RULES OF ENGAGEMENT
Rule 1: I
just completed a rereading and review of this book (Oct. 2003) with some theologically minded friends of mine. You are
cordially welcome to follow along, chapter by chapter, as we highlight important topics (bullets) and make comments on each
chapter. A former professor of mine, Dr. Keith Lamb, used to say: “I do not ask you to always agree with me, but I do
ask you to listen.” That is our first rule or guide in reviewing this book. It is full of material … a lot of
which challenges positions held by Calvinists like myself … as well as those of the Arminian persuasion. Don’t
put the book aside when something you believe in is challenged; remain objective and persevere to the end!
Rule 2: A Reformed professor and former pastor of mine, Jackson Boyett,
used to advertise his church on a local Christian radio station with the following humorous quip: “Come to Dayspring
Fellowship, where we are sure you will find SOMETHING that will offend you.” He was right! I did find things there that
I disagreed with! But Jackson is a dedicated student of the Word, and is such a calm, personable teacher, that you cannot
get into heated arguments in his study … instead, you always leave his home thinking about something new, something
challenging - with a theological reading list to follow up on! His accommodating manner to those with different opinions
and his voracious appetite for reading is our 2nd rule of engagement.
Rule 3: I do not like Dillow’s term “experimental predestinarian,” because as a Calvinist
and a Dispensationalist, I have not found anyone from my theological school who adheres to the teachings on perseverance that
he takes exception to in this book. Perseverance in good works (as a requirement for justification-salvation) is NOT taught
by any Dispensational Calvinists I have known. That doesn’t mean they don’t exist, but if they do, I haven’t
met them. Since I’m a 5-point Calvinist, but only adhere to Positional Eternal Security as opposed to the erroneous
addition of Experiential Perseverance in Holiness, I cannot be placed into the lump of “experimental predestinarians”
as argued in this book.
I have crossed paths with many Covenantal Calvinists, however, who do hold to Experiential
Perseverance in Holiness as an element of their 5-point outline. I consider this intrusion of an experiential element
into the doctrine of Eternal Security to be an offshoot or strain of legalism. In many cases, the adherents of this view are
nothing more than glorified “fruit inspectors,” spending an inordinate amount of valuable time inspecting the
“fruit” of other believers. As an adjunct to this erroneous doctrine, it has been my observation that these believers
are morbidly obsessed with “mortifying sin in the flesh” as opposed to walking in the Spirit. More on that controversial
subject later!
Covenantal Calvinists were the authors
of all the older confessions in which the ‘guarantee of perseverance to the end’ is indeed stated in a somewhat
“hidden” or “obscure” manner. In my opinion, the phrase “experimental predestinarian”
as used by Dillow only applies to Covenantal Calvinists, not Dispensational Calvinists. I think his term is a most unfortunate
choice, so I’m going to replace it with [Covenantal Calvinist] with my own brackets around it. Whenever you see my term
[Covenantal Calvinist] you may replace it with Dillow’s term “experimental predestinarian” if you prefer.
Covenantal Calvinists, whether amillennial or postmillennial, may take exception to my use of this term, but I’m sticking
to it until enough exceptions to the rule warrant a new term in my estimation.
