“Another of the arts of these preachers, consists in their use of scholastic words. These words, like the cups and balls of jugglers, serve them for a variety of purposes. By these, they sometimes blindfold the people, and sometimes make them stare, while they imagine some profound meaning to be contained in them; and at any rate, these words serve to confound and perplex the plain simple doctrines of the gospel, as well as to furnish upon occasions no small matter of idle disputation among the teachers. I shall only point at one instance. Mr. E. Erskine divides the sufficiency of the atonement into a threefold distinction. The first he calls intrinsic, the second ordinate, and the third legal. Then, after giving his explication of them, he very gravely tells us which of these faith has to do with, and which not. The preachers of his doctrine are at present at no small variance as to the proper use of these words, publishing ingenious controversies for the benefit of those who are disposed to read them. The poor people, who cannot well fathom such depths, must be left to follow the guides they severally most admire” (Robert Sandeman).
This Sandeman quote brought to my mind how various types of theological juggling clowns (many times Calvinistic) attempt to immure the heart of the simple gospel in incoherence. To them, judging based on an atonement that actually atones is radical to the extreme. Tolerant Calvinist Clowns bloviate about how it takes many long and arduous years of study for a regenerate person to believe the very heart of the gospel. If we say this gospel-denying assertion is contradicted by such verses as John 10:4-5, Romans 10:1-4, and 2 Corinthians 4:6, then they will just turn and honk their red noses at us: Honk! Doctrinal Perfectionism! Honk!
In addition to this customary Calvinistic clouding of the simple doctrine of Christ’s efficacious cross-work, is their frequent fabrication of foolish fables and fictions.
Like glittering and bouncing baubles they are tossed up into the air;
Hoping that in them will be found meaning to make them stop and stare:
“… most who call themselves ‘Calvinists’ or ‘Reformed… say that God is IN control of all things but does not actively CONTROL all things. Now how’s that possible? Well, to anyone with common sense, it’s NOT possible. It’s a contradiction. But we have Calvinist authors and seminarians who make up all kinds of theories in order to justify their view of their god who doesn’t cause everything while remaining sovereign, and none of these theories has any basis in the Bible. They just had to concoct these fables, these fictions, about God, in order to make all their preconceived notions fit into the Bible’s clear teaching of God’s sovereignty. And they really don’t do a very good job of it. They use a lot of seminary-type words and phrases to try to impress people and get people to think they have this special knowledge of God, so we’re supposed to just defer to them, because, after all, they’re smarter and more well-read and have gone to highly-esteemed seminaries. But if you look at what they’re really saying amidst all the rhetoric, you’ll see that their house is built on sand. They have no biblical basis for their fabrications.”