The Highway Forums General Discussion Open Forum Dave Hunt's "What Love is This?"

Pilgrim

Thank you for providing that review on Dave Hunt's "What Love is This?"
I have known for quite some time about Hunt's book and in fact this isn't the first critique I have read on Hunt's book.
James White also has a good critique on the book himself, of which he has been attacked by many about.

To me, it isn't that I care so much that Hunt is opposed to Calvinism; it is just that he not only misrepresents Calvinism, but also misrepresents many Calvinists themselves.
One thing that I find almost laughable (if it wasn't such an important subject) is his saying that CH Spurgeon was opposed to Calvinism.
Anyone who has done any reading on Spurgeon would know of his love for the doctrines of grace.
This alone should show anyone the errors (to put it mildly) of Hunt's book. Yet, there are many big names that back his errors.

Count me in as one person that is not interested in reading Hunt’s book.
Hopefully Hunt’s book will serve to show people of just how low the enemy will go, to keep the truth from going out.

Tom

sigh. . .I have a very dear friend who is a rabid Arminian and never misses an opportunity to let me know how "heretical" my reformed beliefs are. . .I fear that this book will only give him more "ammunition" and entrench him even further in his position.<br><br>

gotribe<br><br>If this friend of yours uses this book as ammunition, it just goes to show you what kind of a friend he really is.<br><br>By the way, if by chance he does use it, it isn't hard to prove that Hunt is wrong. Spurgeon is only one such way to prove this fact.<br><br>Tom

I just listened to a rather excellent critique of Hunt's book given by Phil Johnson at the Grace Church Shepherd Conference. I had read James White's critique of Dave's theology, but after hearing Phil review this book, the situation is worse than I had imagined. Hunt is not only wrong headed about his critique of Calvinism, something we all would agree from the get go, but his book is so poorly researched and written that he confuses authors and sources he is citing. For instance, through out his book he makes Jay Adams, the counseling guy, the target of his pen, but he is quoting from the books of James Adam, another fellow altogether different, and attributes his citation to Adams the counsellor. It is not just a one time misquote, but is constant through out the whole work. That is not only sad, but down right pathetic. Those individuals who recommend Dave's book as the death knell against Calvinism are obviously showing their true colors of hating God's sovereignty. If they so hate sovereign grace that they would recommend what is a joke of a book, then it is plain to see where their presuppositions begin. This book is on the level of Gail Riplinger's masterpiece from back in '94, "New Age Bible Versions" or anything Peter Ruckman may write (if you know who he is).

Anyone struggling with this idiot book at their church and among their congregation would be wise to get on the internet and go to gracechurch.org and see if the conference tapes are available. I believe they are for a small fee of 5 or 6 bucks, but it would be worth it to get this lecture by Phil. Anyone who knows Phil Johnson knows he is a rather laid back, soft spoken individual who is more akin to "talking" to you when he is in the pulpit, than preaching. But I have never seen him so excercised as when he was reviewing this book. I hope someone has the wearwithall to send Hunt a copy.

Fred

I was just patting myself on the back. I love you all.

Tom<br> There is one thing I have learned about Arminians, they rarely argue from a factual basis. Election is a concept that is thematically developed throughout scripture and one must pay attention to all that the Bible says about it not just a verse here or there. When Hunt's book, which by the way is just a regurgitation of Giesler's book, stoops to misrepresentations, character assassination, and ad hominen attacks it is proof of the shallowness of his arguments.<br>I might also add, that the reason he and Giesler both saw the need to try to either co-opt or denounce the great reformed thinkers in the way they did is because they know the weight which these mens thoughts and teaching still have in the church today. You will notice they didn't refer to any of the "great" Arminian "thinkers" to buttress their arguments. Anyone who has taken college speech knows you don't win a debate by basing your whole argument on the attacking of your opponents positions. <br><br>Michael

Fred,<br><br>I,too, read and listened to white's critique of Hunt. Honestly, I was offended when Hunt was mocking us for praising God for his sovereingty. His whole presentation is mockery and caricature of the doctrines of grace. He ought to apologize for slandering all those men( calvin, spurgeon,adams, sproul, white, etc)..<br><br>In christ<br>Carlos

Anyone know if any Arminian theologians/or preachers come forward and admit that Hunt's book misrepresents Calvinism and people like Spurgeon?<br>Believe it or not, I have heard Arminians rebuke other Arminians for misrepresenting Calivinism.

Anyone know some good resources that talk about the history of Calvin at Geneva? I mean after all he was the Hitler of his day....<br><br>It's easy to find Spurgeon's sermons on LA in particular (pun intended) but how 'bout some Calvin history? especially related to Servetus (sp?)

I think that Dan corner rebuked Hunt, but I believe this might have been in regards to only Arminius and eternal security. I will see if I can find that article on-line. I know He has been rebuked by a Lutheran. See http://www.whatloveisthis.com.<br>Look for the article "A Non-Calvinist Replies to Dave Hunt's Response". <br><br>Carlos<br><br>

Jimbo,<br><br>Most biographies would include the historical and especially Calvin's role in Geneva, what part he had in Servetus' legal execution, etc. One of the best I have read so far is: John Calvin: A Biography by T.H.L. Parker (Westminster Press: Philadelphia, 1975).<br><br>Another very interesting book is: The Register of the Company of Pastors of Geneva in the Time of Calvin by Philip E. Hughes (Eerdmans: Grand Rapids, 1966). Don't be misled by the title [img]http://www.the-highway.com/w3timages/icons/laugh.gif" alt="laugh" title="laugh[/img]. It is a detailed account of how the church at Geneva functioned, including it's ordinances and practices. There are many references to Servetus as well.<br><br>In His Grace,

Jimbo,<br><br><br>Check this website...Look for the article on "The Burning of Michael Servetus"<br>http://www.whatloveisthis.com/home.html<br><br>Also, you might some info at the website below. It has lot's of information on church history. I'm sure there is something here on that incident.<br>http://www.monergism.com/thethreshold/articles/topic/history.html<br> <br><br>Carlos

See also: Was Geneva a Theocracy?

Thank you for that link, it was very interesting.<br><br>On another note on this issue, lately I have had a chance to talk to some Arminians about this issue and after telling them about Hunt's misrepresenting of Spurgeon and some others. Unfortunately it seemed to go in one ear and out the other. In fact, one said to me, judging from the reaction of Calvinists to Hunt's book, what Hunt said must be true.<br><br>It would seem that some people are not interested in the truth, if it doesn't back up their views.<br><br>I will say however, that I have seen some Calvinists take this matter a little too personal. Their reactions seem to me to be made before they went into prayer for Hunt. But that may be because sometimes it is hard to read someone's intent on the printed page.<br><br>Tom<br>

Tom,<br><br>You are welcome. <br><br><blockquote><font size=1>In reply to:</font><hr>[color:"blue"]It would seem that some people are not interested in the truth, if it doesn't back up their views.</font><hr></blockquote><p><br>I concur. I have come accross some friends who just refuse to go over chapters like eph 1, romans 9, etc. Basically, they will just keep repeating john 3:16 and refuse to go any further...<br><br><blockquote><font size=1>In reply to:</font><hr>[color:"blue"]I will say however, that I have seen some Calvinists take this matter a little too personal.</font><hr></blockquote><p><br>I don't think the Calvinists that I came across have taken it too personal. Instead I believe they have been zealous to defend the truth of scripture and the men that have been slandered. I don't see any wrong in that. Cany you let me know what writings specifically that you are referring to??? Maybe I may have missed something.<br><br>I Do think we ought to be praying for Mr. Hunt. <br><br>In Christ,<br>Carlos