Great example of Christian love in the debate

[ReformedBaptist]

In the past I have shared this before as an example of how we ought to respond to each other. I am preaching to myself here too. I get frustrated with this debate and tend to dismiss it. But George Whitfield presents a wonderful example of Christian charity and manliness in his letter to John Wesley.

We all do well to read it and take his attitude for an example.

http://www.spurgeon.org/~phil/wesley.htm

Some quotes,

My dear Brother,
I thank you for yours, May the 24th. The case is quite plain. There are bigots both for predestination and against it. God is sending a message to those on either side. But neither will receive it, unless from one who is of their own opinion. Therefore, for a time you are suffered to be of one opinion, and I of another. But when his time is come, God will do what man cannot, namely, make us both of one mind. Then persecution will flame out, and it will be seen whether we count our lives dear unto ourselves, so that we may finish our course with joy. I am, my dearest brother,
Ever yours,

J. WESLEY

Reverend and very dear Brother,

od only knows what unspeakable sorrow of heart I have felt on your account since I left England last. Whether it be my infirmity or not, I frankly confess, that Jonah could not go with more reluctance against Nineveh, than I now take pen in hand to write against you. Was nature to speak, I had rather die than do it; and yet if I am faithful to God, and to my own and others' souls, I must not stand neutral any longer. I am very apprehensive that our common adversaries will rejoice to see us differing among ourselves. But what can I say?

...Yours affectionate, though unworthy brother and servant in Christ
-Whitefield

 

[pinoybaptist]

you won't have many responses here, RB. I for one would like to see that happen, but that's doubtful considering how so many newbies here come looking for a debate against the Doctrine of Grace or Calvinism with the mindset that these are the doctrines of the unsaved, hell-bound, and blasphemers.
These two whose writings you cited have no doubts at all about the other's eternal standing and where their differences lay.
On the other hand, there is one new, wet-behind-the-ear poster here who have been upbraided by another who is on his side of the fence for questioning the salvation and eternal standing of those on the other side of the spectrum.

 

[kyredneck]

Thanks for sharing that RB. You are right, we should be so considerate of one another, but, sometimes our beliefs can be passionate........

 

[John Toppass]

you won't have many responses here, RB. I for one would like to see that happen, but that's doubtful considering how so many newbies here come looking for a debate against the Doctrine of Grace or Calvinism with the mindset that these are the doctrines of the unsaved, hell-bound, and blasphemers.
These two whose writings you cited have no doubts at all about the other's eternal standing and where their differences lay.
On the other hand, there is one new, wet-behind-the-ear poster here who have been upbraided by another who is on his side of the fence for questioning the salvation and eternal standing of those on the other side of the spectrum.

or visa versa

 

[Victorious]

“It must not be forgotten that at this very time Wesley was in the thick of the controversy with the Rev. Walter Shirley and the Countess of Huntingdon's preachers about the famous Minutes of 1770, in which Wesley had laid down clearly the differences between his views and those of the Calvinists. It is much to the credit both of Mr. Whitefield's friends and of Wesley that this was not allowed to interfere with their invitation to him to preach the sermon, nor with his own affectionate and ungrudging recognition of the greatness and goodness of his departed fellow worker. Indeed, their difference of opinion had never, since the dispute in 1741, been permitted to interrupt their mutual love and esteem; they agreed to differ, and still to love one another.”

“Wesley was not ignorant of the differences between himself and Whitefield in regard to predestination; but most properly in this sermon, whilst he recognizes (iii. I) that there are differences of opinion between the children of God, he emphasizes the points of agreement; and whatever Whitefield may have believed about the eternal decrees, no man ever preached a full and free salvation more constantly and effectively than he did. The only solution of this difficultly is to be found in the recognition that the two opposing views represent the two sides of one truth, which our finite understanding is not able to synthesize; but which we may nevertheless accept, just as we accept the Unity in Trinity in the Godhead, or the divine-human person of our Lord.”

http://www.piney.com/WhitefSer54Funeral.html

The age old Calvinist/Arminian debate is not sin. I admit that I enjoy it immensely because God’s grace is at the center of it and I learn patience, lol!. JUST KIDDING! (although with an element of truth here :smilewinkgrin Sometimes I think God is testing our love for one another and laughing at us! Neither view is heresy in my opinion. Just a different view. The walk tells it all. If I can stay married to my opposition and still love him, I think we can learn to tolerate the view of a brother or sister in Christ. I believe it is a sin to condemn either side to hell.

 

[Skandelon]

when i saw the title of this thread i thought for sure it was going to be about me

 

[pinoybaptist]

when i saw the title of this thread i thought for sure it was going to be about me

I can't say about the others here, but you weren't even in my mind, skan.
somebody else has that crown now, if you once wore it.:tongue3: