Jon Gary Williams
Articles / Resources
0137
G. C. Brewer vs Ben M. Bogard
February 25, 1932
McDougal, Arkansas
(By G. C. Brewer)
January 12-15, four-day debate.
Great crowds came from far and near. Brought lunch and all ate together without denomination difference. Debate on a high plane. Arguments strong and driven hard.
Bogard affirmed: "sinner is so depraved that the Holy Spirit exercises a power in addition to the written word." This is a double proposition. But Bogard always combines these and discusses them in one proposition. He is a little tender-footed on both of these points. He says the sinner is totally depraved by nature, and yet he will not say that the sinner is wholly helpless and passive in the matter of salvation. He thinks the sinner has a will and a choice. He seems to realize the inconsistency of his position, and therefore he explains and hedges at every turn. He says that salvation is conditional on the part of the sinner, and yet he says that the sinner cannot comply with the conditions without a direct enabling power of the Holy Spirit. He will not admit that this takes the matter entirely out of the hands of the human being and makes it wholly arbitrary with God. Neither will he admit that the operation of the Holy Spirit is irresistible, as the old doctrine of Calvinism affirms. He is kept busy trying to harmonize the proposition and his argument. Some of us believe that if Mr. Bogard had not debated this question in print, he would not now sign this proposition. He is decidedly weaker on this than on anything else that he debates. He makes some strong arguments, it is true; but the conclusion from his argument sis nothing but absolute Calvinism or Hardshellism and these conclusions Mr. Bogard strenuously repudiates. He wants to make Hardshell arguments without accepting Hardshell conclusions.
Apostasy: We are again disputing over one of the five points of Calvinism. This is another place where the Missionary Baptists accept Calvinism and agree with the Hardshells, although the Hardshells are more consistent. Calvinism has to postulate (assume) 'the final perseverance of the saints' since it has already denied man's free agency or freedom of will and choice, and made the matter of salvation entirely arbitrary with God. It has made man helpless and God's grace irresistible. Before man is saved he has no choice; he must serve the devil. He cannot quit Satan's service and obey God without a miraculous change, in which he has nothing to do and no volition. Then after this miraculous work of grade, he still has no choice; he must serve God. It is impossible to quit the service of God and serve Satan. He may commit all the sins known to man, but that is only his body that sins. God will let him serve Satan, but he will not let Satan have him in the end. This is the principle involved - Man's freedom of will, man's moral responsibility.
Brewer (cont.) "Mr. Bogard will have much to say about God's power, love, goodness and God's faithfulness, and the rich provisions God has made for us. These things will all sound beautiful and sweet and thrilling to the soul, and the most thrilling thing about them "is the fat that they are true." Do not be misled, beloved. We are not debating about God's part in man's salvation. We do not deny God's ability to save, God's willingness to save, God's faithfulness or love." We are affirming man's ability to disbelieve, prove unfaithful, and be lost." As we have saddled Calvinism upon them, they in turn attempt to charge us with "PELAGIANISM," "ARMINIANISM" and "SOCINIANISM". Those (isms) they claim, postulate salvation by law, by works, by merit. When they set that up as the thing they are opposing, they ring in a multitude of those sublime scriptures that predicate salvation upon grace and mercy and love and righteousness and utterly demolish such legalism.
If Mr. Bogard could make you believe that I am affirming such a doctrine as that, he would have an easy time in this debate. He would show that a man would have to be perfect to be saved. He would show that a man must 'continue in all the things of the law to do them'; 'that if he offends in one point, he is guilty of the whole.' He would show that a man must achieve his salvation by himself -- without a Savior. He would show you how terrible, how hopeless and impossible that doctrine is.
Brewer: If Bogard could get me to say one thing that would indicate that I am affirming or defending that cruel, heartless, Christless doctrine, he would impale me upon a thousand points of Holy writ and vanquish me utterly. But I do not believe any such doctrine, and before my opponent charges it upon me I vehemently disavow it. We "do not" save ourselves. Christ saves us. We "are not" saved by works, but by grace (Ephesians 2:9-10; Titus 3:3-5; Romans 4:4-6). We are not saved by our righteousness, but through God's righteousness, which we obtain through faith in Christ (I Corinthians 1:30; II Corinthians 5:21; Philippians 3:9; Romans 10:3). This righteousness is revealed in the gospel (Romans 1:16). 'Apart from the law' (Romans 3: 21-22) man does not, therefore, have to be perfect (except as he is made so by Christ) in order to be saved. He does not achieve, earn, merit his salvation. Yet "his salvation does depend upon himself."
Brewer (cont.). I took away much of his usual so-called 'argument' by defining the question. The point was made so clear that he could not fight a false issue, and that weakened him. I forestalled any effort to make me teach something I do not believe, and that ruined most of my opponent's prepared and practiced speeches. Any truth he teaches will be immediately accepted by me. He does preach much truth. The truths he teaches do not lead to the conclusions he draws. No man ever lived who was more skillful in perverting the truth than my genial opponent. He is an adept. You have to watch him. The admissions he makes are ruinous to his doctrine.
VIEW NEXT REPORT >>
