Recently I came across a curious little book called The Secret Stifler. Its stated purpose is to save the church from incipient Sandemanianism, which was a movement that emphasized that Saving Faith is like any other faith except in the object of the Christian Gospel. Sandemanianism denies to Saving Faith any emotions, obedience or will and says it is a spiritual understanding or belief of the gospel alone. If Saving Faith is not belief of the Gospel alone then what is it?
The book is modest and unimpressive in its appearance and publication. The Preface is written by Southern Baptist Theological Seminary Professor, Michael Haykin. Haykin has been lambasting Sandemanianism for years being a Padawan of the teaching of Andrew Fuller. He sets the pace of the book by saying if Sandemanianism is true then we cannot distinguish true believers from nominal believers as even nominal believers "mentally assent to the truths of Christianity"(p.9). So for Haykin unbelievers believe that Christ died for their sins and rose again for their salvation, but they still go to hell because they just believed it with their mind. This is far from scripture which teaches "the gospel is the power of God for salvation to everyone who believes..."(Rom.1:16).
The author then goes on to give a little helpful background of his theology in his Preamble. He is a five-point Calvinist, Particular Baptist. He does not like the term "Reformed Baptist" as he thinks it is an oxymoron. He does not agree with the 1689 London Confession strictly as he is not a Covenant Theologian. He declares himself a decided New Covenant Theologian.(p. 17)
Next the author goes on to announce that in this book he is just focusing on the understanding of "Faith" in Sandemanianism and not the system as a whole. He repeats the oft made proclamation that Andrew Fuller "effectively destroyed"(p. 24) Sandemanianism back in the 19th century. Sandemanians do not agree with this assessment but I guess we got to take the author's word for it. He then includes Gordon Clark as a modern day Sandemanian by quoting from his book What is Saving Faith? (p. 25) David Gay does not seem to understand Clark in the quote. Clark says "Not all cases of assent, even assent to biblical propositions, are saving faith, but all saving faith is assent to one or more biblical propositions." (p.26) Clark simply meant believing in angels and demons although biblical propositions, do not save. Only believing the propositions of the Gospel save! This unbelievably and sadly causes David Gay confusion. David then goes on to assume that because Sandemanians deny that faith is emotional that it necessarily leads to dry dead Christianity. It seems to be foreign to him that faith leads to a heart of worship as its effect. He cannot fathom this concept.
David Gay declares that Sandemanianism produces passionless preaching. He is clear that preaching should not be cold hard facts but vibrant and dynamic and uses a case study of Christmas Evans to prove it. It is not surprising Gay feels this as scripture says "people will not endure sound teaching, but have itching ears they will accumulate for themselves teachers to suit their own passions..." (2 Tim. 4:2-5). Finally, Gay does a comparative study of the exegesis of Sandemanian interpretations of Scripture with his own. This I found helpful in that he at least, unlike other critics, has grappled with the writings of Sandemanians directly. The main argument Gay uses is James 2:19 where demons are said to believe in one God. For him Demons believe Christ died for their sins and rose again for their salvation but they still go to hell (p. 60). Gay seems totally ignorant that Christ did not die for angels (Heb 2:16) and that the gospel is not even understood by elect angels much less demons (1 Pet. 1:12). Quite often John 2:23-25 is used to employ that something other than faith is necessary for salvation but Jesus in John 3:11,12 says these people (of which Nicodemus was one) did not receive his testimony by believing him. Simon the Sorceror (Acts 8:13) is another example often used to prove that believing the gospel is not enough but Simon believed he could "obtain the gift of God with money"(Acts 8:20) which is clearly not the gospel of Jesus Christ. These examples fall by the wayside as one examines them faithfully in scripture. Believers passively receive faith and are born not of blood, nor of the will of the flesh, nor of the will of man at all but by the will of God alone (John 1:12,13). Soli Deo Gloria
Although I disagree with the author on almost all of his scriptural interpretation, I do recommend this book for the very helpful history of Sandemanianism and the usually careful quotations of Sandemanian exegesis which hopefully will lead people to the truth. His history is generally good with minor exceptions like saying the Sandemanians leading scholar was a man named William Robinson. I am unaware of such a scholar but am aware of a William Jones who wrote many books and articles on Sandemanians and Sandemanianism. Gay also says Sandemanianism is a Reformed error in one of his appendices (p. 209), showing rightly that they are five-point calvinists. The main problem with the book is where David Gay defines saving faith. He declares "We must be clear. Relying, leaning, trusting, obeying, resting, embracing, cleaving, holding, fleeing to, and casting myself on Christ are not mere accompaniments of saving faith; nor can they be limited to the effects of saving faith. They lie at the very heart of saving faith itself. They are saving faith."(p. 90) We see here clearly that he includes obedience in saving faith and he makes no bones about it. David Gay and Michael Haykin sadly teach a works salvation.
"I am not ashamed, for I know whom I have believed, and I am convinced that he is able to guard until that Day what has been entrusted to me." (2 Tim. 1:12) Amen!
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
