Wednesday, May 03, 2006

Southern Seminary Welcomed John Frame Who Teaches Salvation Occurs By Believing Nothing

In the past few weeks, The Calvinist Flyswatter revealed the unusually strong ties between the Southern Baptist Theological Seminary and men who teach the exact opposite of what Southern Baptist churches believe on the doctrine of the new birth.

I can now reveal that in addition to previous revelations, Reformed theologian John Frame was an honored guest and lecturer at the seminary in April 2004. In addition to his lectures, the seminary sent an invitation which said, "All faculty, Th.M, and Ph.D. students are invited to a dinner with John Frame .... John Frame will give a brief address and hold a question and answer session."

John Frame teaches a heretical view of the new birth. Specifically, he says that the new birth occurs before a person puts his faith in Jesus Christ. I have written how some professors at Southern Seminary also teach "born again before faith" theology despite the fact that their salaries are paid by churches who believe the opposite of what they are teaching.

Frame was once asked, "What doctrines must one believe to be saved?" He responded by saying, "None. I hold the Reformed view that children in infancy, even before birth, can be regenerated and saved, presumably before they have any conscious doctrinal beliefs."

John Frame believes salvation occurs by believing nothing! Contrast Frame with the Apostle Paul. When asked by the Philippian jailer, "What must I do to be saved," Paul responded decisively, "Believe on the Lord Jesus Christ, and thou shalt be saved." Acts 16:31.

Southern Baptists believe Paul, not John Frame. Why then, did Dr. R. Albert Mohler, Jr., the president of Southern Seminary, have John Frame as an honored guest lecturer? Brother Bob Ross and I have written about the strange associations and faculty hiring of Dr. Mohler since his arrival at Southern. You can read these articles here, here, and here.

Only Dr. Mohler knows for sure why he continues to promote men who are dead wrong on the vital doctrines of regeneration and the new birth. I can only pray that the trustees of the seminary and the churches of the SBC discover the truth about who is teaching what at SBTS.

(Prior to publication, I asked Brother Bob Ross if he wanted to include any remarks. Below are his comments.)



We have no objection to the right of any man to believe any piece of religious fiction that he chooses. But it is highly questionable as to the wisdom on the part of a Baptist seminary's endorsing one as a "theologian" who holds to one of the most phantasmagorical of all fictions -- that the elect are "born again before birth."

Does one have to be in the pedo-regenerationist communion to "qualify" for this unique distinction? Or does it hold good for Baptists, also?

This smacks somewhat of the old "Two Seeds" Doctrine taught by Daniel Parker, one of the orginators of Hardshell anti-missionism. It is the old "we be Abraham's seed" doctrine held by the Pharisees of Jesus' time. I think it was also held by the Manichees.

This theory, in a practical sense, rules out the new birth as expounded by Jesus in John 3:14-18. Also 1 John 5:4, 5, 12.

Is it any wonder that Presbyterianianism over the years has been a veritable bottomless pit from when has arisen all kinds of wild, weird, and wall-eyed sects and divisions? -- Bob Ross


At Wednesday, May 03, 2006 10:17:00 PM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

While I disagree with Frame about a great many things, I do have some questions.

What do you believe about young children who die? Do they go to heaven? If so, are they regenerated or does God simply disregard their sinful nature and let them in apart from regeneration?

What do you believe about John the Baptist? Was he regenerated from very early? Do you have to be born again to have the Spirit?


At Wednesday, May 03, 2006 11:06:00 PM, Anonymous Anonymous said...


Qurious said...

What do you believe about young children who die? Do they go to heaven? If so, are they regenerated or does God simply disregard their sinful nature and let them in apart from regeneration?

What do you believe about John the Baptist? Was he regenerated from very early? Do you have to be born again to have the Spirit?


I can't speak for Charles, but I accept the Creedal Calvinist view on both of these questions. Dying infants are saved, as I understand the Confession, and whatever instrumentality God uses to impart the knowledge and faith in Christ to them constitutes their spiritual birth, whether in this life or in the life beyond. We really have no revelation into this matter (Deut. 29:29).

On John, his pre-birth leaping in the womb was in response to his hearing the "salutation" of Mary (Luke 1:41). There is no indication, however, that John's case indicates the "norm" for all infants, nor for adults, no more than the case of Jesus' appearing to Saul on the road to Damascus is intended as the "norm" for adult salvation.
-- Bob L. Ross

At Thursday, May 04, 2006 3:25:00 PM, Anonymous Anonymous said...


