SolaSaint
Well-Known Member
I'll side with the Prince of Preachers. He believed in man's responsibility and God's sovereignty. Anything less adds to scripture.
http://www.spurgeon.org/calvinis.htm
http://www.spurgeon.org/calvinis.htm
-
Welcome to Baptist Board, a friendly forum to discuss the Baptist Faith in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to all the features that our community has to offer.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon and God Bless!
Calvinism is the Gospel, just ask Charles H. Spurgeon
- Thread starter SolaSaint
- Start date
- Status
So anyone who is not a calvinist is lost?
When one says that Calvinism is the gospel that is what the clear implication is. There reason that is the implication is because if you do not hold to Calvinism then you do not have the gospel.
Yes I hold to the doctrine of grace. Just not the Calvinist version.
Inspector Javert
Active Member
Everyone agrees with "Grace"...
They just don't buy into the Philosophy of Determinism.
Grace isn't the issue, and Spurgeon was often wrong. Love Spurgeon, but for as many wonderful things he said....the "Prince of Preachers" also said a lot of stupid things too.
When it came to specifically "Calvinism"...his statements were usually self-refuting ham-handed or just poorly thought-out. He's not a great apologist for that view. But he was good and honest.
The "Prince of Preachers" was a GREAT preacher, but he was a half-cocked Theologian. He understood that faith precedes regeneration, and unlike the modern Calvie, he denied that regeneration precedes faith. He isn't a stellar apologist for Determinism even if he believed in it.
I don't worship any man, that includes Edwards and Spurgeon, and I'd as quickly say they are wrong on any given issue as I would anyone else.
Last edited by a moderator:
And this is where the calvinist arrogance comes into play. It is arrogant to assume and assert why someone else is offended. BY the way that is not why calvinism is offensive.
SolaSaint
Well-Known Member
Thing is the same can be said against non-cals, that they are arrogant for believing they can decide their destiny. Lets agree, it is easy to make a straw man argument by exaggerating the opposition. I admit Calvinists do it, will you agree non-cals do also?
I'm not picking a fight, I'm just getting tired of all the hatred of Calvinism. That is why I posted this.
I'm not picking a fight, I'm just getting tired of all the hatred of Calvinism. That is why I posted this.
And this is a prime example of why there is so much animosity against Calvinists. So long as you talk like that there will be disgust for cals. And yes saying things like that is picking a fight.
There is no hatred of Calvinism there is only disgust for Calvinist and the way they talk to people. So I will ask again. Do you believe that if you are not a Calvinist you do not have the gospel therefore you are not saved.
Last edited by a moderator:
And your distinction between hatred and disgust is... what?
The entire phrase is ". . .the Gospel and nothing else."
Is the OP's Calvinism the Gospel and nothing else?
Spurgeon expanded on the "and nothing else" idea later in his ministry:
"It is one thing to believe in the Doctrines of Grace, but quite another thing to accept all the encrustations which have formed upon those doctrines and also a very different matter to agree with the spirit which is apparent in some who profess to propagate the pure Truth of God."
Is the OP's Calvinism the Gospel and nothing else?
Spurgeon expanded on the "and nothing else" idea later in his ministry:
"It is one thing to believe in the Doctrines of Grace, but quite another thing to accept all the encrustations which have formed upon those doctrines and also a very different matter to agree with the spirit which is apparent in some who profess to propagate the pure Truth of God."
Tom Ascol of Founders Ministries speaks to the OP's tactics:
http://www.gofbw.com/news.asp?ID=13048&fp=Y
http://www.gofbw.com/news.asp?ID=13048&fp=Y
Doubting Thomas
Active Member
Umm...no. The Gospel was around long before either Calvinism was invented or before Spurgeon started preaching it.
No!
Would state that in the doctrine of Sotierology proper, the calvinistic approach is the best way to define what the Bible teaches, but NOT the only way, nor is it the Gospel itself!
Its the best way to understand what the Gospel teaches and is!
being a calvinist does not mean that one is cruel/unkind arrogant towards others though!
Some have been, but that is NOT what the belief system should inspire!
Calvinists who believe in Limited Atonement are not preaching the gospel that Paul preached. Paul could (and did) look folks right in the eye and tell them that Jesus died for OUR sins according to the scriptures.
1 Cor 15:3 For I delivered unto you first of all that which I also received, how that Christ died for our sins according to the scriptures;
4 And that he was buried, and that he rose again the third day according to the scriptures:
Calvinists who believe in Limited Atonement do not tell people that Jesus died for "our" sins. Oh, they will say Jesus died for "sinners" but even this is only a half-truth and not what Calvinists sincerely believe.
No, if a Calvinist told the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth they would tell folks that Jesus only died for "some sinners" but that they do not have a clue who those persons are.
And if they were really, really honest, they would tell folks that they do not even know for a certainty if Jesus died for them personally.
That is not the gospel.
1 Cor 15:3 For I delivered unto you first of all that which I also received, how that Christ died for our sins according to the scriptures;
4 And that he was buried, and that he rose again the third day according to the scriptures:
Calvinists who believe in Limited Atonement do not tell people that Jesus died for "our" sins. Oh, they will say Jesus died for "sinners" but even this is only a half-truth and not what Calvinists sincerely believe.
No, if a Calvinist told the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth they would tell folks that Jesus only died for "some sinners" but that they do not have a clue who those persons are.
And if they were really, really honest, they would tell folks that they do not even know for a certainty if Jesus died for them personally.
That is not the gospel.
SolaSaint
Well-Known Member
I guess a new question should be, "why do non-cals always know what Calvinists believe, even better then they themselves know and they assume we hide the truth to lost people?" I'm sure glad we have all you educated smart folks to tell us lowly Calvinists what we believe...:wavey:
The Archangel
Well-Known Member
First, to say that those of us who hold to Limited Atonement are preaching a different Gospel than Paul is to say that we are not believers, which clearly breaks the rules of the BB.
Second, your ignorance of even the most basic hermeneutical principles is astounding. In 1 Cor 15 (as with the entire book) Paul is addressing BELIEVERS. So, for him to say "Our" sins can--but does not have to--refer to the elect. Paul's preaching on Grace and the related doctrines is well known to cover the so-called "Doctrines of Grace."
You are simply wrong and either unable or unwilling to be corrected on this.
So, now you're questioning the integrity of every Calvinist. Ridiculous.
The Archangel
I am not going to allow non-Cals to slam the Cals and vice versa.
- Status