C.H. Spurgeon and election

[standingfirminChrist]

John 6:37-39 "All that the Father giveth me shall come to me; and him that cometh to me I will in no wise cast out. For I came down from heaven, not to do mine own will, but the will of him that sent me. And this is the Father's will which hath sent me, that of all which he hath given me I should lose nothing, but should raise it up again at the last day. "

This goes along with the verse that says "No man can come to me, except the Father which hath sent me draw him: and I will raise him up at the last day." (John 6:44)

Romans 8 says "Moreover whom he did predestinate, them he also called: and whom he called, them he also justified: and whom he justified, them he also glorified. What shall we then say to these things? If God be for us, who can be against us? "

and right after that: "Who shall lay any thing to the charge of God's elect? It is God that justifieth."

So you seem to be missing part of the Bible. Either that or you look to your own wisdom to explain away the clear teaching of Scripture. Who's will is sovereign? God's, man's or Satan's You said that Satan is blinding man - but the verse says "If God be for us, who can be against us?" How can Satan steal from God?

God is not willing that any should perish. Jesus is drawing all men unto Him, not just some.. Certainly not just the ones Cal's think are worthy of Salvation.

Christ's blood was shed for not our sins only, but for the sins of the whole world. Every man, woman and child born on this earth have that gift of eternal life offered to them according to the Word of God.

 

[gb93433]

Not all saved are elect, but all elect are saved.

Salvation is in Jesus Christ. All saved are the elect and all of the elect are saved.

Those who are chosen in Mt. 22:14, "For many are called, but few are chosen." are the elect. Chosen and the elect come from the same Greek word and is used to describe the same people.

Romans8:33-35 “Who will bring a charge against God's elect? God is the one who justifies; who is the one who condemns? Christ Jesus is He who died, yes, rather who was raised, who is at the right hand of God, who also intercedes for us. Who will separate us from the love of Christ? Will tribulation, or distress, or persecution, or famine, or nakedness, or peril, or sword?”

Romans 10:9 that if you confess with your mouth Jesus as Lord, and believe in your heart that God raised Him from the dead, you will be saved;
Romans 10:13 for "Whoever will call on the name of the Lord will be saved."
Ephesians 2:8 For by grace you have been saved through faith; and that not of yourselves, it is the gift of God;
Titus 3:5 He saved us, not on the basis of deeds which we have done/ righteousness, but according to His mercy, by the washing of regeneration and renewing by the Holy Spirit,

1 Peter 1:4, “to obtain an inheritance which is imperishable and undefiled and will not fade away, reserved in heaven for you”

I might suggest that you look up the word for "reserved" in your Greek text. It is a perfect participle.

 

[standingfirminChrist]

No, not all saved are elect. Gaius was not said to be elect. Nor were Erastus or Quartas said to be elect... yet they were saved.

Paul mentioned several more names not associated with being elect, yet being saved or brethren or saints.

The saved are comprised of saints, brethren, and elect. That truth is clearly written in the Word of God.

Of all the names mentioned in Romans 16 as being of the body of Christ to be greeted, only Rufus is spoken of as being 'chosen in the Lord.'

 

[gb93433]

No, not all saved are elect. Gaius was not said to be elect. Nor were Erastus or Quartas said to be elect... yet they were saved.

Paul mentioned several more names not associated with being elect, yet being saved or brethren or saints.

The saved are comprised of saints, brethren, and elect. That truth is clearly written in the Word of God.

Of all the names mentioned in Romans 16 as being of the body of Christ to be greeted, only Rufus is spoken of as being 'chosen in the Lord.'

I am shocked at what I just read!

Did you even read what you wrote when you wrote, "Paul mentioned several more names not associated with being elect, yet being saved or brethren or saints. The saved are comprised of saints, brethren, and elect."?

Why do you waste so much time proof texting?

According to your method of interpretation you are not chosen because your name is not mentioned anywhere.

Are you saying the Paul is not chosen? He is not mentioned as chosen in Romans. None of the names in Romans 16 are mentioned as being saved. Are none of them saved too?

Romans 16 is the greetings portion of the conclusio of a typical letter in that day. So interpret it that way. That is the way scripture is written.

Acts 19:2, 22, “Now after these things were finished, Paul purposed in the spirit to go to Jerusalem after he had passed through Macedonia and Achaia, saying, "After I have been there, I must also see Rome." And having sent into Macedonia two of those who ministered to him, Timothy and Erastus, he himself stayed in Asia for a while.”