Bob to Charles:

John Frame's theology which says that unborn "elect" babies are regenerated (born again) before birth makes Dr. Mohler's concern about Joel Osteen rather superfluous, doesn't it, Charles?

On his March 30 blog, Dr. Mohler expressed some concern about one's finding the Gospel in Joel's messages, as follows:

The first question is this -- Would anyone watching his television program, or sitting in his vast church facility, hear in Mr. Osteen's message a clear and undiluted message of Gospel proclamation? Would this person have any reason, based on hearing Mr. Osteen's message, to know himself as a sinner and to understand how the cross of Christ is the only ground of his salvation? Would he come to know that Jesus the Christ is fully human and fully divine, and that He came in order that we might have everlasting life -- not just a good parking space?

I listen to Joel every week, and I hear him present the Gospel and those other items just about every week. In fact, at the end of every sermon, he presents a brief summary of the Gospel message to the unsaved and urges them to accept Christ.

But why is Dr. Mohler concerned after hearing John Frame?

John Frame has duly informed Dr. Mohler that the "elect" infants are either regenerated before birth or soon after birth, so why would Dr. Mohler have any further worries about any one of the elect's hearing the Gospel from Joel Osteen or anyone else?

If they get regenerated when Frame says they get regenerated, it does not seem to be reasonable that there should be any further concern about what they hear thereafter, does it?

It seems that Frame's view would alleviate any worries in Dr. Mohler about what Joel Osteen is preaching or not preaching, doesn't it? -- Bob L. Ross

At Thursday, May 04, 2006 4:03:00 PM, Anonymous Anonymous said...


Bob's Note: I sent the following email on April 23, 2006 and have not as yet received a reply. I sent it a second time on April 29, and also had no reply. I have frequently received emails from Tom Nettles and some from Al Mohler, but this one has met with no response.

I am posting here in the John Frame thread due to the fact that Lasserre Bradley Jr. is very much on the same order of doctrine. He, too, believes the "elect" are regenerated without hearing and believing the Gospel.

Lasserre Bradley Jr. has long been the No. 1 Hardshell Baptist in the United States, and Southern Baptists have a right to know why leaders at the Southern Baptist Theological Seminary are having anything to do with him. Bradley has spent most of his life opposing the preaching of the Gospel to the unsaved as the means ordained of God for bringing them to Jesus Christ for salvation.

If and when I get a response from either Dr. Nettles or Dr. Mohler, who teach at the Southern Baptist Theological Seminary, I will post their reply on the Calvinist Flyswater.


To Dr. Tom Nettles and copy to Dr. R. Albert Mohler

Dear Brother Nettles:

As you know, I have expressed a great deal of public concern over the rise of certain views on the New Birth for quite sometime.

I have recently had a disturbing email from a very reliable Southern Baptist Pastor and leader who alleges that Dr. Nettles has been "fellowshipping" with Pastor Lasserre Bradley Jr., the leading Hardshell Baptist preacher in the United States for the past 40 plus years. [See Note following this email].

I have personally known Bradley since he was 19 or 20 years old, and when he went to the Hardshells in the late 1950s he reeked havoc in Eastern Kentucky among some churches when I was living in Ashland. He led astray several of our personal preacher friends who traipsed off after him into Hardshellism on the matter of "regeneration."

It grieves me to bring this matter to you, but since you hold such an influential position in Baptist ranks, I would not have any easy conscience unless I heard directly from you about the nature of your association with Bradley, if this allegation is indeed true.

This is simply an inquiry, and yet I must tell you that this could become a matter of public notice, so your reply will hopefully express in exact detail the nature of your association with Lasserre Bradley Jr. and what, if any, doctrinal implications are involved, from your point of view.

I have not concealed my deep disappointment with the Southern Baptist Seminary's decline in the direction of what I believe to be detrimental theology on the new birth, and I will continue to scrutinize the developments that arise in days ahead and make public commentary concerning them.

Thank you for giving this matter your attention. I await your response.

Bob L. Ross, 3 John 3


NOTE: Subsequent to the above email, this report of the visit was made by Lasserre Bradley, Jr. himself to the Pastor who passed it along to me. This Pastor said, "He mentioned that he had been in chapel at Southern, not long before the time I met him. He had gone to Southern to visit Tom Nettles at Nettles' invitation. In all fairness, he was merely having a dialogue with Nettles as he and I were talking."

If Tom Nettles invited Lasserre Bradley Jr. to Southern Seminary, it raises some very serious questions. Bradley is the most noted Hardshell heretic of the past half century, and one who has for years been an enemy of the Baptist doctrine taught in the 1689 Baptist Confession of Faith. He is a champion of the "regeneration precedes faith," "born again before faith" heresy.

