met, but must meet if he is to enter into the kingdom of God - conditions that all who are already physically born must meet. Nicodemus, along with us all must be born again. Jesus is, of course, speaking of a spiritual new birth, typified by water baptism.

It is not altogether safe for one to trust alone in his own understanding. Therefore, a total of more than thirty commentaries were researched by this writer. Without exception they all interpreted Jesus' reference to the necessity of being born of water as referring to water baptism. None has yet been found holding a different view.

We learn from John 3:26 that Jesus was already admitting disciples into His kingdom by the rite of baptism and this seems to explain the allusion to water here. From Jamieson, Fausset and Brown, we read:

A twofold explanation of the "new birth," so startling to Nicodemus [is revealed in this verse]. To a Jewish ecclesiastic, so familiar with the symbolical application of water, in every variety of way and form of expression, this language was fitted to show that the thing intended was no other than a thorough spiritual purification by the operation of the Holy Ghost. Indeed this element of water and operation of the Spirit are brought together in a glorious evangelical prediction by the prophet Ezekiel.

Then will I sprinkle clean water upon you, and ye shall be clean: from all your filthiness, and from all your idols, will I cleanse you. A new heart also will I give you, and a new spirit will I put within you: and I will take away the stony heart out of your flesh, and I will give you an heart of flesh. And I will put my spirit within you, and cause you to walk in my statues, and ye shall keep my judgments, and do them (Ezek 36:25-27).

This commentary goes on to show that this promise in Ezekiel might have come to the remembrance of Nicodemus had such a spiritual understanding not been almost lost in the reigning formalism of his time.

Already had the symbol of water been embodied in an initiatory ordinance, in the baptism of the Jewish expectants of Messiah by [John] the Baptist, not to speak of the baptism of Gentile proselytes before that; and in the Christian Church it was soon to become the great visible door of entrance into "the kingdom of God," the reality being the sole work of the Holy Ghost. Titus 3:5 refers to the washing of regeneration and renewing of the Holy Ghost.

In The Wesleyan Bible Commentary we find these comments by Harvey J. S. Blaney:

Jesus described this experience as being born of water and the Spirit. The beautiful analogy of the new birth need not be encumbered with strained interpretations, such as seeing in the water a reference to a phenomenon of the physical process of birth. The water referred to the rite of baptism. Conversion was very closely associated with baptism . . . being synonymous in time. Baptism, which was a ritual cleansing, became associated with Christian conversion as the evidence of having accepted the Gospel.

In "A Treatise on Baptism," John Wesley defined this rite as "the initiatory sacrament, which enters us into covenant with God. It was instituted by Christ, who alone has power to institute a proper sacrament, a sign, seal, pledge, and means of grace, perpetually obligatory on all Christians."

In his Journal dated February 5, 1760, he writes: "I baptized a gentlewoman at the Foundry; and the peace she immediately found was a fresh proof, that the outward sign, duly received, is always accompanied with the inward grace." Here and in numerous other references to water baptism, one finds Wesley fully convinced that this sacrament can and should be a means of grace. He persuasively shows water baptism to be a divinely intended means of the new birth in regeneration. However, that statement must be harmonized with his notes upon John 3:5: "Except he experience that great inward change by the Spirit, and be baptized (wherever baptism can be had), as the outward sign and means of it" [he cannot enter into the kingdom of God].

Adam Clarke assures us in the following words that water was used as an emblem of the Holy Spirit's work of cleansing.

The soul was considered as in a state of defilement, because of past sin: now, as by that water the body was washed, cleaned, and refreshed, so, by the influences of the Holy Spirit, the soul was to be purified from its defilement, and strengthened to walk in the way of truth and holiness.

When John came baptizing with water, he gave the Jews the plainest intimations that this would not suffice; that it was only typical of that baptism of the Holy Ghost, under the similitude of fire, which they must all receive from Jesus Christ. . . . Therefore, our Lord asserts that a man must be born of water and the Spirit, [that is] of the Holy Ghost, which, represented under the similitude of water, cleanses, refreshes, and purifies the soul.

Clarke continued by exhorting sacramentalists not to rely alone upon the external ritual of water baptism. Jesus baptized all his followers with the Holy Ghost and, according to Clarke, this baptism with the Holy Ghost is what essential distinguishes the Christian dispensation from that of the Jewish. "He who receives not this baptism has neither right nor title to the kingdom of God."

