Search this blog

Andy Naselli is a smart dude. He has two Ph.D's and currently serves as D.A. Carson's research assistant. His first Ph.D. was on the Keswick theology of sanctification. His dissertation is now available through Logos. I commend it to you. Here's the blurb I wrote.

As a pastor, I don't get asked to read many dissertations. I can't say I was pining for more. I have enough to read without having to slog through a bazillion footnotes on the role of dyslexic cobblers on the development of pre-industrial French mercantilism. But alas, my suspicions of nascent scholarship were born of ignorance. At least Andy Naselli proved them wrong in a big way on this occasion. Andy's work on Keswick theology is first-rate. I knew it would be. But I didn't know it would be so interesting . . . and edifying . . . and applicable . . . and easy to read. This is a model of scholarship serving the church. I've already incorporated his analysis of Keswick's history and his tight theological work on sanctification into my preaching. I enjoyed this book. I learned from this book. I was able to help my congregation by reading this book. I couldn't ask for more from a few hundred pages and a few thousand footnotes.

Many evangelicals may only be vaguely familiar with traditional Keswick theology. So I asked Andy a few questions about it. He’s condensed several years of research and several hundreds of pages of writing into 1000 words, so I encourage you to take five minutes and benefit from Andy’s expertise.


1. Give us a brief history of the Keswick movement.

Keswick (pronounced KEH-zick) is a small town in the scenic Lake District of northwest England. Since 1875, it has hosted a week-long meeting in July for the Keswick Convention. In my book, "the early Keswick movement" refers to a movement  from 1875 to 1920  that was

  1. conservatively evangelical;
  2. based on and distinguished by the belief that the majority of Christians are living in defeat and that the secret to living the victorious Christian life is consecration followed by Spirit-filling; and
  3. stimulated by annual conventions at Keswick, England, and literature by its propagators.

So "Keswick theology” (as I use the term) refers to the view of sanctification shared by the prominent propagators of the early Keswick movement.

Beginning in the 1920s, the Keswick Convention's view of sanctification began to shift from the view promoted by the leaders of the early convention. William Graham Scroggie (1877-1958) led that transformation to a view of sanctification closer to the Reformed view. Today its speakers include people like D. A. Carson and Sinclair Ferguson, whose views on the Christian life differ significantly from the Keswick Convention’s first generation.

2. Who were some of the significant people involved with Keswick, both those who influenced it and those influenced by it?

People who influenced Keswick theology:

  1. John Wesley, John Fletcher, and Adam Clarke (Wesleyan perfectionism)
  2. Phoebe Palmer and camp meetings (Methodist perfectionism)
  3. Charles Finney and Asa Mahan (Oberlin perfectionism)
  4. W. E. Boardman, Robert Pearsall Smith, and Hannah Whitall Smith (the higher life movement)

Significant proponents of Keswick theology:

  1. T. D. Harford-Battersby and Robert Wilson (Keswick's founders)
  2. J. Elder Cumming (Keswick's exemplar)
  3. Evan H. Hopkins (Keswick's formative theologian)
  4. H. W. Webb-Peploe (Keswick's orator)
  5. H. C. G. Moule (Keswick's scholar and best theologian)
  6. F. B. Meyer (Keswick's international ambassador)
  7. Charles A. Fox (Keswick's poet)
  8. Andrew Murray (Keswick's foremost devotional author)
  9. J. Hudson Taylor and Amy Carmichael (Keswick's foremost missionaries)
  10. Frances Havergal (Keswick's hymnist)
  11. A. T. Pierson (Keswick's American ambassador)
  12. W. H. Griffith Thomas, Charles G. Trumbull, and Robert C. McQuilkin (Keswick's leaders of the victorious life movement)

People who were influenced by Keswick theology:

  1. A. B. Simpson (Christian and Missionary Alliance)
  2. D. L. Moody, R. A. Torrey, James M. Gray (Moody Bible Institute)
  3. Pentecostals
  4. Lewis S. Chafer, John F. Walvoord, Charles C. Ryrie (Dallas Theological Seminary)

3. I really like how you explain Keswick theology by going through a typical Keswick conference. Would you explain the conference and theology for us?

I survey Keswick theology in five parts corresponding to the five days of a typical week at an early Keswick Convention. The convention viewed itself as "a spiritual clinic."

