 |
| Access here: http://bit.ly/XFwOKQ |
|
THE CALVINISM OF TEXAN BAPTIST, BENJAMIN H. CARROLL
It
recently
came to my attention through my activities on Twitter how one
who is very vocal in his anti Calvinism (branding it as Satanic
etc.,) regarded the Texan preacher, Benjamin H. Carroll as a
"Baptist giant" and but only recently enthused to a fellow pastor that
Carroll was also "a genius" and that his commentary is "a gold mine." High praise indeed! As far as Carroll's Baptist polity is concerned, I do not doubt
it in the least, but as shown below, that this man's "Baptist giant" was also
(by his own allegation) a
"Calvinist heretic" and (forgive the slight diversion here) also rejected
the KJVO position (1) and regarded Premillenialism as nullifying the
Cross of Christ (2). As much as it is tempting to follow through these
later thoughts of Carroll (not that I necessarily agree with him) the
main thrust of this article, as suggested by the title is Carroll's
Calvinism. It needs to be said that Carroll does not appear to be a 5
point Calvinist. Unfortunately, he succummbed to the teaching that
Christ atoned for
(i.e. covered) for the sins of those who would later be in Hell. This opens up all sorts of theological problems.
But, apart from this, no one can doubt that basically held to the
broad Calvinist faith. Consider the quotes below, all from the
original sources, that are available on the internet.
1) BH Carroll wisely and correctly distinguished between Calvinists and Hyper Calvinists:
"Some hyper-Calvinists
hold that all subjects of influence from the Holy Spirit are
necessarily saved, basing their arguments on such scriptures as, "Being
confident of this very thing, that he who hath begun a good work in you
will perform it until the day of Jesus Christ" (Phil. 1:6). From which
they argue that the Holy Spirit never really touches any man except
those pre-ordained to salvation. I hold unswervingly to the doctrine
that in every case of genuine conversion the good work thus commenced
will be graciously completed. But, in my judgment, the Bible is very
far from teaching that the lost never had any spiritual light – never
were subject to any impressions made by the Holy Spirit. Indeed, it
would seem impossible otherwise to commit the unpardonable sin against
the Holy Spirit." (Comments on the Unpardonable Sin)
(Note: Carroll invoked the names of many Calvinists to support view of the unpardonable sin: "I know of no great
theologian in the Baptist ranks who denies it. I refer to such acknowledged
teachers of systematic theology as Gill, Boyce, Strong, Dagg, Hovey, Pendleton,
and Robinson, and among the Presbyterians such authors as Calvin, Hodge, and
Shedd – all of whose books I have studied on this specific point.")
"He prayed for them, but not for the world. I stop to ask a question: Did not
Christ pray for sinners? He is not talking to them here; he is talking to
Christians. "I pray for them, my disciples, whom God gave to me." My
question is, Does it mean that Christ never did pray for sinners? Did Christ
ever pray for sinners? On the cross Christ said, "Father, forgive them,
for they know not what they do." And in Isaiah 53 it is said, "He
made intercession for the transgressors." Some hyper-Calvinists claim that
praying for sinners is foolish. It once went sweeping over Texas and came nigh
capturing it. In sweeping away the mourners' bench and some of the hurtful
methods used in carrying on protracted meetings, it swept away the mourner
himself. These heretics taught that the sinner had no right to pray for
himself, and that Christians had no right to pray for him, and that Christ did
not pray for them. Praying for sinners is not in print here, because this is an
intercessory prayer for his people. But it does not contradict other passages,
which show that he prayed for his persecutors, and all transgressors." (John 14-17)"Once
when a party of preachers were discussing election and predestination I
asked the question, "Do you believe in election and predestination?"
The answer was, "Yes." "Are
you ever hindered by what you believe about election in preaching a
universal gospel? If you have any embarrassment there it shows that you
have in some way a wrong view of the doctrine of election and
predestination." A young preacher of my county went to the wall on that
thing. It made him practically quit preaching, because he said that he
had no gospel except for the sheep."
Note: Although Carroll does not mention Hyper Calvinists by name here, yet this is what he is get at. True Calvinists, after (to quote Spurgeon) "Calvin's own stamp" readily affirm the free offer of the gospel.
