Danger in the Camp

by John M. Otis

Danger in the Camp: An analysis and refutation of the heresies of the Federal Vision is a defense of the great doctrinal truths of the Protestant Reformation. The Federal Vision movement has denied justification by faith alone, the perseverance of the saints and the imputation of Christ's righteousness, to name a few. This book defends the theology of the Reformed standards set forth in the Westminster Confession of Faith and Catechism, the Belgic Confession and Heidelberg Catechism, and the Canons of Dordt. This is the most comprehensive analysis to date. The book uses the very words of the proponents of the Federal Vision movement to provide precise documentation and analysis.

Genres: Theology

544 pages, Paperback

First published October 31, 2005

Reviews

[Adam Ross]

Astute viewers will notice that this book is not rated. That is not a mistake. It is actually my rating. Zero stars.

This is the book by John Otis, proclaimed the most thorough and lengthy refutation of the Federal Vision to date. I found a copy used online, and decided to snatch it up for research on my FV book. Otis was instrumental in the 2002 "Call to Repentance" which sparked the entire FV controversy in the first place, and at the time held the position of moderator for the RPCUS.

Now, I have endeavored to be fair and open-minded while reading the critics of the FV. I have found myself restraining myself from frustration to sadness at the theological combat. Never, before this book, have I found myself embarrassed for the author. The interior text appears to have simply been copied from an internet page, with no paragraph indentations in sight. Further, for a book advertised as the most "thorough" refutation of the FV, I was pretty disappointed to find a bibliography of four and a half pages, in big font, with gaps between each listing. So make that two pages and a third. Further even than this are the glaring reference errors; some references are footnoted, while others are in-text citations, and none of them are properly formatted.

Typographical problems aside, however, the book is just . . . bad. His analysis of Norman Shepherd alone was so mangled that I reduced to utter speechlessness, and about which my brain is still slightly cross-eyed. He quotes Shepherd to the effect that a justifying faith is a living and active faith, accuses him of works-righteousness, then quotes Shepherd saying that justification is entirely by grace through faith, and then writes "Shepherd is playing games with words" (58). This is nothing but a refusal to discover what Shepherd is trying to say. Now repeat. For 40 pages. Just bad, bad, bad. THis is without a doubt the worst anti-FV book I have ever read, and that includes the one by John Robbins'.

[Phillip Taylor · Rating 4 out of 5]

Otis seems to have had a pretty solid grasp of the positions held by those formative FV personalities. I say “have had” because I think there’s been some movement over the last 20 years. This book is probably more than half quotations. The last chapter on Greg Bahson is interesting but probably not necessary. Maybe it was in the 2000’s. The appendix is gold. I would recommend that alone to anyone acquainted with the issue who just wants to know how to protect their presbytery from guys overly influenced by FV.

I might get push back on this, but I would say Wilson might be the exception. I think he gets Wilson right on his view concerning the visible church and he is careful with Wilson concerning the Covenant of Works/Life. Wilson has qualified his position on justification, imputation, and election a bit differently than you will find it here (maybe this is a later development for Wilson but I think I’ve seen early qualification as well). Wilson is slippery on these issues, I’ll admit. I suspect it’s because of his heavy emphasis on the objective aspects of the sacraments. He probably feels more comfortable with a kind of election which includes members of a covenant community who will not preserve. This then leads to flirtation with NPP (Wright) formulations of final justification (non forensic/requiring works). So I think he wants to maintain his view of the sacraments and reformed orthodoxy… unfortunately for him they never let him back into the club. Now he has his own club, but it seems like that’s not enough for him.

But what do I know. I didn’t know what any of this was until just a few years ago.

[James · Rating 4 out of 5]

Books are like cities in war zones. Some are open cities read quickly and others are taken slowly, a kin to house to house fighting, paragraph by paragraph. Danger in the Camp is one of the latter.

This, I think, has much to do with the writer's style.

However, the effort is very much worth it as the book deals in depth with the theology known as the Federal Vision. It is shown to be contrary to the Scriptures and to the Reformed confessions, the Westminster Confession of Faith, Larger and Shorter Catechisms and the Three Forms of Unity (The Heidelberg Catechism, the Belgic Confession and the Canons of Dordrecht).

The book gives the impression at times of being unbalanced in that it seems to pay more attention to the Reformed standards than the Scriptures but as those who teach the Federal Vision claim to adhere to the teachings of those standards this is probably necessary.

The book could be improved by swapping the places of the chapter on Greg Bahnsen with Appendix A as that seems to me to be a more natural structure. The chapter defending Greg Bahnsen reads like a "fanboy's' attempt to vindicate his hero from a damaging claim. Otis does succeed in his purpose.

The suggested questions for presbyteries to ask those seeking ordination are a very helpful practical help.

The book is worth the effort to read. It is an important work that should be read by pastors and elders.