ANNOUNCER: This is Grace in Focus. Thank you for joining us today. We’re going to go back in time a little bit to the early days of Dallas Theological Seminary and ask the question, did some of those original professors who were free grace hold to four point Calvinism and how consistent were they? This is the radio broadcast and podcast ministry of the Grace Evangelical Society and our website is faithalone.org. There’s lots to learn about us there. We have many hundreds of articles that you can read and research. They are connected to our main theological thrust of free grace theology. And we have a magazine also called Grace in Focus that is free to you, free subscription, beautiful magazine, full length, full color, great articles. It is free. The only cost you might have is if you live out of the 48 contiguous United States, you would have to pay the postage. Other than that, it is free. We want you to have it. Get signed up for it today at faithalone.org. 

And now with today’s question and answer discussion, here is Bob Wilkin, along with Ken Yates. 

KEN: Bob, I have a question that I think both of us are going to be interested in because of our educational history. Both of us went to Dallas Theological Seminary and Clayton asked a question about the history of Dallas Theological Seminary. He specifically asked about some of the, what would we say, the stalwarts of the seminary? He mentions Lewis Sperry Chafer, who was the first president, John Walvoord, who was the second president, and then Charles Ryrie, who you had in class, and I knew him and I got there just as he was leaving. He found out I was coming, so he retired. But Clayton’s point is that these guys were all four-point Calvinists. They all disagreed with certain aspects of what we believe and what we teach here at Grace Evangelical Society and what Zane Hodges believed as well. And of course Zane was a long time professor at Dallas Seminary, what 27 years he taught there. 

Basically he says, what do we think about that? Are we giving these guys a pass on their four-point Calvinism, on their views of total depravity, on their lack of free will, on their perseverance of the saints? He says, as four-point Calvinists, didn’t these guys all teach that all believers are going to persevere in good works, that the unbeliever is totally depraved and cannot believe and Zane didn’t believe those things. We don’t believe these things. So he says, what’s going on there? And how would we respond to that? Are we giving these guys that founded the Seminary we went to, are we giving them a pass of some kind? 

BOB: Yes. Yes, we are. Okay, so Clayton, I’ve got many things I can say. 

KEN: There’s many things we can say about this, right? 

BOB: But let me start with a simple one. Shawn Lazar wrote a couple of articles in our journal, I believe, right? And he wrote about Dallas Seminary between, I think, the years were 1965 and 1970. And I think his point was, aside from Hodges, the other men were all inconsistent. At times, they would say things that sounded like they were solidly in the free grace camp. And at times, they said things that were inconsistent with that. 

For example, Dr. Ryrie talked about, he understood James 2, “faith without works is dead” to mean that you had, he called it a two-coupon ticket in order to get into heaven. And you had to have faith and works. And if the works were detached, it’s not good if detached. Yet I know, I had Dr. Ryrie for soteriology. And I know he had this squirrelly view of the perseverance of the saints, the fifth point of Calvinism. He basically said there will be some works, sometime. But a believer could die in carnality. A believer could die out of fellowship with God. 

KEN: And Ryrie disagreed with MacArthur, the lordship salvation. So when you read some of it, you say, wow, he’s right on, then you read other things that what where did that come from? 

BOB: Right. So I would encourage you to read those two articles. Go to faithalone.org and just search on Dallas Seminary 1965. I think it was by Shawn Lazar and you’ll find it will come up. [See article here.] And I think he does a great job of showing there was some inconsistency there. And we’re not going to hide that. Now it’s interesting, and I believe Clayton in his letter says, Hodges really wasn’t a four-point Calvinist. He calls Hodges an Arminian. 

KEN: Now he doesn’t go into that. He does call him an Arminian. I’m pretty sure what Clayton means is the free will aspect of it. 