The modern holiness movement has obscured the significance of water baptism by making the baptism with the Holy Spirit an experience subsequent to entrance into the kingdom of God. The "one baptism" to which we find reference in Ephesians 4:5, is in reality, the same baptism with a dual manifestation. It consists of an inward, spiritual effusion by the Holy Spirit, outwardly typified by the application of water as its emblem. The comments of Dr. Charles Carter in The Wesleyan Bible Commentary elucidate this passage.

As water baptism, of whatever mode, is an outward sign of the inward work of God by His Spirit in the believer's heart, so the baptism with the Spirit is the fulfillment of what is signified. Thus in each instance it is one baptism.

Water baptism and Spirit baptism have been said to be two halves of one act. That one act is entrance into the kingdom of God. By one Spirit we are baptized into one body (1 Cor 12:13). By the sacrament of water baptism, one not only testifies to having embraced the Gospel and the one Christian faith, but according to early teachings of Methodism, avails himself or herself also of the divine means by which this baptism with the Spirit is to be received, regenerating and giving life to the soul formerly dead in trespasses and sins.

One final word of caution seems appropriate to add to the foregoing discussion. From his comments at the close of Acts 10, we quote Adam Clarke once more as he warns his readers against taking either of two extreme and dangerous attitudes toward religious rites. With water baptism and the Lord's Supper particularly in mind, he writes:

We must beware neither to despise outward rites in religion, nor to rest in them. Most people do either the one or the other. God gives us outward helps, because he knows we need them. But do we not sometimes imagine ourselves to be above that which, because of our scantiness of grace, is really above us? We certainly may overrate ourselves, and underrate God's bounties. He who is taught by the Spirit of God will be saved from both.
 
 

Reviewed by Vic Reasoner  
 
 

John Wesley's Explanatory Notes Upon the Old Testament were printed between 1765-6. He relied upon Matthew Henry, but stated openly that he had edited out all Henry's references to the doctrine of "absolute, irrespective, unconditional predestination." Wesley also relied on the commentary of Matthew Poole.

This three-volume set was never reprinted until 1975. I still remember how disappointed I was when my reprinted set arrived. Adam Clarke was right in his assessment, "The notes on the Old Testament are allowed, on all hands, to be meagre and unsatisfactory." In addition, the photocopy reprint of the old English type was difficult to read.

Wesley's Explanatory Notes Upon the New Testament, written in 1755, is also brief. He did not attempt to parade his knowledge; it was his purpose to assist the unlearned reader by writing simply and "to make the notes as short as possible." This doctrinal standard of Methodism has stayed in print in both one and two-volume bindings. Yet it is unfortunate that when Wesley came to the book of Revelation he decided to translate the writings of John Bengel, a German Lutheran. Those who read Wesley's notes on Revelation may not know that Wesley was simply providing the opinions of a well known scholar without necessarily endorsing his opinions. In his introduction to Revelation Wesley put the disclaimer, "Every part of this I do not undertake to defend."

Despite these limitations Wesley's Notes on both the Old and New Testament do have value. However, a complete five-volume set of notes on the whole Bible retails for $229.99. Wesley wanted to provide something within the financial grasp of the common person. He would not be pleased with the current cost of his unabridged set.

G. Roger Schoenhals had edited a one-volume condensation of the five-volume set. It was originally publishing in 1987 under the title Wesley's Notes on the Bible. In 1990 Zondervan Publishing House reprinted this edition as John Wesley's Commentary on the Bible.

To conserve space Schoenhals omitted the biblical text which was Wesley's own translation. However, he footnotes differences between Wesley's translation and the King James translation. He also omitted about two-thirds of Wesley's comments. Schoenhals assumed general background information could be found in any standard commentary. However, Schoenhals included every personal reference, every pastoral reflection and was sensitive to any theological statements. What we are left with has more of a devotional flavor. He extracts the gems and does not appear to impose his own agenda in the way Ralph Earle did with Adam Clarke's commentary (see my review in The Arminian, Vol. 12, No. 1 (Spring, 1994). I only wish Schoenhals had kept Wesley's introductions to each book of the Bible instead of including just the introduction to Revelation.

