“They are not perceptive.”

I found an article entitled, “The Heinous Error of Hyper-Calvinism” by a Dr. James Galyon (the entry was posted on April 10, 2010). Amongst the comments, Dr. Galyon states the following in response to “Charles”:


Examples of modern hyper-Calvinists include [a fellow–CD], Chris Duncan, and Christopher Adams. [The fellow–CD] includes the following individuals in his “Heterodoxy Hall of Shame”: Louis Berkhof, Loraine Boettner, Horatius Bonar, Thomas Boston, John Calvin, Thomas Chalmers, Gordon Clark, A.A. Hodge, Charles Hodge, Herman Hoeksema, J. Gresham Machen, Jonathan Edwards, John Murray, John Owen, J. I. Packer, A.W. Pink, John Reisinger, C. H. Spurgeon, Joel Beeke, Jerry Bridges, John Brown, John Bunyan, Martin Luther, Robert L. Dabney, W.G.T. Shedd, Matthew Henry, Thomas Aquinas, William Perkins, Thomas Hooker, William Ames, Richard Sibbes, Joseph Alleine, John Piper, Ernest Reisinger, Tom Ascol, Roger Nicole, Robert Reymond, R.C. Sproul, Andrew Fuller, Stephen Charnock, Iain Murray, A.W. Tozer, Cornelius Van Til, Thomas Watson, James White, George Whitefield, D. Martyn Lloyd-Jones, and J. C. Ryle. When you castigate the Reformers, the Puritans, the giants of the Great Awakening, and the Reformed stalwarts, something is amiss.

Of course, the above is a common reaction among fashionable Calvinists. I responded to Dr. Galyon in the comment box at his site:

Hello, James- This is a bit late in the game — I just found this site– but I wanted to comment on what you said here:

“Examples of modern hyper-Calvinists include [the fellow–CD], Chris Duncan, and Christopher Adams.”

We have an article written against hypercalvinism, actually: Anyway, just throwing it out there.

The fellow, practically echoing my statements, wrote this to Galyon:

We at Outside the Camp get slandered as being Hyper-Calvinists by the clueless. To see what we really believe, read “Damnable Hyper-Calvinist Heresy.”

Galyon responded to us thusly:

[Fellow–CD] & Chris:
Thanks for dropping by 2WC. Of course, since you believe such Reformed stalwarts as Jonathan Edwards, John Owen, John MacArthur, R. C. Sproul, J. I. Packer, and Charles Spurgeon are “outside the camp,” not to mention John Calvin himself, I doubt that any of the regulars here at 2WC (not to mention yours truly) would fare any better in your estimation. Nonetheless, I’ve approved your comments with the provided links in order that they may see what you have to say.

I wrote the following in reply to James Galyon’s:

Hello, James-

Thanks for allowing our comments through. Your response is commonplace among the Calvinist and Reformed. John 12:43 and 2 Corinthians 10:12 are passages that come to mind in response to what you’ve said concerning the “stalwarts.” If you would permit one more link to the common reaction that you’ve articulated, this would be it:


Further, yet similar comments by me — not posted to Galyon’s site — would be the following: Actually, we would say that they are squarely “inside the camp” of self-righteous religion.

“For we dare not to class ourselves or to compare ourselves with those who commend themselves, but they, measuring themselves by themselves, and comparing themselves among themselves, are not perceptive” (2 Corinthians 10:12).

Many of the fashionable Calvinists are those who measure themselves by themselves. They measure themselves with Calvin or Spurgeon and say: Oh my. If these men are judged to be unregenerate by their written works then what is to become of me, or what is my state before God to be? Or, on the other hand, they think that they are truly in God’s favor since if all of these alleged “stalwarts of the faith” agree with them then all is well. As the apostle tells us, these types of people are not perceptive. This is not to say that these Calvinists would SAY that the alleged “stalwarts” are superior to Scripture, but it is to say that they ARE respecters of persons who seek not the glory of God, but the glory of men.

This fact is explicated further at the OTC website:

A common reaction to our Heterodoxy Hall of Shame goes something like this: “Look at all the stalwarts of the faith they are condemning! This should be enough to show you that they are not to be taken seriously.”

Did you notice something missing in that statement? There is hardly ever a comment on why these people are in the Heterodoxy Hall of Shame. They just look at the name and say, “How dare you!” This shows that they are respecters of persons; their worship of a person is more important than the fact that this person promoted heresy. I have much more respect for a person who actually engages in conversation about the heresy that these people promoted, no matter who they are or what status they have in the “Reformed” and/or “Christian” community.

It matters not whether the heretic is John Calvin or John Doe. If that person promotes damnable heresy, then that person is unregenerate.

Do you bow at the feet of these people and maintain that they are Christians no matter what they have said? Or do you judge by God’s standard alone, no matter how famous or how respected these people are by religionists? How you respond tells a lot about you.