Inside Information

by John R. Bisagno

A Book Review

by: Ron Flurry

I first met John Bisagno in 1990 while working in the area of Church Fund raising with a long time friend of his. I've always appreciated the man because of his faithfulness to preach the Word of God and building the churches he has pastored over the years. He spent 30 of the 57 years he has been in ministry at the great First Baptist Church of Houston. His leadership ability has revealed his greatness there for during the 4 1/2 years after his resignation, without an interim pastor, the church continued to grow in attendance and baptism.

This book reveals much about his ability as a pastor as he shares his views relating to pastoral things. The first six chapters are right on target. Every pastor needs to read what he has said. Chapter eight and nine are well written, and is worth reading because of his long tenure service. He speaks from his heart. Chapter 10 seems to be a sermon on tithing and ought to be preached in every Baptist pulpit in the Southern Baptist Convention.

With these chapters, the book is worthy to be purchased. The chapters of Calvinism and Private Prayer Language is far from being good. In fact, they are a very poor excuse of exegetical correctness. Where he does adequate treatment in chapter eleven on Part I of The Private Prayer Language, he leaves chapter twelve hanging. He does not tell us what a Private Prayer Language is, and how damaging it is to churches. He becomes even Religiously (in place of Politically) Correct, by not revealing leading Southern Baptist who practice Satan's arts; such as Jerry Rankin, President of INB of the SBC. Why deal with the subject if you are not willing to show the proponents of the heresy?

Chapter seven is the great problem of the book. He states: "Calvinism is hurting us far more than we dare acknowledge (page 8). In the chapter, he states he quotes "generously from a booklet by Dr. Curtis Hutson." No where in the body of his diatribe does he tells us the name of the booklet, anything about Dr. Hutson, or when he is quoting him. Please understand that I am not saying in the following statement a person has to go to seminary to be a theologian, but to speak as one, with no quotes, no references to resources, etc., and to state your only resource is from Dr. Hutson, brings questions of the legitimate nature of one's biblical and historical understanding of the doctrine he is putting down. First of all, John Bisagno should receive a "Live Time Accomplishment Award" for his pastoral ministry experience. But, he is no theologian. He has no seminary training, and has not received any earned Doctors Degree. The Dr. Curtis Hutson he quotes entered Christian ministry later in life and does not have a seminary degree, nor an earned doctorate. He was the editor for Sword of the Lord, and a protege of Dr. John R. Rice.

One of the saddest things which has happened within the Southern Baptist Convention has been the leaving of the principles of Baptist Beliefs upon which we were founded. One must study the history of Anabaptist to understand the critical nature of who historically we are. Suffice it to be said here (check out my post on "What the Bible Says About Predestination," and "A Study of the Doctrine of Sovereign Grace"), that we were Particular Baptist. Today, most Southern Baptist do not even understand what that means and really do not care. How sad! In reality, we are General Baptist who believe as John Bisagno does in "universal atonement." We cloak it in "security of the believer" language, but in practice that is who we have become. This Dr. Hutson, whom he quotes, espouses the doctrines of Jacobus Arminius, one Anabaptist who rejected studied under John Calvin's protege, Theodore Beza. The first Baptists called themselves "General Baptist" and their leader was Thomas Helwys (The new publishing name for the Liberal Baptists who call themselves "Baptist Committed"). Their doctrinal position became known as Arminianism because they followed the articles of five-Remonstrance against the five points of Calvinism. The modern followers of this belief are the Methodist, Assemblies, Church of God, Nazarenes, Free-Will Baptists, General Baptists, Churches of Christ, Seventh-day Adventists, The Salvation Army, Mennonites, Pentecostals, Charismatics, Baptists Committed, and most Southern Baptist preachers today.

There are so many issues in his chapter of which I take exception, but the worst is his exegesis of Scripture. He does not base his beliefs upon sound exegetical principles, but personal belief biases to prove man has a free will. I give you an example. Page 64, first paragraph. Let's look at these two verses exegetically: are not willing comes from ouk-thelete 2 pers. indicative present= not willing, inclined or disposed to. to come comes from elthein 2nd aorist infinitive= to come or to pass. ye might have comes from echete 2 pers. pl. present subjunctive = to have or possess. If we take this verse out of context toward whom Jesus is speaking, I would have to apologize to the Armenians. But, to correctly exegete this verse, it must be seen in its context. Jesus is speaking to the Pharisaical Jews who were trying to kill him and to whom He said in verse 42, But I know you, that you do not have the love of God in you. He later told them No one can come to Me unless the Father who sent Me draws him; and I will raise him up at the last day (John 6:42). The reason they would not is because they had no ability to come to Life in Christ. They had not the love of God in their hearts. Now, take Revelation 22:17. The phrase in the King James is whosoever will. The Greek uses only ho thelon present participle = the willing one or, the one who is willing. Again, if we take this verse out of its context, one might be able to use it to build a case of the supremacy of man's will over God's Sovereignty. However, the context dictates to whom Jesus is speaking. It is to the assemblies (v. 16) It is regarding His coming for His children, they who do His commandments (v.14). He condemns those who are not His followers (v. 15) and gives this greatest of invitations, not to the lost, but to His Bride. It's time to go to Heaven. Jesus tells the Spirit to issue the summons. The one who hears, thirst, and wills will follow the Spirits call. Why, because, they have life in them. They will because their will has been born again. But don't take my word for it, take Jesus'. I am the bread of life. He who comes to Me shall never hunger, and he who believes in Me shall never thirst. . . .All that the Father gives Me will come to Me, and the one who comes to Me I will by no means cast out. . . .This is the will of the Father who sent Me, that of all He has given Me I should lose nothing, but should raise it up at the last day. And this is the will of Him who sent Me, that everyone who sees the Son and believes in Him may have everlasting life; and I will raise him up at the last day. . . . No one can come to Me unless the Father who sent Me draws him; and I will raise him up at the last day (John 6:35, 37, 39-40, 44). The coming to Christ is not based upon someone wanting to come to Him; desiring to come to Him; or, coming because of the wishes of someone else. There coming to Jesus has always been and always will be because God the Father has chosen them to come to Jesus. That's the fullest of meaning found in John 1:12-13: But as many as received Him, to them He gave the right to become children of God, to those whom believe in His name: who were born, not of blood (being human), nor of the will of the flesh (willing one's self to Him), nor of the will of man (the wishes of someone else), but of God.

The Biblical approach to doctrinal truths relating to Salvation and God's Sovereignty, comes only through serious study of the Bible. As a student in seminary, I set out to disprove the doctrine of Election. What I found was I was "kicking against the goads." Election is not a mystery but a Biblical teaching. The will of man is not a mystery, but as understandable as all other Biblical doctrines when seen through the Sovereignty of God standpoint. John Besagno needs to stay close to what he knows from experience as a great leader and pastor, but not enter the realm of theology without proper documentation and Biblical exegesis.