2)
BH Carroll affirmed his strong unbelief in the sovereignty of God in
salvation before (rightly) affirming his belief in the responsibility
of the sinner:
"In the matter of personal
salvation, whatever many scriptures seem to teach, there must be earnest
exertion upon our part. No man believes more than I do the doctrine of
predestination, the doctrine of the elect, the doctrine of the absolute
sovereignty of God in salvation, the doctrine that salvation from its inception
to its consummation is of God, the doctrine of the necessity of the work of the
Holy Spirit at the very beginning and throughout the entire course of the
Christian life. All of these I believe, without a shadow of reservation. And
yet the Bible teaches that man must not sit still; that he occupies no waiting
attitude; that he is not to remain in a morally passive state, and if I knew
that I had to stand before the judgment bar tomorrow and answer for the
orthodoxy, the soundness of the statement 'I now make, I would lift up my voice
confidently and say that this lesson shows that in the matter of salvation
there must be the most attentive, the most earnest, the most vigorous and the
most persistent exertion upon our part. On what word do I found this? I found
it on this word "strive." It is our Lord, not I, who turns the
questioner from a question of curiosity first to his own case and then to the
responsibility of exertion." (Repent or perish)
3)
BH Carroll affirmed his strong
unbelief in the sovereignty of God in all affairs, invoking Calvinist
examples and especially the doctrine of the Perseverance of the
Saints:
3. "Are there not twelve hours in the day?" – How clearly this
passage teaches that a man cannot die until his work is done, nor malice strike
the beloved of God until he permits! It is a statement of the doctrine of
predestination, and surely the men of this spirit have been the world
conquerors. The Huguenots, the Dutch Calvinists, Cromwell's Ironsides, the
Scotch-Irish of Londonderry, swarming into Pennsylvania, down the Shenandoah
into Virginia and on into the mountains of the Carolinas, Georgia, Tennessee,
and Kentucky, sending out great spirits here and there like Andrew Jackson and
Stonewall Jackson, together with the Baptist hosts of Texas, who have helped
much to make this Texas a commonwealth of perfect portrait of a life, the
writers supporting and supplementing each other to a degree inexplicable in any
natural way and demonstrating that each of the four was led by super God –
these all illustrate the meaning of the passage. I deny not that the Arminians,
particularly the Methodists, have achieved great things in evangelism, but this
they did not by "falling from grace," but by "the perseverance
of the saints" and their doctrine of the power of the Holy Spirit. (The raising of Lazarus and its results)
4) BH Carroll viewed the mourner's bench, at least, with suspicion and referred to some hurtful methods in evangelism:
"In sweeping away the mourners' bench and some of the hurtful
methods used in carrying on protracted meetings, it swept away the mourner
himself." (John 14-17)
5)
BH Carroll repudiates the faith before election view as man
glorifying and as teaching that salvation is by works and not grace:
"The
last clause of verse 48, which reads thus: "As many as were ordained to
eternal life believed," needs some explanation. When I was a young
fellow and had not imbibed the doctrine of predestination
I wanted that to read, "And as many as believed were ordained to
eternal life." Perhaps that is the way you want to interpret it. Dr.
Broadus said, "Let the scripture mean what it wants to mean," and you
let that passage stand – ordination to precede eternal life. Ordination
to eternal life takes place in eternity. Paul, in Romans 8, gives us
the order. Many modern people do not believe it. We seldom ever hear
anybody preach a sermon on it. I heard a strong preacher once say, "I
just can't believe it." Romans 8:29 reads, "For whom he foreknew, he
also foreordained to be conformed to the image of his Son . . . and
whom he foreordained, them he also called: and whom he called, them he
also justified." Justification comes at believing. So unless that
passage reads, "As many as
were ordained to eternal life, believed," it would break Paul's chain
all to pieces. Settle it in your mind that salvation commences with
God, and not with man. If you put it the other way, "As many as
believed were ordained to eternal life," then you put the man ahead. It
is the question after all, Is salvation of grace or of works?" (Commentary on Acts 13:48)
6) BH Carroll affirming his belief in the doctrine of Total Depravity:
"And then again they were liable to misunderstand. He says, "I don't mean
that the murderer never gets to heaven; I don't mean that men who were
fornicators never get to heaven, for such were some of you. You belonged to
that very crowd, but ye were washed; the Holy Spirit took you in charge; you
desired to obey God, not to disobey him." In other words, the Holy Spirit is greater than total depravity. It can
overcome total depravity, because total depravity is of the first birth; but this
being born again by the power of the Holy Spirit makes one of another seed, of
the word of God, that liveth and abideth forever." (1 Corinthians 6:9-11)
7) BH Carroll catalogues Augustine's greatness, identifying it with Calvinism:
"This
is a case worthy of consideration. Everyone ought to read Augustine's
confessions. He did not keep on living that life after he was
converted; he was one of the greatest preachers that ever lived. What
we call Calvinism is the doctrine of Augustine. He saved the church for
300 years from going astray." (1 Corinthians 6:9-11)
And
just in case, you miss the application, BH Carroll takes it up again in
the review questions, identifying Calvinism with the gospel that Paul
preached in Corinth:
"21. What the character of
the Corinthians before hearing the gospel, and what their character afterwards?"
"22. What remarkable case of
this transformation cited, and what is Calvinism?"