Romans 16:21 -24, “Timothy my fellow worker greets you, and so do Lucius and Jason and Sosipater, my kinsmen. I, Tertius, who write this letter, greet you in the Lord. Gaius, host to me and to the whole church, greets you. Erastus, the city treasurer greets you, and Quartus, the brother. The grace of our Lord Jesus Christ be with you all. Amen.

2 Timothy 4:19-21, “Greet Prisca and Aquila, and the household of Onesiphorus. Erastus remained at Corinth, but Trophimus I left sick at Miletus. Make every effort to come before winter. Eubulus greets you, also Pudens and Linus and Claudia and all the brethren.”

 

[Rippon]

SFIC's methods of interpretation reminds me of some Charismatics who make distinctions like the saved do not have the Holy Spirit and other refinements which are foreign to the Bible .

 

[standingfirminChrist]

I am shocked at what I just read!

Did you even read what you wrote when you wrote, "Paul mentioned several more names not associated with being elect, yet being saved or brethren or saints. The saved are comprised of saints, brethren, and elect."?

Why do you waste so much time proof texting?

According to your method of interpretation you are not chosen because your name is not mentioned anywhere.

Are you saying the Paul is not chosen? He is not mentioned as chosen in Romans. None of the names in Romans 16 are mentioned as being saved. Are none of them saved too?

Romans 16 is the greetings portion of the conclusio of a typical letter in that day. So interpret it that way. That is the way scripture is written.

Acts 19:2, 22, “Now after these things were finished, Paul purposed in the spirit to go to Jerusalem after he had passed through Macedonia and Achaia, saying, "After I have been there, I must also see Rome." And having sent into Macedonia two of those who ministered to him, Timothy and Erastus, he himself stayed in Asia for a while.”

Romans 16:21 -24, “Timothy my fellow worker greets you, and so do Lucius and Jason and Sosipater, my kinsmen. I, Tertius, who write this letter, greet you in the Lord. Gaius, host to me and to the whole church, greets you. Erastus, the city treasurer greets you, and Quartus, the brother. The grace of our Lord Jesus Christ be with you all. Amen.

2 Timothy 4:19-21, “Greet Prisca and Aquila, and the household of Onesiphorus. Erastus remained at Corinth, but Trophimus I left sick at Miletus. Make every effort to come before winter. Eubulus greets you, also Pudens and Linus and Claudia and all the brethren.”

I know what I wrote, gb. Paul referred to all of those names as being saved when he used words such as brethren, in the Lord, in the faith, etc.

Proof texting the Bible? You've got to be kidding. Maybe you need to try it instead of believing Calvin's Institutes as final authority.

 

[Rippon]

Proof texting the Bible? You've got to be kidding. Maybe you need to try it instead of believing Calvin's Institutes as final authority.

You really need to get a new act on the road . Who has quted John Calvin's Institutes Of The Christian Religion on this thread ?Do you think we have to run things past Calvin's works before we post ? Get real .

 

[Rippon]

Romans 8:30 : "And those he predestined , he also called ; those he called , he also justified ; those he justified , he also glorified." ( NIV )

I suppose SFIC would like to take this opportunity to deny that this singular group of people is indeed the elect .

 

[Jerome]

Spurgeon, on calvinists' mutilating scripture when it doesn't fit their "grand theory" [I Tim. 2:4]:

"My love of consistency with my own doctrinal views is not great enough to allow me knowingly to alter a single text of Scripture. I have great respect for orthodoxy, but my reverence for inspiration is far greater. I would sooner a hundred times over appear to be inconsistent with myself than be inconsistent with the word of God. I never thought it to be any very great crime to seem to be inconsistent with myself, for who am I that I should everlastingly be consistent? But I do think it a great crime to be so inconsistent with the word of God that I should want to lop away a bough or even a twig from so much as a single tree of the forest of Scripture. God forbid that I should cut or shape, even in the least degree, any divine expression. So runs the text, and so we must read it, "God our Saviour; who will have all men to be saved, and to come unto the knowledge of the truth.""