  1. Day one focused on sin (the diagnosis). Keswick views sin as an indwelling tendency or law that can be counteracted but never eradicated. When the Holy Spirit counteracts the believer's sinful nature, he can live without "known sin."
  2. Day two focused on God's provision for victorious Christian living (the cure). This cure is based on the fundamental proposition that there are two categories of Christians: (1) those who have been justified but have not experienced a crisis of sanctification and (2) those who have been justified and have experienced a crisis of sanctification. According to Keswick, the problem is that wrong views on sanctification result in defeat (category 1), and the solution is that sanctification by faith results in victory (category 2).
  3. Day three focused on consecration (the crisis for the cure). This consecration involves two steps: surrender ("let go") and faith ("let God").
  4. Day four focused on Spirit-filling (the prescription). Keswick proponents give various multiple-step lists of the conditions and results of Spirit-filling.
  5. Day five focused on powerful Christian service (the mission).

4. What are the chief problems with the Keswick view of sanctification?

My book lists fifteen negative theological critiques of Keswick theology. I’ll mention just seven:

  1. Disjunction: It creates two categories of Christians. This is the fundamental, linchpin issue.
  2. Perfectionism: It portrays a shallow and incomplete view of sin in the Christian life.
  3. Quietism: It tends to emphasize passivity, not activity.
  4. Pelagianism: It tends to portray the Christian's free will as autonomously starting and stopping sanctification.
  5. Methodology: It tends to use superficial formulas for instantaneous sanctification.
  6. Impossibility: It tends to result in disillusionment and frustration for the "have-nots."
  7. Spin: It tends to misinterpret personal experiences.

5. Where do we still see Keswick’s influence today? Is their’s a common error that resurfaces often in the church? If so, what makes its so attractive?

Keswick’s influence permeates modern evangelicalism to various degrees, but since it’s relatively recent in church history, I wouldn’t say that it resurfaces often.

Perhaps my experience with Keswick theology will resonate with some others and illustrate one way that Keswick’s influence continues today. When I shared my Christian "testimony" in my high school and early college years, I would say something like this: "I was saved when I was eight years old, and I surrendered to Christ when I was thirteen." By "saved," I meant that Jesus became my Savior and that I became a Christian. By "surrendered," I meant that I finally gave full control of my life to Jesus as my Master and yielded to do whatever he wanted me to do.

Most of the Christians I knew--especially preachers--used those categories, so I did, too. Young people in my youth groups or at summer camp commonly told their story the same way: "I accepted Christ as my Savior when I was eight years old, and I accepted Christ as my Lord when I was thirteen." That was the standard God-talk lingo. There were always two steps: first you get saved, and then you get serious. Too many Christians were saved but not serious. They were living a defeated life rather than a victorious life, a lower life rather than a higher life, a shallow life rather than a deeper life, a fruitless life rather than a more abundant life. They were "carnal," not "spiritual." They experienced the first blessing but still needed the second blessing. Jesus was their Savior, but he still wasn't their Master. So preachers often urged them to make Jesus their Master or “dedicate” themselves through surrender and faith (i.e., "let go and let God").

Second-blessing theology is pervasive because countless people have propagated it in so many ways, especially in sermons and devotional writings. It is appealing because Christians struggle with sin and want to be victorious in that struggle--now. Second-blessing theology offers a quick fix to this struggle, and its shortcut to instant victory appeals to genuine longings for holiness. When I was thinking of a title for my book, one of the options I came up with was a parody of the book you wrote with a thirty-five word title:

Let Go and Let God? Examining a Popular View of Christian Living: or, Why a Quick Fix to Your Struggle with Sin Will Not Result in a Victorious Life, Higher Life, Deeper Life, More Abundant Life, or Anything Other Than a Misguided, Frustrated, Disillusioned, and/or Destroyed Life.

6. What projects are you currently working on, either for yourself or for Dr. Carson?

I’m co-editing two books (one on evangelicalism and the other on the extent of the atonement) and working on a couple of others along with some forthcoming articles.