BOB: Well, let me give you a two quick anecdotes. So one year at our conference, Dr. Wayne House was there. And there was a pastor from Washington State, I believe, who was at the conference and we all went out to eat that night. And when we were around the table, the pastor told Dr. House that he was a four-point Calvinist. And he said, okay, you’re an Arminian. And the guy said, no, no, I’m a Calvinist. And he said, didn’t you just tell me you’re a four-point Calvinist? He says, yes. He said, well, if you don’t believe in limited atonement or particular redemption, then you’re Arminian. Well, this guy didn’t accept it. But actually, that’s what Calvinists believe. 

And one year I was at the Ligonier conference and I heard Dr. Al Mohler, who’s now the president at Southern. Dr. Mohler was asked, what do you think of Amyraldian Calvinists? That’s a four-point Calvinist. And he said, well, out of being gracious, I sometimes call them Calvinists. But they’re really Arminian. And you and I both know that if you don’t believe in all five points, you’re not a Calvinist. 

KEN: Can I tell you something before you go on? When I retired from the the military and went back to Dallas and I was interviewed and wanted to take some more classes. Part of the interviewing process was I said, you know, I agree with the Arminian view in the sense that that the unbeliever has the ability to believe. And I said, I know that’s Arminian and they said, that’s absolutely right. And by the way, the guy on the committee said, I agree with you. It was kind of interesting. So he said, yeah, he called me an Arminian too, simply by saying, I believe that the unbeliever has the ability to believe. 

BOB: Okay. And let me say just real quick, because not everybody knows what Arminian means. Right. Armenia is a country. Arminian is a follower of a guy named Jacobus or Jacob Arminius. Arminius was a Calvinist who thought that Calvinism was too strict and no free will. So he introduced free will to Calvinism. Arminius wasn’t trying to develop something contrary to Calvinism. He was trying to modify Calvinism. 

KEN: But normally today, when you think of an Arminian, you think of someone who believes you can lose your salvation. Normally. 

BOB: Well, Arminius did too. 

KEN: Right. And so what they say is, you can choose to, if you have the free will to believe, you have the free will to reject. 

BOB: Right. And that’s not our view. 

KEN: That’s not our view. 

BOB: And that wasn’t Hodge’s view. 

ANNOUNCER: It’s coming, it’ll be here before you know it. What am I talking about? The Grace Evangelical Society’s National Conference 2026, May 18th through the 21st at Camp Copass, an absolutely beautiful campground in North Texas right on the lake with lots of recreation, great food, a great place to stay, wonderful fellowship, and wonderful Free Grace Bible teaching. Information and online registration now at faithalone.org/events. First timers waive registration fees. Faithalone.org/events.

BOB: Clayton mentioned Hodges. And let me tell you, I knew Zane very well. And I would say on the five points of Calvinism, he basically didn’t believe in any of them. But he would have called himself a Calvinist. The five points, or TULIP: total depravity, unconditional election, limited atonement, irresistible grace, and perseverance of the saints. Hodges did not believe in total depravity the way it was normally explained. He did believe in election to eternal life, but he saw it as a mystery and didn’t see it the way Calvinists explained it. 

KEN: Yeah, because most Calvinists, the Calvinists would say that if you’re not of the elect. If you say you believe, you still don’t know you’re of the elect, but Zane says, if you believe, then you’re of the elect. 

BOB: Right. And of course, we don’t believe in election to eternal life. We break with Hodges on that, but we agree with him that the Calvinist view is wrong. He didn’t believe with limited atonement. And he didn’t believe in irresistible grace. And he didn’t believe in the perseverance of the saints. So Hodges might have called himself a Calvinist because he believed in eternal security, right? In fact, Clayton says “once saved always saved” but that’s not the hallmark of Calvinism. In fact, Calvinists really don’t believe in “once saved always saved.” They formally do, but in actuality, they say the only people who are saved once and for all are those who persevere. 

KEN: And you won’t know in this life, right? 