Unless Nettles invited Bradley to the Seminary as a means of confronting him for his heresies, I see no other legitimate and reasonable purpose for such an invitation. I will be very interested in what Tom Nettles and Al Mohler have to say about Bradley's visit. -- Bob L. Ross

Add Bradley to names of Sproul and Frame as invited guests at SBTS who believe the the "elect" get regenerated "before faith," and that of course means "without faith."

Any average Southern Baptist Sunday School child believes more about the Gospel than such men as this, yet the Seminary invites them to be "guests." -- Bob L. Ross

At Friday, May 05, 2006 1:23:00 AM, Anonymous Anonymous said...


Bob to Charles:

I have told you, Charles, that I seldom go to other blogs, but tonight I was surfing around and landed on the Founders Ministries.

I read this from Tom Ascol:

I don't know why Southern Baptists saw a decrease in our reported baptisms last year. I do know that there is a growing number of churches that simply refuse to report all their statistics. I pastor one of them. We did not report the number of people we baptized last year and we will refuse to do so again this year and every year hence until the powers that be lead us to admit that our reported membership statistics are a sham.

Since the Founders are professing to be a "return" to allegedly what Baptists "ought to be," I wonder why their churches would not want others to know what "sound" Baptist churches are doing by way of converts, baptisms, and memberships?

What can be expected of a (1)"born again before faith" type of preaching ministry which (2)does not use public invitations to encourage sinners to repent and confess Christ, and (3)which has an age restriction in regard to when a young person is permitted to obey Christ in baptism?

In Spurgeon's magazine, he always had a report of numbers of converts, baptisms, admissions to the church, etc. Is not Spurgeon one of those that the Founders have allegedly adopted as a role model?-- Bob L. Ross

At Friday, May 05, 2006 9:00:00 PM, Anonymous Anonymous said...


Bob to Charles:

Here is what Spurgeon had to say about churches' reporting on their numbers. From THE SOUL WINNER, pages 13, 14):

I am not among those who decry statistics, nor do I consider that they are productive of all manner of evil; for they do much good if they are accurate, and if men use them lawfully.

It is a good thing for people to see the nakedness of the land through statistics of decrease, that they may be driven on their knees before the Lord to seek prosperity; and, on the other hand, it is by no means an evil thing for workers to be encouraged by having some account of results set before them. I should be very sorry if the practice of adding up, and deducting, and giving in the net result were to be abandoned, for it must be right to know our numerical condition.

It has been noticed that those who object to the process are often brethren whose unsatisfactory reports should somewhat humiliate them: this is not always so, but it is suspiciously frequent.

I heard of the report of a church, the other day, in which the minister, who was well known to have reduced his congregation to nothing, somewhat cleverly wrote, "Our church is looking up." When he was questioned with regard to this statement, he replied, "Everybody knows that the church is on its back, and it cannot do anything else but look up." When churches are looking up in that way, their pastors generally say that statistics are very delusive things, and that you cannot tabulate the work of the Spirit, and calculate the prosperity of a church by figures.

The fact is, you can reckon very correctly if the figures are honest, and if all circumstances are taken into consideration if there is no increase, you may calculate with considerable accuracy that there is not much being done; and if there is a clear decrease among a growing population, you may reckon that the prayers of the people and the preaching of the minister are not of the most powerful kind.

One wonder if the Founders are not reporting since their churches may not be showing a very strong growth, especially in the number of converts and first time baptisms. -- Bob L. Ross

At Friday, May 05, 2006 9:06:00 PM, Blogger David B. Hewitt said...

My friend Charles:

The title of your post here seems to be misleading. Are you confusing salvation (which includes believing in Christ and the Gospel) with regeneration (which is the Holy Spirit causing a dead sinner to come alive and believe the Gospel)? They are different, to be sure. Regeneration is part of salvation, but it is not the whole of it.

Anyway, hello again. It's been a while. :)

Dave Hewitt

At Friday, May 05, 2006 9:28:00 PM, Anonymous Anonymous said...


Bob to Charles:

The following is from Al Mohler's website which I visited earlier today:

"We are convinced that the Gospel of Jesus Christ has been misrepresented, misunderstood, and marginalized in many churches and among many who claim the name of Christ. Compromise of the Gospel has led to the preaching of false gospels, the seduction of many minds and movements, and the weakening of the church's Gospel witness.