I am not usually excited about abridgements; Wesley scholars often wish they had more material, not less, with which to work! This one-volume commentary could not be your only resource for Bible study. Yet this edition, at $29.95, puts the best of Wesley's comments on the whole Bible within the reach of lay readers and is sufficient for general study. However, it has been out of print since 1995. Hopefully, Zondervan will reprint it at some point in the future. We have some of the last copies available and will sell them for $29.95 plus postage/handling as long as they last. Order from

Fundamental Wesleyan Publishers

PO Box 3432

Beckley, WV 25801-1932

or e-mail victorpau@aol.com  
 
 

Douglas A. Crossman  

This article is continued from the previous issue. Reflecting on Dr. Keith Drury's sermon The Holiness Movement is Dead, Crossman offers eight additional observations based upon his experience as an international evangelist.

5. A negative and judgmental spirit among those professing holiness.

I live on a holiness camp ground founded by the great William McDonald of Boston. In its heyday, it is claimed that rarely less than 7000 would be found on the grounds during camp meeting. I have some 48 portraits of the past preachers who preached so effectively here. What variety of style, denominational background, and interpretations of various scriptures. There were Quakers, Baptists, Congregationalists, Methodists of various types, and Salvationists. Some were millennialists, others were not. What held them together in such unity? Perfect love. They shared a uniting experience of the Spirit which filled them with love and created a general tolerance over the interpretation of secondary doctrines.

How different today! The aggressive and judgmental spirit that predominates today is nothing short of scandalous. Not even among us who are agreed on the need of the life of holiness can it be said, "See how these Christians love each other." Almost all separations and divisions in fellowship today is either over personalities or on the interpretation or application of a secondary truth. The famous John Newton said, "What a sad spectacle it is to see sheep biting sheep."

6. Substitutes for the genuine working of the Spirit.

6A. Legalism instead of spirituality.

When I adopt a certain standard of lifestyle, dress, or behavior, because I believe God would have me to do so, that is grace. When I inflict this upon others and require it from them, that is legalism. The first attitude is to be respected, the other is to be deprecated and rejected.

6B. Externalism, instead of internal cleansing.

The whole emphasis of Scripture is on Heart Purity. God has many holy people across the world, yet who differ radically on the matter of standards. To judge outwardly, from externals, can lead to very false conclusions, yet it is widespread among us.

6C. Separation instead of evangelical unity.

I hope we are all opposed to the false ecumenical movement, but the alternative is not separation from other true Christians. We dare not rend the body of Christ. According to Romans 14-16 we can be one is spirit with all other true believers, despite differences of interpretation.

There has been a neglect of the doctrine of the oneness and unity of the Church in favor of an individualistic work of the Spirit. In too many cases members of one church almost seem to believe they are the only ones who will find heaven. Many have testified how shocked and surprised they were to discover that there were Christians in other fellowships besides theirs.

It seems we are afraid that if we show any love and unity for a sister church down the road that some of our people may go tho them. We are afraid of a loss in numbers, so we find things to criticize and condemn. We try to discourage any of our people from attending the revival of a sister church or our young people from meeting their young people.

7. The manifestation of a materialistic spirit.

There has to be something worrisome over the fact that our homes exude a materialistic philosophy. The number and quality of the cars that we have, our furnishings, and the things, things, things that seem to possess us. The subject of conversation too often when holiness preachers get together is either their latest car or the amount of money we are making on the side, in addition to preaching. Few will now accept the Pauline standard, "This one thing I do." Some even run almost a business empire. Their assets run into millions. The tragedy of all this is that these pastors and with their businesses are looked up to and admired as achievers. Materialism and spirituality can never be found together.

8. The evident lack of complete consecration among many in holiness churches. This is evidenced in:

8A. The lack of sabbath observance.

By this I mean keeping the Lord's Day, Sunday, as a very special day. It should not be a day of shopping and attending sports events; it should be an opportunity for public worship, spiritual reading and wholesome family time.

8B. Careless church members.

The consecrated believer will surely be at the prayer meeting and will be faithful in attendance and support of the services of the church. Through loyalty to the church the responsible member will see that some of the social obligations of the church towards the poor and the shut-ins are fulfilled. They will be engaged in the outreach of the church.

8C. Lack of participation in worship and service within the fellowship.

A consecrated church will not lack for stewards, Sunday School teachers, and participants in the praise and worship of the congregation. There is something wrong when a member attends a service, sits comfortably, and never opens his mouth in any praise in song or word. Such a congregation has the air of death about it.