8) BH Carroll on election, asking the question: "Was
this election based on foreseen repentance and faith, or did repentance
and faith result from the election?" Whole section shows that faith and
repentance are the signs (not the cause) of our election i.e. we repent
and believe because we are elect:
"Let
us consider somewhat the matter of election. It is something that may
be known. He says he knew it. Once I helped to ordain a man for whom I
conducted the examination. I asked the questions just as fast as I
could fire the shots at him: "What does election mean?" "To choose."
"Who chooses?" "God." "When?" "Before the foundation of the world."
"Unto what?" "Salvation." "In whom?" "In Christ." "Was this election based on foreseen repentance and faith, or did repentance and faith result from the election?" This
was the thing that Paul was discussing: "I am thankful, brethren,
because I know you are elected. You are chosen of God unto salvation
through sanctification of the Spirit, and belief of the truth in Jesus
Christ." That being the doctrine of election, -that God chose those
people in eternity, yet Paul here in time could find out. So what are
the tokens or signs that one is elected? These tokens are of two kinds:
signs to Paul, the preacher, and signs in them, or the evidence that
they are the elect. When he saw these signs he knew they were elect.
How important that thing is for us. Our articles of faith
say it is our privilege and duty to ascertain whether we are elected.
We ought to find out whether we have been chosen of God. There is a way
to find out: "How that our gospel came not unto you in word only, but
also in power, and in the Holy Spirit and in much assurance." (1 Thessalonians)
Note again the follow up review questions:
9. What is election, who
elects, when, unto what, in whom, and what the relation of election to
repentance and faith?
10. Show how Paul knew of
their election of God, (1) from signs in him, and (2) from signs in them.
"If God were the author of sin and constrained men by an extraneous
power to sin, he could not be a judge. All who hold the Calvinistic
interpretation of grace must give fair weight to that statement. Whenever God
does judge a man, his judgment will be absolutely fair." (Romans 2:17-4:25)
10) BH Carroll expounded the doctrine on Unconditional Election in 1 Peter 1:2:
"Peter's
doctrine of election illustrating the work of the Trinity in the
salvation of men. 1 Peter 1:1-2 represents the Trinityin the work of
salvation: "The elect according to the foreknowledge of God the Father
in sanctification of the Spirit unto obedience and sprinkling of the
blood of Jesus Christ." There we see he presents the whole Trinity –
the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit. That statement of the doctrine of
election in a few words, when coupled with a part of 2 Peter I, gives
Peter's whole idea of the doctrine of election. As Peter states
election, what is it? It means chosen to salvation. Who elects? God the
Father. According to what does he elect? According to his
foreknowledge. What does he mean by foreknowledge? The Greek word is
"prognosis": "nosis" means knowledge, and "pro" (the "g" being for
euphony) means before, or foreknowledge, and that word is a noun is
used only by Peter in the New Testament. He uses it three times, as
follows: Acts 2:23; the passage here, 1 Peter 1:1, and in 1 Peter 1:20.
These are the only places in the New Testament where we have the word
"prognosis," foreknowledge, which means to know beforehand. But both
Peter and Paul use the verb "prognosco," which means to know
beforehand. Peter uses that verb in 1 Peter 3:17, and Paul uses it in
Acts 26:5; Romans 8:29; 11:2. Both Peter and
Paul use the verb once to talk about a previous happening, i.e., a
happening before the time of which he is speaking. Paul says that the
Jew had known him beforehand, and Peter uses it in a similar way where
it refers to men knowing one thing before they know another thing. We
have nothing to do with that foreknowledge. Paul uses that word with
reference to God foreknowing his people, and all the other times Peter
speaks of God's foreknowledge. Now,
then, the question is: What does foreknowledge mean? Foreknowledge is
used by Peter, and "to foreknow" is used by Paul, referring to God. My
reason for putting that question is, that when I was a young preacher,
a Baptist preacher who was a good man, but Arminian in his theory,
preached a sermon on election; and he said, "election is according to
foreknowledge; God foreknew that certain men would repent and believe,
and having before seen they would repent and believe, he elected them."