My most recent project is a chapter I’m coauthoring with Doug Moo called “The Problem of the New Testament’s Use of the Old Testament” for The Scripture Project: The Bible and Biblical Authority in the New Millennium (ed. D. A. Carson; 2 vols.; Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, forthcoming in c. 2012). The nearly forty authors plan to meet together for four days later this month to discuss each other’s chapters, so I’m looking forward to that. Other authors include John Woodbridge, P. J. Williams, Simon Gathercole, Graham Cole, Peter Jensen, Henri Blocher, Craig Blomberg, Kevin Vanhoozer, Paul Helm, and Dan Doriani.

Don Carson always seems to have about a dozen books in the queue, and I help proof them at various stages of the publication process. The next two manuscripts I see should be Evangelicalism: What Is It and Is It Worth Keeping? and The Intolerance of Tolerance.

View Comments


35 thoughts on “Andy Naselli on Why “Let Go and Let God” Is a Bad Idea”

  1. Doug says:


    You mentioned you should see Don Carson’s “The Intolerance of Tolerance” soon. This book was originally slated for release earlier this year (March 2010) and has been delayed a couple times already (now expected by August 2010). Do you know why it has been delayed?

  2. JR says:

    Before we vilify the Keswick view entirely let me recommend this volume of the four views series:

    Hoekema, McQuilkin and Walvoord may disagree on some finer points, but generally they applaud each other’s approach.

    All that to say…I look forward to Naselli’s book. As a Columbia Biblical Seminary graduate I appreciate very much the teaching of Robertson McQuilkin and he is very much of the Keswick school. However, I do recognize its pitfalls as well.

  3. John Crutchfield says:

    I also am a graduate of Columbia Bible College & Seminary (now Columbia International University), and, with JR, appreciate McQuilkin’s challenge to the average believer to live a “deeper life.” I resonate with your critiques, but I wish you had also discussed things you can affirm about the movement (surely there’s something!). Doesn’t Keswick attempt to address the repeated failure of the Christian struggling against “the world, the flesh, and the devil”? Isn’t it a good thing to think about how we can pursue God more passionately? Corrections can then be offered.

  4. Mark says:

    As this book (and this review) are buzzing around the internets lately, I thought I’d mention something I haven’t seen in any of the reviews of it. The Keswick Convention as it currently stands is as solidly evangelical as you can get these days. Don Carson himself is speaking there this year. It’s just worth mentioning so the modern convention isn’t tarred with the same brush in people’s minds if they here about it.

  5. DLE says:

    It does not matter whether we are Pentecostal, Holiness, Reformed, Arminian, Calvinist, or whatever; we all fail to see the holes in our own theology and practice of the faith. I know that I have learned much from all the various streams of Christianity, and they are all commendable and all problematic, each in their own way.

    We can say that the Keswick proponents had blind spots or failed in one way or another. Yet it is nonetheless true that there is victory in Jesus, that we are being changed from one degree of glory into another, that we are moving away from our identity as sinners and toward our identity as saints. The Bible repeatedly makes this clear.

    I find it sad that so few are willing to take what is good out of a movement and run with it, while rejecting the rest. We tend to reject all and then wonder why our life of faith seems so small and powerless.

  6. David Haslam says:

    Under the heading, ‘Significant proponents of Keswick theology’ the reviewer lists Frances Havergal as “(Keswick’s hymnist)”.

    Is this an anachronism?

    Frances Ridley Havergal died in 1879. The first Keswick convention was in 1975. The majority of her writings (poetry and prose) were written well before the birth of the Keswick theology of sanctification.

    Like Robert Murray M’Cheyne (a generation earlier) she too is one of the ‘overlooked shapers of Evangelicalism’ to use a phrase coined by Don Carson.

    Yet to claim that she was a proponent of Keswick theology seems rather far-fetched. More likely is that as many of her hymns were already well loved by all sections of Evangelicalism in the second half of the 19th Century, so it was quite natural that some her hymns would have been adopted by the Keswick Movement.

    F.R.H. never went to Keswick and never would, because she re­alized the implications. Let Frances speak for Frances.

    I’ve been discussing this aspect with a knowledgeable friend, whose reply included the following…

    Frances was no more “Keswick’s hymnist” than you are Vladimir Putin’s software consultant. Frances kept her distance from the Keswick movement, not wanting herself to be identified nor associated with them. She clearly rejected “sinless perfectionism” as false doctrine against Scripture.