Mohler is pictured with some of those about whose "gospel" he should indeed be very much concerned -- the "born again before faith" variety, and the pedo-regenerationists.

I wonder what this "Together for the Gospel" group would have thought of Spurgeon's simple Gospel, as illustrated below:

I saw not along ago a woman who said to me, “Is it indeed true that upon trusting in Jesus I shall be saved at once?”

I replied, “It is even so.”

she said, “My father, when he got religion, was nearly six years a-getting it; and they had to put him in a lunatic asylum part of the time. I thought that there was no getting saved: with out going through a very dreadful process.”

I spoke to her of the person, and the work of Jesus, and repeated
to her the divine command, “Believe on the Lord Jesus Christ, and thou shalt be saved.”

She caught the idea, and obeyed the command I perceived
that she yielded to the truth, and really trusted, for I saw a change come over her face which betokened the rest of her soul. Those who are familiar with such scenes know what a beauty lights up the countenance of the plainest persons when they come to see the way of peace, and enter upon it.

“I am saved,” said she, and she hastened off, saying, “I will get away now, for your time must not be wasted. I am saved, and you can tell the truth to some others, and perhaps they will rejoice as I do.”

Are there none here this morning to whom this gospel will be good news? Young man, it may be that you will begin this morning a new life, and that there will be for you a grand career in the service of God. The beginning of the new life is faith in Jesus Christ.

“Only trust him,
only trust him,
Only trust him now;

He will save you,
he will save you,
He will save you now.”


Metropolitan Tabernacle Pulpit, Vol. 54, pages 273, 274.

At Friday, May 05, 2006 10:37:00 PM, Blogger Charles said...

David, Hello!

I'm repeating what Frame said.


At Saturday, May 06, 2006 3:47:00 PM, Anonymous Anonymous said...


Bob to Charles:

Some brethren in the midwest have formed a "Spurgeon Baptist Association" of a few churches. One of the primary leaders is a friend of mine, and we are both rather "fanatics" about Spurgeon. I am hoping they will do a better job of representing Spurgeon than some of the others have done, such as the Founders and Banner of Truth.

Here is an email I sent to a couple of the brethren:

Dear Brethren:

I was thrilled when I heard about the Spurgeon Baptist Association, and about your plans to do evangelism.

I want to urge you to restore the honored place of "The Sinner's Prayer" as it was used by C. H. Spurgeon. . . .

I am therefore calling your attention to how Spurgeon used "The Sinner's Prayer," and hope you may give it a restoration to the place of usefulness that Spurgeon used it.

Luke 18:13, 14: "And the publican, standing afar off, would not lift up so much as his eyes unto heaven, but smote upon his breast, saying, God be merciful to me a sinner. I tell you, this man went down to his house justified rather than the other: for every one that exalteth himself shall be abased; and he that humbleth himself shall be exalted."

Directing sinners to faith in Christ obviously takes precedence over prayer, yet prayer can be a means of effecting the heart of a lost person and thereby prayer becomes an encouragement to his believing in Christ. 

Below are excerpts from what C. H. Spurgeon had to say about the sinner's prayer.

Spurgeon had a high regard for the practical application of the sinner's prayer of Luke 18:13 in bringing the lost to Christ

It seems to me that of all people, creedal Calvinists can most logically identify with the implications of the sinner's prayer, for Calvinism is the most prominent theological system which teaches justification based solely on the provisions of the mercy of God, which is what the Publican was pleading in his prayer.

Furthermore, a desire for mercy is prompted in the sinner by the Holy Spirit's blessing on the Word of God (Romans 8:26; 1 Cor. 4:7; Phil. 1:6; 2:13; Romans 10:13), which is the view of the creedal Calvinist.

Note below how Spurgeon made use of the sinner's prayer.

Spurgeon, a Calvinist, preached two great sermons on the text in Luke 18:13, sermons #216 and #1949.  ><

In sermon#1949, Spurgeon said

His supplication speeded well with God, and he speedily won his suit with heaven. Mercy granted to him full justification. The prayer so pleased the Lord Jesus Christ, who heard it, that he condescended to become a portrait painter, and took a sketch of the petitioner. I  say the prayer in itself was so pleasing to the gracious Savior, that he tells us how it was offered: “Standing afar off, he would not lift up so much as his eyes unto heaven, but smote upon his breast.” . . .

My heart’s desire this morning is that many here may seek mercy of the Lord as this publican did, and go down to their houses justified . . . .