When he got through I told him that the New Testament use of
foreknowledge was just about equivalent to predestination, and that any
Greek scholar would tell him so, and that election was not based upon
any foreseen goodness in man or any foreseen repentance or faith in
man, but that repentance and faith proceed from election, and not
election from them. So that what Paul means by foreknowledge is just
about the same as predestination; that in eternity God determined and
elected according to that predestination." (Comments on 1 Peter 1:2)
11) BH
Carroll lauded the various Calvinistic Confessions of Faith
prevelant among the Baptist Churches in texas at that time:
"I
now introduce the "New Hampshire Confession of Faith," written by John
Newton Brown, and which is the Confession of most Texas Baptist
churches." (Sermon on Assurance)
"First
in order, as most official and authoritative, are Confessions or
Declarations of Faith. These symbols embody in a terse form and show
forth to the world the substance of our belief on the main points of
Bible teachings. They are very important historical witnesses of
doctrine. The most venerable symbol
of American Baptist doctrine is the Philadelphia Confession, "adopted
by the Baptist Association met at Philadelphia September 25, 1742," and
"printed by Benjamin Franklin, 1743." The historical basis of this Confession, in the main, was the London Confession of 1689. On the Philadelphia Confession nearly all the early Baptist Associations of America were founded. I now introduce this venerable witness of Baptist doctrine..." (Sermon on Assurance)
"I have quoted these creeds as the historical witnesses of doctrine, because
our first proposition re-dates to history. There are some nowadays who decry all use
of creeds.
These always have a creed of their own which they wish to impose in the
place of the one they decry. Spurgeon well says on this
point: "The arch-enemy of truth has invited us to level our
walls
and take away our
fenced cities. He has cajoled some truehearted but weak-headed
believers
to advocate this crafty policy 'Away with creeds and bodies of
divinity!'
This is the cry of the day. Ostensibly, it is reverence for the Bible,
and
attachment to charity which dictates the clamorous denunciation; but at
the
bottom it is hatred of definitive truth. As Philip of Macedon hated the
Grecian orators because they were watchdogs of the flock, so there are
wolves who desire the destruction of our doctrinal formularies, that
they may
make havoc of the souls of men by their pestilent heresies." (Sermon on Assurance)
12) BH
Carroll considered the Calvinist James P. Boyce as unsurpassed as a theologian:
"Now here is the text-book on systematic theology, which every student of that
seminary [ Southern Baptist Theological Seminary] is required to almost memorize. It was prepared by our lamented brother, Dr. James P. Boyce, to whom a superior
was not left on earth when he was called up higher." (Sermon on Assurance)
NOTES FROM INTRODUCTION
(1) “No man with a Bible before him can seriously question a personal, real,
visible, audible, palpable, tangible coming of the Lord Jesus Christ.
We don't preach on it enough. While the premillennialist preaches too
much on the time feature of it, the postmillennialist preaches too
little on the reality and certainty of it. Whoever puts the time too
soon, or makes it always imminent prepares for infidelity in the
reaction of disappointment. Whoever leaves it out of his preaching
altogether, leaves out the great hope of the gospel.” From: Our Lord's great prophecy - His Second Coming (Concluded)
(2) "The only textbook absolutely requisite is the English
Bible. The Common, or King James Version, can be made to serve, but the
Canterbury Revision, or the American Standard Version, is much preferred." (From Introduction to Commentary on the English Bible)
(2) "Bearing these reflections in mind, I submit for consideration four analyses of
the letter to the Romans, three of them here, and my own later. The first is by
Albert Arnold Bennet, of the Baptist Theological Seminary of Japan, and is by
all odds the best in many respects. In his book we have three parallel columns,
the right hand column containing the Greek text according to Westcott and Hort,
the middle column the revised translation verse by verse, and the first column
the analysis itself in detail, carried entirely through the book. It is the
most remarkable specimen of analysis I have ever known. I am very proud that a
Baptist is the author of it. Who would expect such a thing from a Baptist
Theological Seminary in Japan?" (Commentary on Romans)
"The King James
translators had not before them any one of the three oldest manuscripts of the
New Testament: the Alexandrian manuscript, now in the British Museum, was
presented to Charles I, son of James. The Sinaitic manuscript was discovered long
after that translation by Tischendorf, and it is now in the museum at St.
Petersburg. The Vatican manuscript is in the Vatican Library at Rome. All these
oldest and best manuscripts read: "Blessed are they that have washed their
robes, that they may have the right to the tree of life." I have
facsimiles of all these oldest manuscripts in my library. You may accept it
without question that in the best texts the reading is "Blessed are they
who have washed their robes." (Commentary on Revelation)
.FTR:
I reject the notion that the W&H texts are superior texts. I have
recorded these quotes from Carroll to show that he was far from the
KJVO position. In describing this "heretical Calvinist" Carroll as a "Baptist giant" and his PostMill, Calvinistic commentary as "a gold mine," you
can how confused some of the anti Calvinism crowd can be. Once again, I
make the same point (seeing they make the same moves over and over
again) - if these pastors can read and benefit so much from Calvinist
commentaries, then so can those who sit in their pews. For all their
severe denunciations of Calvinism etc., they know where to run when they
want meat to feed the flock. Read Spurgeon! Read Gill! Read BH Carroll!
Read Matthew Henry! Read the commentaries of Hodge! Your anti Calvinist
pastors read and study them! The "Calvinism-is-heresy" outbursts are
little more than mere theatre and that in the most sacred of places, the
gospel pulpit.
THE END
