Hi Mark, If you are interested in John Metcalfe, I can give you some information. Metcalfe is a prolific writer of religious books. He was converted in the 1950s, ordained to the ministry by Lloyd-Jones, but in the late 1960s developed a theological system that set him outside of the Reformed Church. I suppose that he is unknown in the USA because he refuses to have a web-site or for any of his material to be shown on the internet.
I read a number of his books as a new Christian and was fascinated by him for some time. As I'm sure Ian has told you, he insists that law has no part whatever in a Christian's life. He has two other erroneous doctrines which to my mind are more serious, but I won't name them here without permission of the management. Certainly, neither Gadsby nor Huntington nor Philpot would own him.
However, Metcalfe's chief menace to the Church of Christ is that his books aim to separate the believer from his church and to make him wholly dependent upon Metcalfe. In his books he attacks Calvinism, Arminianism, Brethrenism, Anglicanism, Presbyterianism indiscriminately and commits all their adherents to hell. His reader is therefore left without any support but Metcalfe, so he ends up at home on the Lord's day, reading Metcalfe's books, listening to his tapes, singing his hymns (yes, really!) and making him (Metcalfe) rich. I have spoken to those who are in his cult, those who have escaped, and even to his own daughter (via internet). If these sources are to be believed, if you attended his church in Buckinghamshire, you would find a legalism and authoritarianism that would shock you.
Ian Potts is certainly under his influence, but how far I am unable to say. Certainly, he has left the excellent Congregational Church his parents belong to, joined and left a Reformed Baptist Church and is now (last I heard) attending a hyper-Calvinist church somewhere. This is the fate of those who fall under Metcalfe's teaching; they become spiritual Flying Dutchmen, doomed to wander from church to church but never able to settle because of Metcalfe's baneful influence.
Metcalfe also suffers from delusions of grandeur. Here is his own review of one of his books:-
Quote
'This concise and unique revelation of the Epistle to the Colossians has the hallmark of spiritual originality and insight peculiar to the ministry of John Metcalfe. It is as if a diamond, inert and lifeless in itself, has been divinely cut at great cost, so that every way in which it was turned, the light from above is enhanced and magnified to break forth with divine radiance showing colour and depth hitherto unsuspected.'
Modest huh?
I hope that gives you the information that you want.
Thanks Steve,however I was asking Pilgrim what he knew about Metcalfe - I already knew. Mr Potts did not refer to or quote Metcalfe in any of his posts to my knowledge . Gadsby perhaps.....
Steve, Thanks for that information. That reminds me of things I have heard about Harold Camping. It also makes me think of Paul's words to the Galatians.
Quote
Galatians 4 17 They zealously court you, but for no good; yes, they want to exclude you, that you may be zealous for them.
however I was asking Pilgrim what he knew about Metcalfe - I already knew
Mark,
I know enough about Metcalfe to know that he is someone to avoid at all costs. I also know that if he embraces in his heart what he writes in his books he is on the road to perdition, lest he repent. Be that as it may, since you admit to already knowing about John Metcalfe, do you also find his particular views to be veritable and albeit opposed to what historic Christianity has always taught, you find yourself in agreement with him?
Mark, You said:- 'Mr Potts is hellbound along with Metcalfe then.'
Your words, not mine; it is possible to be deceived without being damned, I think. My impression of Ian is that he loves the Lord. However, I do advise you most strongly to stay away from anything to do with John Metcalfe.
Just, perhaps, to finish the thread, Metcalfe's two other distinctive heresies are:- 1. A total rejection of the imputation of the active obedience of Christ. 2. A belief that the personal faith of Christ is somehow imputed to the believer instead.
There is more to it than that. If he were correct (he isn't!) then every Systematic Theology ever written would need to be scrapped. No doubt the reason that he does not publish on the Net is that if he did then his work would be exposed to serious inspection and refuted publicly.
Mark replied: I know something of his writings and I am aware of what is said about him but I am not a follower of him-nor any mortal.
Mark,
I didn't ask you if you "followed" John Metcalfe or any other man. Of course you it is implied in your response that you only follow God, which is what most would also claim. Surely this has no weight to it for if all followed God alone, then there would be no differences in either doctrine or life between us.
This is what I asked you and I thus ask you again:
Quote
. . . since you admit to already knowing about John Metcalfe, do you also find his particular views to be veritable and albeit opposed to what historic Christianity has always taught, you find yourself in agreement with him?
Let me expand on that question, since I'm typing out this reply. What you do know of his views, which if any, do you find in error?
I would agree with Steve about Metcalfes "popish" authority but I was never fascinated in him as Steve was. Most of the stuff I have read is from his tract publication list which includes Calvin,Bunyan,Luther,Whitefield,Philpot,Huntington,Gadsby etc,etc. I have handed out many of them .
BookMark said: I would agree with Steve about Metcalfes "popish" authority but I was never fascinated in him as Steve was. Most of the stuff I have read is from his tract publication list which includes Calvin,Bunyan,Luther,Whitefield,Philpot,Huntington,Gadsby etc,etc. I have handed out many of them .
I am not going to promote Metcalfe Pilgrim.
Well, I'll try one more time to ask the same question as before. If you avoid answering, then people will assume what they will.
. . . since you admit to already knowing about John Metcalfe, do you also find his particular views to be veritable and albeit opposed to what historic Christianity has always taught, you find yourself in agreement with him? And, what you do know of his views, which if any, do you find in error?