Now, I want to cheer your hearts by noticing that this man, through this prayer, and through this confession of sin, experienced a remarkable degree of acceptance. He had come up to the temple condemned; “he went down to his house justified.” A complete change, a sudden change, a happy change was wrought upon him. Heavy heart and downcast eye were exchanged for glad heart and hopeful outlook. He came into that temple with trembling, he left it with rejoicing. . . . Oh, that you might find mercy this morning! Let us seek this blessing. Come with me to Jesus. I will lead the way; I pray you say with me this morning — “God be merciful to me the sinner.”

In sermon #216, Spurgeon said the following:

Come just as thou art, with nothing of thine own, except thy sinfulness, and plead that before the throne—"God be merciful to me a sinner." This is what this man confessed, that he was a sinner, and he pleaded it, making the burden of his confession to be the matter of his plea before God. . . .

May I be made sure of heaven, and all that in a moment?" Yes, my friend, If thou believest in the Lord Jesus Christ, if thou wilt stand where thou art, and just breathe this prayer out, "Lord, have mercy! God be merciful to me a sinner, through the blood of Christ."

I tell thee man, God never did deny that prayer yet; if it came out of honest lips he never shut the gates of mercy on it. It is a solemn litany that shall be used as long as time shall last, and it shall pierce the ears of God as long as there is a sinner to use it.

Come, be not afraid, I beseech you, use the prayer before you leave this Hall. Stand where you are; endeavor to realize that you are all alone, and if you feel that you are guilty. now let the prayer ascend. Oh, what a marvelous thing, it from the thousands of hearts here present, so many thousand prayers might go up to God! Surely the angels themselves never had such a day in Paradise, as they would have today, if every one of us could unfeignedly make that confession.

Some are doing it; I know they are; God is helping them. And sinner, do you stay away? You, who have most need to come, do you refuse to join with us. Come, brother come. You say you are too vile. No, brother, you cannot be too vile to say, "God be merciful to me."

Perhaps you are no viler than we are; at any rate, this we can say—we feel ourselves to be viler than you, and we want you to pray the same prayer that we have prayed. "Ah," says one, "I cannot; my heart won't yield to that; I cannot." But friend, if God is ready to have mercy upon thee, thine must be a hard heart, if it is not ready to receive his mercy. Spirit of God, breathe on the hard heart, and melt it now! . . . .

Spurgeon closed the sermon with this plea:
Let us use this prayer as our own now. Oh that it might come up before the Lord at this time as the earnest supplication of every heart in this assembly! I will repeat it,—not as a text, but as a prayer,—as my own prayer, as your prayer.

Will each one of you take it personally for himself? Let everyone, I entreat you, who desires to offer the prayer, and can join in it, utter at its close an audible "Amen."
Let us pray,
[And the people did with deep solemnity say] "AMEN."

P.S.—The preacher hopes that he who reads will feel constrained most solemnly to do likewise.

The cry of a young raven is nothing but the natural cry of a creature, but your cry, if it is sincere, is the result of a work of Divine Grace in your heart. When the raven cries to Heaven it is nothing but the raven’s own self that cries—but when you cry, “God be merciful to me a sinner”—it is God the Holy Spirit crying in you!

The Ravens' Cry, Volume 12, Metropolitan Tabernacle Pulpit, page 55.

The fact that many of the Hybrid Calvinists are critical of the use of the Sinner's Prayers is just another example of how far removed they are from Spurgeon's creedal Calvinism. -- Bob L. Ross

At Sunday, May 07, 2006 4:28:00 PM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Scott said...

Are you back so soon?

We just can't take you at your word, can we? You said you wanted to debate, but you were just gasing? You said you were thru with this blog, but you were just gasing? You say you like Spurgeon and Gill, but you are just gasing?

This is Sunday . . . how many souls did your preaching lead to Christ today? Did you have anybody come and say they got "born again before believing in Christ"?

Did you get thru the sermon without getting "ordo salutifried"?

Did you pledge allegiance to the Hybrid flag, "I pledge allegiance to the ordo paludal, and to the pedo-regenerationist heresy for which it stands"?

If you are such good friends with Nettles, why won't he explain why he "invited" Hardshell Heretic Bradley to SBTS? Is he like the Pharisees who said, "We cannot tell"? Inviting Heretic Bradley is like inviting Osama bin Laden to the White House for dinner.

Do you agree with John Frame that the "elect" are "born again" before they are born the first time? Can we expect Mohler to continue inviting such heretics to SBTS?

Do you agree with the Founders that "numbers" don't count? . . . especially if you don't have any "numbers" to submit?