 

[standingfirminChrist]

Spurgeon, on calvinists' mutilating scripture when it doesn't fit their "grand theory" [I Tim. 2:4]:

"My love of consistency with my own doctrinal views is not great enough to allow me knowingly to alter a single text of Scripture. I have great respect for orthodoxy, but my reverence for inspiration is far greater. I would sooner a hundred times over appear to be inconsistent with myself than be inconsistent with the word of God. I never thought it to be any very great crime to seem to be inconsistent with myself, for who am I that I should everlastingly be consistent? But I do think it a great crime to be so inconsistent with the word of God that I should want to lop away a bough or even a twig from so much as a single tree of the forest of Scripture. God forbid that I should cut or shape, even in the least degree, any divine expression. So runs the text, and so we must read it, "God our Saviour; who will have all men to be saved, and to come unto the knowledge of the truth.""

Seems Spurgeon is inconsistent with his stance. Some sermons he says God would have only the elect saved, then he turns around and says God wants all men saved.

James says of such:

A double-minded man is unstable in all his ways

 

[NaasPreacher (C4K)]

A double-minded man is unstable in all his ways

I wish I had only a small measure of this man's "instability".

 

[standingfirminChrist]

Granted the man was an intelligent man. And He did preach. But much of his preaching flip-flopped more than a fish out of water when it came to election.

 

[Jerome]

A confession of faith, circa 1890:

"We, the undersigned, banded together in Fraternal Union, . . . .
We hold and maintain the truths generally known as "the doctrines of grace." The Electing Love of God the Father, the Propitiatory and Substitutionary Sacrifice of his Son, Jesus Christ, Regeneration by the Holy Ghost, the Imputation of Christ's Righteousness, the Justification of the sinner (once for all) by faith, his walk in newness of life and growth in grace by the active indwelling of the Holy Ghost, and the Priestly Intercession of our Lord Jesus, as also the hopeless perdition of all who reject the Savior, according to the words of the Lord in Matthew 25:46, "These shall go away into eternal punishment,"—are, in our judgment, revealed and fundamental truths.
Our hope is the Personal Pre-millennial Return of the Lord Jesus in glory.

C. H. SPURGEON. . . ."

 

[standingfirminChrist]

So Spurgeon believed that people would reject the Savior and go into eternal perdition.

In order for one to reject something, that something had to be offered to the one rejecting it.

So, Christ was offered to the one who rejected Him... the rejection not by God's design, but because of man's free will to choose.

John 5:40 And ye will not come to me, that ye might have life.

 

[Jerome]

Spurgeon on "limited atonement":

"But do you know the limit of it? Christ hath bought a "multitude that no man can number." The limit of it is just this: He hath died for sinners; whoever in this congregation inwardly and sorrowfully knows himself to be a sinner, Christ died for him; whoever seeks Christ, shall know Christ died for him; for our sense of need of Christ, and our seeking after Christ, are infallible proofs that Christ died for us."

 

[4His_glory]

I wish I had only a small measure of this man's "instability".

You and me both Roger. God raised up Spurgeon to not only bring glory to the name of Christ in the 1800s but in our generation also. I appreciate his ministry so much and his writings and sermons have blessed me greatly. I named my youngest son after him.

 

[4His_glory]

I am not a 5 pointer (4 pointer which some calvinists say is impossible but I beg to differ) but I am not going to deny that Charles Spurgeon was. It is amazing to me how many paint Spurgeon to be some one he was not by mis-quoting him (like Dave Hunt). One does not have to agree with him but at least be honest in presenting what he believed.

 

[gb93433]

I hold firm to the Word of God. God saves whosoever He will. Of those He saves, He elects to certain services for His Church.

Not all saved are elect, but all elect are saved.

If if were so obvious we would recognize it and you would not have to tell us.

You make no sense and quit giving us such nonsense.

If what you say were true which it is not but if it were then you are saying that God does not gift every believer.

 

[gb93433]

So Spurgeon believed that people would reject the Savior and go into eternal perdition.

In order for one to reject something, that something had to be offered to the one rejecting it.

So, Christ was offered to the one who rejected Him... the rejection not by God's design, but because of man's free will to choose.

John 5:40 And ye will not come to me, that ye might have life.

A man without Christ is not saved. Every man is without excuse. No explanation or rationalization is needed.

 

[gb93433]

But much of his preaching flip-flopped more than a fish out of water when it came to election.

Perhaps.

Your theology on the subject cannot even be found is scripture. Your theology does not even meet the basic definition of called and saved.