    Frances is very attractive to many groups, and I think that if she becomes widely known again, many will claim her as one of their own (the Bob Jones fundamentalists, charismatics, Keswick people, liberals, Arminians, hyper-Calvinists, Campbellites, even Roman Catholics, and others).

    I could quote at much more length, but the evidence to hand is quite clear to me, and I have no desire to be more verbose than these rebuttals. If Andy Naselli thinks otherwise, he probably hasn’t researched F.R.H. in sufficient detail, or has quoted her out of context.

  7. David Haslam says:

    Two more points:

    1. Naselli omits to mention the presence of Rev William Haslam (no relation) among early adopters of the Keswick message. As Haslam took the Keswick message to India and Canada (among other places), his was a significant role.

    2. He focuses almost entirely on theology of the original Keswick Movement, without noting that during the last 40 years, Keswick has evolved to become a much more main-stream evangelical movement, with a rounded Biblical view of sanctification. (Just one evidence for this is that the current chairman is Rev. Jonathan Lamb, who is one of the leaders of the Langham Partnership.)

  8. Hugh McCann says:

    Author Andy & reviewer Kevin need to read Ortlund’s “Truly Reformed” bloggage here @ TGC.

    Ray will set you all to right about loving Keswickians.

    JESUS ONLY, baby!

  9. Andy Naselli says:

    I just added two follow-up clarifications:
    1. What about Keswick today?
    2. Is Frances Havergal really connected to Keswick theology?

  10. Matt Rodatus says:

    I’m very interested in the book on the extent of the atonement that you mentioned. Is that book by Dr. Carson? When is it to be published?

  11. Bernard Briscoe says:

    I am of Paul – are you of Apollos? If so I must shun you!!!
    This seems to be an exercise in rightly dividing the body of Christ
    It is true that we have the luxury of so many evangelical scholars able to sniff out any deviation from their orthodoxy. Surely this is not high priority use of the said scholars, is it?
    “ALL ONE IN CHRIST JESUS” is what I learned from Keswick during our annual visits both sides of WWII, and the message came through many good men. Does the flesh war against the Spirit – Of course, even at Keswick and also in the U of Wherever. But are these scholars immune from that fleshly war to the extent that they have the right to publicly war against the saints of the past 135 years who may have deviated from the perfection required of the non-perfectionists, but have maintained a consistent witness to the Gospel of Christ Jesus, while the witness as a whole in Britain has reduced to a trickle… Is this not another case of the theological pot calling the enthusiastical kettle black.
    Packer’s “Keeping in Step with the Spirit” was an adequate warning
    but being pre-Blog didn’t give the body of Christ the opportunity to indulge in public cannibalism. Shame Brethren!

  12. Bill Garrison says:

    Now that Dr. Bill Raws has gone home to the Lord, is there no one at America’s Keswick in Whiting, NJ, who can offer a rebuttal to this book?

  13. Vaclav Vasil says:

    There were men among the old Keswick teachers that are still worth reading and learning from. H.C.G.Moule is one of them. Here is a link to an online book he wrote, originally called “Thoughts on Christian Sanctity”, this online version is renamed to “Christ and Sanctification”. I’ve been greatly blessed by this little but powerful book. Blessings, Vaclav

  14. Pingback: Jesus Reigns
  15. Torpedino says:

    The theme is that as the quantity of easy installments raises the fee charged from the lender would also augment and vice versa Torpedino the
    applicants are able to dig up the urgent fund something similar to 80 to 750 with the sort-term repayment amount of 2 weeks to 4 weeks.

  16. Thomas Ross says:

    I think that Naselli’s book is very valuable, even if I cannot agree with every aspect of his own theological position. I believe that the critique of Keswick at is also valuable, and it is by one who retains the strict Baptist fundamentalist stance of many Keswick adherents while discarding Keswick and Higher Life errors.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

You may use these HTML tags and attributes: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>

Search this blog


Kevin DeYoung photo

Kevin DeYoung

Kevin DeYoung is the senior pastor at Christ Covenant Church in Matthews, North Carolina. He is chairman of the board of The Gospel Coalition, assistant professor of systematic theology at Reformed Theological Seminary (Charlotte), and a PhD candidate at the University of Leicester. Kevin and his wife, Trisha, have seven children. You can follow him on Twitter.

Kevin DeYoung's Books