Have you figured out yet when you got "born again before faith" and who was the Arminian preacher under whom you were "begotten"? Since most of the Hybrids seem to claim they got saved under Arminians, does that mean that the Arminians are the ones who are "begtting" the Hybrid Calvinists? Are you one of the "offspring" of the Arminians?

"God be merciful to Scott Morgan," and deliver him from Hybrid Calvinism. -- Bob Ross

At Sunday, May 07, 2006 4:57:00 PM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Bob to Charles:

I have been giving it some very serious thought, Charles, and I think "we" would make a good candidate -- if not President -- of the SBC. Consider our credentials --

(1) We have demonstrated that born again believers united in Christ can get along without making theological systems of whatever description a "test of faith."

(2) We have demonstrated that we are against the heresy of the pedo-regenerationists which is creeping into Southern Baptist Seminary, and we could use our office as President to alert the SBC to the dangers of this heresy with great impact. We could call for a "Jericho March" around the Seminary until this heresy was renounced by Nettles, Mohler, Schreiner and any other "born again before faithers" behind those walls.

(3) We could call for a Resolution that would call upon all SBC churches and preachers to affirm their acceptance of Acts 16:31, "Believe on the Lord Jesus Christ, and thou shalt be saved," as always being applicable to the "unregenerate" sinner.

(4) We could call for a Resolution that would categorize all preachers, seminary teachers, and churches as heterodox who teach that anyone can be, is, or has been born again without believing on Jesus Christ.

(5) We could call for the official recognition of Southern Baptists John L. Dagg and B. H. Carroll's theology as being the official Southern Baptist theology that faith in Christ is essential to being born again. -- Bob L. Ross

At Sunday, May 07, 2006 9:16:00 PM, Anonymous Anonymous said...


Several months ago, I wrote several replies to anti-public invitation articles which appear on the Internet. Among the objections that some offer is the false claim that "the practice of publicly inviting people to come forward at the conclusion of a Gospel sermon, did not begin until the time of the 19th century revivalist, Charles G. Finney (1792-1895), who was probably the first to employ this method" (Daryl Erkel).

That this is not the case was again reinforced recently when I was reading the Autobiography of John L. Dagg (1794-1884).

Here is an account given by Dagg of a church service wherein an "invitation" was given when he was 14 years of age, which would have been in 1809, many years before Finney even started preaching.

From the AUTOBIOGRAPHY OF REV. JOHN L. DAGG, pages 9, 10:

Accordingly, on the first of January, 1809, before I was fifteen years old, I became the master of a neighborhood school. . . .

Sometime afterwards I was present at a meeting of the Long Branch church when invitation was given, to those who had hope in Christ, to come forward, and relate their experience. I felt strongly moved to accept the invitation, with others who presented themselves; but considerations, with the sufficiency of which I was not wholly satisfied, held me back. At length I adopted an unauthorized method of determining my case. Among the persons who had been expected to offer themselves to the church that day, was an individual who had been my school-mate. I decided, if he went forward, to accompany him.

Several related their experiences and were received by the church; but as my school-mate was not of the number, I felt, perhaps with some joy, released from taking up the cross. But when the pastor rose to dismiss the meeting, the young man started from his seat, and asked permission to tell what the Lord had done for him. This was now unexpected to me and I was now unable to rally, for the performance of duty. I left the meeting unhappy; and many an unhappy day of spiritual darkness and conflict followed, before I publicly professed Christ.

While anti-invitationists would no doubt find some "differences" between this invitation and others to which they object, nevertheless the fact remains this was an INVITATION for the purpose of CONFESSING Christ as Savior, and it was practiced by Baptists before the days of Charles G. Finney.

This is just another example of the misinformation which is frequently offered by those who are influenced by Hybrid Calvinists and pedo-regenerationists such as Iain Murray who campaign against certain methods used in evangelism. -- Bob L. Ross

At Sunday, May 07, 2006 10:52:00 PM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Funny how Charles doesn't "moderate" Bob L Ross's comments. I pasted one into a Word document and it was over 1300 words, five typed pages' worth.

C'mon, Charles, it's pandelerium!


At Monday, May 08, 2006 12:28:00 AM, Anonymous Anonymous said...


Scott said...


Where is the Scripture? Where do you find the " SBC type sinners prayer in the Bible"? I love Spurgeon and Gill but they are men.

Bob to Scott:

You say Spurgeon and Gill "are men." What does that imply about yourself? Are you only half a man, or more than a man?

Spurgeon said "I tell thee man, God never did deny that prayer yet; if it came out of honest lips he never shut the gates of mercy on it. It is a solemn litany that shall be used as long as time shall last, and it shall pierce the ears of God as long as there is a sinner to use it."