These, as I see it, are some of the factors that have resulted in the general withdrawal of the life and power of the Spirit among the so-called holiness people. Can this be changed? Can we recapture the former glory when "days of heaven upon earth" were often experienced? Or, will God, on the principle that old wineskins cannot contain new wine, raise up a new people with a new spirit, with a new opportunity for spreading scriptural holiness throughout the world? Be sure of this, a holy God purposes a holy people for Himself. Jesus will have a Bride that will be without spot or wrinkle or any such thing.

Reviewed by Vic Reasoner  

Daniel D. Corner, The Believer's Conditional Security (Washington, PA: Evangelical Outreach, 1997), 761 pp.
 
 

The Believer's Conditional Security is probably the most important contribution to the debate over the security of the believer since Robert Shank wrote Life in the Son over 35 years ago. Not only does the author trace the historical development of the doctrine of perseverance and exegete the passages cited by both sides, but he demonstrates the practical consequences of a false view of this important subject.

I am particularly pleased that the author does not throw out the baby with the bath water. He is able to acknowledge positive contributions made by those with which he disagrees. I am also grateful that he does not promote Christian insecurity. The first sentence in the "Foreword" frames the debate properly. "Scripture makes it clear that a person may be eternally secure with God, but the question is: Is that security conditional or unconditional?"

Corner begins by tracing the doctrine historically. Unconditional security had its origin in the logic of Augustine. The doctrinal inconsistencies of Augustine are documented in this book. Every theological position quotes Augustine at some point and disagrees with him at another. Paul Bassett observed that "Wesley himself, and most of his theological progeny, have gone first to the Bible and then to Augustine and found him to be of two minds." Wesley himself said, "When St. Augustine's passions were heated his word is not worth a rush." The ambivalence of Augustine, however, is not enough to discredit his doctrine of perseverance. Some theologians think that is the only part he got right!

It was John Calvin who systemized Augustine's teachings. Corner devotes an entire chapter to "Calvin's dark side," the execution of Servetus. Although this incident cannot be glossed over, in my opinion the author goes too far by questioning the motives and even the salvation of Calvin on this basis. John Wesley, who opposed Calvinist theology, said concerning Calvin, "I believe Calvin was a great instrument of God; and that he was a wise and pious man. But I cannot but advise those who love his memory to let Servetus alone."

Again, there are many who disagree with Calvin at every point of his teaching except his doctrine of perseverance. Calvinism was developed by Theodore Beza and the Synod of Dort which met 50 years after Calvin's death. This counsel was convened to address the teachings of Arminius. Following the pattern provided by the Roman Catholic Church at the Council of Trent, Calvinism seated only Calvinists, declared itself orthodox, and then proceeded to persecute Arminians. The information Corner provides on the Synod of Dort is most helpful. One appendix gives the actual statement of the Synod of Dort on perseverance. Another appendix gives the Westminster Confession of Faith on perseverance. Although Corner would accept neither statement as scriptural, it is to his credit that he does not misquote his opponents. I also commend Corner for reprinting Wesley's "Serious Thoughts upon the Perseverance of the Saints" and the Articles of the Remonstrance in the appendix section.

There is a renewed interest in the older Calvinistic doctrine which I believe is an indictment against the anemic doctrinal condition of Methodism and her offspring. Classic Methodist doctrine triumphed over Calvinism at an earlier point in American history. All that is necessary to rebut the Calvinist renewal is to reread John Fletcher.

Yet most evangelicals and fundamentalists who preach eternal security today do not believe the Calvinistic foundation upon which the perseverance of the saints is built. In A Right Conception of Sin, Richard S. Taylor evaluated this inconsistency.

Quite frequently, however, we find Calvinists who seemingly have repudiated some of their doctrines while clinging to others. For instance, they pride themselves that they have gotten away from the hyper-Calvinism of a limited atonement and the predetermined damnation of the non-elect. "We now know," they say, "that the gospel is for 'whosoever will.'" Going a step farther, they preach as though the responsibility rested with man as well as God by telling sinners to repent, to act. Thus in one stroke they cut away the foundation of Calvinism, and apparently believe in two good Arminian doctrines: the free will of man and the unlimited provision of the atonement. Now, however, they turn around and tell the babe in Christ that he is eternally secure and under no conditions can ever be lost. Thus, having removed the foundation, they rush beneath the superstructure of "imputed righteousness" and "eternal security" and hold it aloft by force of sheer theological courage. Logic could never so uphold it, for logic shows that all the implications of "imputed righteousness" and "eternal security" have their structural girders firmly and inseparably fastened in the foundation of hyper-Calvinism. . . . And any attempt to construct these doctrines without this foundation is like trying to build only the five top stories of a ten-story building. It becomes evident, therefore, that the old hyper-Calvinism is after all more consistent with itself than is this milder, more modern type.