BOB: And by the way, Norm Geisler, Dr. Geisler came to Dallas Seminary toward the end of my, when I was in the doctoral program. And I remember him saying, you can call me a five-point Calvinist if I get to define all five points and you can call me a zero-point Calvinist if I have to follow the definitions that Calvinists hold to the five points. And I agree with him. I used to call myself a Calvinist because I graduated from Dallas. I stopped doing that because I realized I don’t really believe in any of the five points the way they explain it. Yeah, I can manipulate the five points to say there’s some sense in which I believe in all of them except limited atonement and perseverance of the saints. Even perseverance, saints were called to persevere. It’s just we’re not guaranteed.

KEN: Well, a lot of people really modify that one by just saying perseverance of the saints means if you’re saved, you’re saved. That’s how a lot of people say it, but that’s not what the Calvinists means. 

BOB: No. Let me give a quick anecdote on Dr. Walvoord. I only had him for one class in my seven years of Dallas Seminary and it was when I was in the doctoral program. I took a course from him on advanced Christology. And I remember him saying one day that he was asked when he was speaking, I think at Fuller Seminary, and he was asked a question about the judgment of the sheep and the goats. He said, all of the sheep persevere. 

KEN: That’s what the person said to him. 

BOB: Yeah, all of them were praised. And he said, how do you explain that with your dispensationalism? And he said, well, justification is by faith alone. A person doesn’t have to do any works to be born again. But if you are born again, you will persevere to the end of your life in faith and good works. 

KEN: There’s an inconsistency. 

BOB: And he explained that to us in class and I was kind of gobsmacked, but I put my hand over my mouth so people couldn’t tell that I was upset. I hated to hear that from him. But that was true with a lot of the old line Dallas people. They were just inconsistent. 

KEN: Let me ask you a question real quick because we didn’t talk about this. Did he not believe that the sheep and the goats was at the end of the Tribulation? 

BOB: He did. 

KEN: So he, what? That’s just weird that he didn’t say, well, this is talking about, he’s not talking about the Church, he’s talking about, these are the believing Israelites. 

BOB: Okay. So theoretically, he could say, perseverance of the saints is going to be true then, but it’s not true now. 

KEN: Well, but that at the end of the Tribulation, it’s only going to be faithful believing.

BOB: And the reason is true is because, but see, then it’s still not perseverance of the saints, because many of the believers died.

KEN: Exactly. That’s my point. They died. 

BOB: All of the unfaithful died before the end. 

KEN: And they’ll be in the kingdom. 

BOB: So there are goats going to be in the kingdom who weren’t praised and weren’t rewarded. And so there were a lot of inconsistencies. And so Clayton, I appreciate your question. I don’t think we’re going to canonize anybody, right? We in the grace movement recognize we all have feet of clay. I certainly am a cracked pot. I recognize I’ve got lots of warts, lots of flaws. I’m sure my theology is not perfect. I hope that I’ve grown over the years. I’ve changed a lot of my views over the years. I know you have as well, Ken, but we’re people who make mistakes. And so if you see some of the greats in the past and you go, yeah, but they were wrong on this, that and the other. 

KEN: And let me just say something about that too. A lot of times I have found with these older guys, especially, they weren’t as careful with the words that they used. I think it’s because of the battles that they were fighting. And so they, like us, there are certain words that we don’t use, but they lived in a different time when they didn’t do it. So there’s a lot of things that are involved in Clayton. And I really appreciate the questions. Well, thanks for the question. And remember, keep grace in focus. 

ANNOUNCER: We would love to know where you are when you are listening to us. Please take a short minute to send us the call letters of this station and the city where you are listening and how many times a week you listen. Thank you. You will be helping us with our stewardship. Send it to radio@faithalone.org. That’s radio@faithalone.org. We are so thankful for our financial partners who keep us on the air. Every gift is tax-deductible and very much appreciated. If you’d like to find out how you can give, go to faithalone.org.

On our next episode: do you have to keep going to church in order to make it to heaven? We’ll see you next time and until then, let’s keep grace in focus.