However, Founders' associate Scott Morgan seems to know more about it than Spurgeon. Scott claims he got "born again before believing in Christ," so I guess he is "special" compared to Spurgeon, who had to "Look and Live" to be saved.

With preachers like Scott in Southern Baptist churches the Founders and Jim Eliff will not have to worry themselves much about the "percentages" business. They won't have any professions to judge about whether or not they are "regenerated," and their problem will be solved.

I heard of a "revival" once where the church lost several members and added none, and they thought they had had "revival." That seems to be the state of mind among Founders like Scott Morgan. -- Bob Ross

At Monday, May 08, 2006 9:19:00 AM, Blogger Charles said...

Anonymous, Hello!

You said, "Funny how Charles doesn't "moderate" Bob L Ross's comments. I pasted one into a Word document and it was over 1300 words, five typed pages' worth."

What! Bob is under contract to write twice that much!

Thanks for pointing this out, Anon! I'll take care of it immediately!


At Monday, May 08, 2006 9:26:00 AM, Blogger Charles said...

Brother Bob wrote to me,

I have been giving it some very serious thought, Charles, and I think "we" would make a good candidate -- if not President -- of the SBC.

The Flyswatters vs. Mark Dever!

I would add a couple items:

(1) A resolution calling for increased efforts at child evangelism, to include baptizing these little ones upon their profession of faith in Christ.

(2) A resolution affirming the use of the altar call as being greatly used of God and urging that its practice be continued.

Bob, I think you may have something there!


At Monday, May 08, 2006 9:52:00 AM, Anonymous Anonymous said...


Scott said...

NHC" In order to be saved we bust be Regenerated or Born Again"

Scott gets a "star" by his name for at least believing that much of the New Hampshire Confession.

Now if he can just bring himself to believe the rest of it he will get some more stars.

For example, the NHC explains HOW regeneration or the New Birth takes place, what means are used to produce the New Birth, and what are the results or fruits of it.

Of special notice, the NHC says that the New Birth is "by the power of the Holy Spirit" but NOT THAT BY ITSELF or ALONE. The Spirit ALWAYS USES MEANS to do His work.

You see, Scott, in order to have a "birth," you must have SEED involved. No human being is born without SEED. Even Jesus was not born apart from SEED (Gal. 3:16; Romans 1:3).

That is why the NHC says, "by the power of the Holy Spirit in connection with DIVINE TRUTH."

In the New Birth, the SEED in the "begetting" is (1)with the Word of Truth, (2) by the Word of God, (3)through the Gospel (James 1:18; 1 Peter 1:23; 1 Cor. 4:15).

The result of this "begetting" is the birth of faith ("whatsoever [i.e. faith] is born of God," 1 John 5:4), as faith comes by hearing, and hearing "by the Word of God" (Romans 10:17).

All of this is "monergistic" power, for the Gospel is the power of God unto salvation to every one that belieeth" (Romans 1:16; John 6:63; 1 Thess. 1:5).

That is why faith is referred to as "holy fruit" -- for as the child is the "fruit of the womb," so faith is the fruit of the Spirit's begetting by the Word in the heart. You get "fruit" from sowing the Seed (Matthew 13:23). You get faith in the heart as "fruit" by sowing the seed of the Word of God (Luke 8:11).

If you are not getting any born again "fruit" at your church in Georgia, it is because you are not sowing the Seed of the Word of God. God has promised that His Word will not return void, so if you are coming up void, you are not preaching the Word. -- Bob L. Ross

At Monday, May 08, 2006 10:11:00 AM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Charles said...

What! Bob is under contract to write twice that much!

I am sorry about that, Charles, but when I signed on, I expected more of a contest from the Hybrids. As it stands now, refuting Hybridism has been about 50% easier than originally expected.

No need of overdoing it, is there? -- Bob

At Monday, May 08, 2006 10:44:00 AM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

IN REGENERATION . . . or, More Help for
Scott Morgan, James White, Tom Nettles, SBTS Students, Gene Bridges, and other Founders Who Keep Floundering on the New Birth

The following is from B. H. Carroll's Interpretation of the English Bible, Volume 13, pages 20, 21:

Let us look at his great discussion on the word of God (w. 18 25). The analysis says, "The word of God, its nature, its offices, and how to treat it."

It is a seed, an implanted seed: "Receive with meekness the implanted word." The word is "planted" - "the implanted word of God." And how often do we find that the word of God is treated as a seed!