Corner cites statements which deny that the final perseverance of the saints is the same doctrine as eternal security and he also cites statements which equate the two teachings as the same. Sometimes it is claimed that if one does not persevere in the faith he was never truly regenerate. Those who claim to be more Calvinistic tend to say, "If you ever had true faith, you're saved, but you can never really know until the very end of your life that you had true faith to be saved." In one chapter Corner gives eighteen biblical examples of people who were once saved, but were finally lost.

The modern eternal security teaching is a bastard doctrine which neither true Calvinists nor Arminians will claim. Corner is at his best in documenting the absurdities and bankruptcy of this position. His chapter on "The Carnal Christian" documents the modern teaching that a believer cannot be distinguished from a lost sinner. The popular teaching is that "carnal" Christians can steal, lie, be addicted to pornography, commit adultery, get drunk, commit suicide, fall away from the faith, cease believing, become an agnostic, a professed atheist or an "unbelieving believer" and still be eternally secure. Corner is absolutely right in declaring, "This carnal Christian question is a watershed issue, since it really affects the definition of a Christian and, therefore, who will ultimately be saved." Corner concludes that both varieties tend to produce the same practical result even if they do not have the same theological basis.

Wesley did apply the term "carnal," as found in 1 Corinthians 3:1-3 to Christians. In "The First-fruits of the Spirit" he describes those who walk after the Spirit. They are filled with the Holy Ghost and demonstrate the fruits of the Spirit, yet inward sin still remains in them. He calls them "carnal." Yet he teaches that while they feel sin they do not yield to it; while they have sin they do not give way to it. While Wesley and Adam Clarke did not interpret 1 Corinthians 3:1-3 alike, Wesley's use of the word "carnal" cannot be equated with the later development of the "carnal Christian" doctrine by dispensationalists.

Approximately half of the book is devoted to scriptural interpretation. Eternal life is received at the moment of the new birth, yet it also described as a hope for those who persevere. God is faithful, but we must also be faithful to the point of death.

Eternal security teachers claim there are no degrees of sin and lump unintentional sin together with deliberate sin. They conclude, therefore, that we are all sinners and deny that we can be set free from sin (Rom 6:18). They claim that all of our sins, past, present, and future have already been forgiven and that no sin can cause one who has had a moment of faith to lose salvation. The true doctrine of grace, however, teaches us to say "No" to ungodliness and live godly lives (Titus 2:12).

One clear condition is all that is necessary to disprove the doctrine of unconditional security. In an appendix on "The Conditional Word If" Corner compiles six pages of conditions. Corner also catalogs and refutes 110 arguments used by unconditional security teachers. Another helpful section analyses twelve ways in which eternal security teachers mislead their hearers.

Corner does not use technical exegesis to interpret scripture, but tends to rely on cross-referencing and the larger context to make his point. Even though there are some references to the Greek language or grammar, the lay reader will not get lost. The author has been involved in evangelism for over twenty years and pastored for almost seven years. Because of the harm caused by the eternal security teaching and because of his concern for souls which are deceived by it, Corner spend over ten years in researching the issue.

Ultimately the question must be answered by the teaching of Scripture. We are losing the doctrinal battle on this subject because we have withdrawn from the battle ground. Corner finds leaders within Arminian denominations who themselves teach "once saved, always saved." Our side is not known for its doctrinal preaching; the other side has produced most of today's well-known "Bible" teachers which dominate the media and publish most of what is written on the subject of security. This massive handbook is a virtual reference book for Arminians and its needs to have a wide circulation.

We will not see revival until there is first a reformation. God is too wise to revive a lawless Church which believes it can sin with impunity. This book is an ax laid at the root of the problem. May God use it to start a reformation.

Get your copy. $19.95 softback or voice book; $29.95 hardback. Order from:  

Evangelical Outreach

PO Box 265

Washington, PA 15301-0265

e-mail evangout@hhs.net