The Dark Side of Calvinism: The Calvinist Caste System

by George Bryson

In the Dark Side of Calvinism you will discover that according to John Calvin: … God … arranges all things by his sovereign counsel, in such a way that individuals are born, who are doomed from the womb to certain death … If you disagree with this statement you must also disagree with John Calvin and Calvinism. If you agree with this statement you must also disagree with our Lord who said: …God so loved the world that He gave His only begotten Son, that whoever believes in Him should not perish but have everlasting life…Jn. 3:16

Genres: Theology

400 pages, Paperback

First published January 1, 2004

Reviews

[Steve · Rating 5 out of 5]

This book is excellent. I was a 2.5 point Calvinist for over twenty years! I could never believe in Limited Atonement in light of John 1:29 and 1 John 2:2. Every Calvinist argument for belief in LA was weak and pathetic in light of those verses (and more ). My primary Bible teachers were Calvinists for those couple of decades finally in 2011 I wanted to figure out the truth. I bought Why I’m Not a Calvinist and Troubling Questions for Calvinists and this book. Why I’m Not a Calvinist is good but Troubling Questions and The Dark Side are excellent. Five star both of them. For anyone struggling with questions about the truth of Calvinism these are must reads.
I must say that the complaint I see about this book about not using Scripture or exegeting Scripture just aren’t true. They address every one of the five points with Scripture. It’s a Straw Man argument. One must wonder why people seem to love to follow an unrepentant murderer who twists the Word of God which is who Calvin was.

[Tim · Rating 1 out of 5]

Well I am about 100 pages in and so far not very impressed. There has been exactly zero scripture exegeses up to this point. Highly disappointing. Bryson's argumentation has not been convincing and it appears to me that he doesn't understand the position he is attempting to criticize. We will see how the remainder of the book develops.

Now through page 130. Finally getting into some scripture which is always a good thing. One thing that continues to bother me is Bryson's attempts to make analogies to draw out his personal view of a text or his idea of the Reformed view of a text instead of simply exegeting the scripture. I am finding that his understanding of the Reformed position is terribly flawed and his arguments don't hold up under examination. The argumentation is not well thought out and Bryson is constantly setting mans "free will" as the ultimate sovereign. He has not yet defined what he means by "free will", he has yet to exegete the scriptures that identify man as dead in his sins, hater of God, unable to do things that please God or the fact that scripture plainly teaches that no one seeks after God. He has yet to define what is the nature of this reprobate hater of God. How does someone who is by nature a child of wrath do anything that pleases God? Maybe the answers to these questions will be forthcoming.

Two things that stood out tonight. In regards to particular redemption, Bryson notes the logical and proper question. If Jesus bore the judgement for and was the penal substitutionary atonement for all souls in all of human history, then for what sin is any person judged in hell. If the Son took the the just penalty due all sin of every person who lived then if the sinner is judged for his sin when he dies isn't that sin being judged twice. Is that not double jeopardy and thus unrighteousness? However, once Bryson identifies this question, then proceeded to not answer the question. He quotes John 3:16 and says Christ died for all and moves on with ought addressing the question. Disappointing.

In discussion of Irresistible Grace on pg 178, Bryson says the Calvinist believes that the sinner can do nothing good or right, he can only do wrong. I would think that anyone who reads their bible would say that. The scriptures are abundantly clear that the one who sins is a slave to sin. We are dead in our trespasses and slaves to sin. We are by nature children of wrath. There is none who seeks after God, no not one. I find it interesting that in every analogy the Arminian uses to describe the sinner, the sinner is never dead. He is either starving, stranded on an island, drowning, in a burning building; he is in some state of distress but never as scripture declares dead. Interesting to say the least.

When discussing John 6:44 "...that is why I told you, no one can come to me unless the Father who sent me draws him, and I will raise him up on the last day"; important to note that Bryson completely skips discussing who it is that is raised up on the last day. Wonder why he didn't address this part of the verse is telling. A few pages later Bryson discusses those who raised up. However it is very confusing and does not exegete the text at all.

Getting close to the end and the argumentation has not gotten any better or clearer. In the past 40 pages Bryson has really attacked and slandered the Reformed believer to an extent that is disturbing. He accuses them of having no reason to witness to unbelievers, accuses them of having no reason to engage in prayer and is constantly decrying their unbiblical view of salvation. I found a quite a bit of ad hominem attacks rather than a sound exegetical review of the very difficult scriptures for the Armenian. One interesting point, Bryson goes out of his way to try and claim to be a Monergist and accuses the Calvinist of changing the meaning of the term. Bryson says that he is a biblical Monergist. However, everything I have read in this book so far leaves no doubt that Bryson would hold that God will not save anyone without that persons actions, I.e. faith in Christ. Since he does not believe in unconditional election, by definition salvation for Bryson has to be a collaborative effort, God draws the sinner and it is up to the sinner to respond or not. That is by there very definition of Synergism. How Bryson can say he is not a Synergist is beyond me.

Finished up the book today. The last 50 pages Bryson goes out of his way to slander the Reformed believer. I was disappointed in his attempts to say reformed Christians don't or shouldn't evangelize, pray, seek to please God or try to change our world for Christ. Bryson was saying why would the Calvinist do anything if God has predestined what will occur. Sad to see such shallow argumentation from a scholar. I was also very disturbed that on pg 372 Bryson put some out of context quotes from James White accusing him of saying God kills babies... What is more than sad is that Bryson was part of that program and he knows what he wrote is not in context or complete. This an agreggious error, it borders on telling a flat out lie about Dr. White. I have read a number of writings from the Reformers and their positions in this book are not represented accurately. Instead of dealing with the arguments the reformers make using scripture and trying to show why those arguments are incorrect, Bryson describes his own view of Calvinism and then tears that down. Not a very scholarly approach when trying to articulate why the other side is wrong and you are right. Bryson passed on some very compelling scripture, Romans 3, 5, 8, 9 or gives very small attention to these key scriptures.

It appears to me that Bryson's view is that human "free will" is the sovereign controller of mans ultimate destiny. According to Bryson God is an observer and man is in control of his own final resting place. Cheers.

[Al Postlethwaite · Rating 4 out of 5]

First, I must say that I am "Reformed". I look at this book from that perspective.

It is an interesting book, in that the author is very polite and calm, irenic, in his dealings with an opposing view. Nothing here is like the stridency of Dave Hunt in parts of "What Love is This" for example. A much calmer approach than many Reformed commentators and authors have taken towards his position...

Like many other reviewers, I do wish that he had examined Scriptures more effectively in support of his case. The use of illustrations and analogies wasn't always helpful.

Too often in reviews of works from non-Calvinist / non-reformed authors, I read that the author "doesn't understand" Reformed distinctives or Calvinism. In this case, such statements are wrong. Here is an author who does understand them, and states them very clearly. Having said that, it will become "obvious" to some that I don't understand them either! There are good brothers and sisters in Christ out there who do understand and who don't share Reformed convictions - to believe otherwise is arrogance.

The author cannot be labelled "Arminian" in the current usage of the word. He isn't. Another example of arrogant dismissal of an alternative view.

I feel "sharpened" after reading this book. Bryson didn't convince me, but he has made me look more carefully at some of our instinctive Reformed attitudes towards those who have alternative views.