"The sower went forth to sow," the parable of tares, the parable of the seed that groweth by itself, and then in the Psalms, "He that soweth in tears shall reap in joy," and "he that goeth forth weeping bearing precious seed, shall doubtless come again rejoicing, bringing his sheaves with him."

And the passage in Peter, "born again, not of corruptible seed, but of incorruptible, by the word of God that liveth and abideth for ever."

If the word of God as to its nature is an implanted seed, then what are its offices?

First, it is an instrument of regeneration. The record says, "Of his own will he brought us forth by the word of truth."

How is regeneration to be brought about? By preaching the word.

The sower goes out and sows the word - the seed, which is implanted, and becomes the instrument of regeneration by the Holy Spirit.

. . . We can get these three lessons: (1) It is the instrument of regeneration. (2) It is a mirror for revealing sin. (3) It is the perfect law of liberty.

Bob's Note: Dr. Carroll's emphasis on the scriptural place of the Word in the New Birth no doubt helps to account for the fact that Southwestern faculty and students generally endeavor to win souls rather than try to make proselytes to Hybrid Calvinism which seems to be the goal of some SBTS faculty and students.

At Monday, May 08, 2006 12:46:00 PM, Anonymous Anonymous said...


B. H. Carroll:

Mr. Spurgeon, in talking to his preacher students, tells of an incident that he witnessed. He was visiting an Episcopalian preacher, and a man under conviction of sin came to see
his pastor. He told Mr. Spurgeon to stay and hear what the man had to say. The sinner stated his case.

The preacher said, "You go home and read a certain book on the 'Evidences of Christianity' and read certain passages, and pray to the Lord, and in a week come back to see me."

Mr. Spurgeon leaped to his feet and said, "My dear sir, don't dismiss that man that way. You have no right to do it. He comes to you as an anxious sinner, for you to tell him what to do, and you have marked out a line of conduct that may take him beyond his life time. If you will permit me, I will tell him what to do. Let him now accept Christ; let us pray now that he may at once accept Christ."

The Episcopalian said, "If you want to do it, do so."

Mr. Spurgeon said to the man, "Will you right now look to the Lord Jesus Christ while we pray," and he knelt down to pray and the man arose happily converted.

We should never postpone a convicted sinner's case. If the man is not under conviction we may work to convict. But when a contrite and penitent man comes, who feels that he is a sinner, and wants to know what to do to be saved, we should deal with him just as Paul did with that jailer at midnight, who said, "Sirs, what must I do to be saved?"

Paul answered, "Believe on the Lord Jesus Christ and thou shalt be saved."

He was saved that very night. There is the great failure in most meetings.

-- From B. H. Carroll's An Interpretation of the English Bible, Volume 13, page 300.

Wouldn't it be wonderful if the SBC had more theologians like Carroll teaching at Southern Baptist Theological Seminary instead of those given to the Hybrid Calvinism theory of the pedo-regenerationists such as Shedd, Berkhof, Sproul, and Frame? -- Bob

At Monday, May 08, 2006 5:14:00 PM, Blogger Charles said...

Scott, Hello!

Stay on topic. I have told you this before.

You last post was fine except for the off topic things. If you take them out and resubmit it that would be fine.


At Monday, May 08, 2006 10:53:00 PM, Anonymous Anonymous said...


Charles said...

Scott, Hello!

Stay on topic. I have told you this before.

Bob to Charles:

I hope Scott doesn't desert the Flyswater. He is such a "Barney Fife" type that he adds a lot to the blog. He "sets up" so many subjects in a way that makes it easy to comparatively present the Truth. Like Barney, he takes himself so "seriously," it is all the more noticeable how far afield he is on Baptist doctrine. He reminds me a lot of some of the "King James Onlys" I have encountered.

I thought the Founders would surely ask him to hush by now, but if they have, I have not heard. Since he was so "hot" for awhile for a debate, maybe they did tell him to "stuff it" on that. -- Bob Ross

At Tuesday, May 09, 2006 12:50:00 AM, Blogger Charles said...


I noticed that after you offered to debate Scott anytime, anywhere, he "pulled a James White" and ran like a scalded dog.

He just couldn't stay away. They have a word for it, what is it, for people who like punishment?


At Tuesday, May 09, 2006 1:30:00 PM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Charles said...

He just couldn't stay away. They have a word for it, what is it, for people who like punishment?

I would guess that in school, he was always trying to get attention. He tried to be a sort of class clown and engaged in a few harmless pranks. He was a spoiled brat. -- Bob


Post a Comment

<< Home