If a Calvinist Preached on the Gospel from your Pulpit

[Jerome]

Whitfield was closer to the events of Dordt, so it is notupr

So true!

Do you mean these men were rebels in their time? Whitfield certainly was. He was not allowed to preach in his denominations churches. He had to preach in the open air.

Plus he went on to serve under Selina Hastings, foundress of The Countess of Huntingdon's Connexion:

Selina Hastings, Countess of Huntingdon

Whitefield became her personal chaplain

the "Countess of Huntingdon's Connexion," a Calvinistic movement within the Methodist church

Lady Huntingdon exercised an active, and even autocratic, superintendence over her chapels and chaplains

 

[Squire Robertsson]

I mean they were all "Calvinists." Though, not of the type railed against by so many. As for Whitfield and slavery, it would appear that part of his legacy has been whitewashed out of popular history.

Do you mean these men were rebels in their time?

 

[Reformed]

I mean they were all "Calvinists." Though, not of the type railed against by so many. As for Whitfield and slavery, it would appear that part of his legacy has been whitewashed out of popular history.

I do not believe it lessens his labors for Christ, although it displays the mixture and error of a flawed humanity.

Sent from my Pixel 2 XL using Tapatalk

 

[agedman]

I mean they were all "Calvinists." Though, not of the type railed against by so many. As for Whitfield and slavery, it would appear that part of his legacy has been whitewashed out of popular history.

I may be wrong, but I recall that Whitfield’s views of slavery were more that it was not anti- Scriptural. Yet, he did hold that inhumane treatment would bring God’s judgment. He campaigned for slavery (as an economic necessity) but also promoted humane treatment and established educational institutions that the life of the slave would be lifted above that estate.

Here is a short article about his own conflicted thinking: (Slaveholding Evangelist)

Slavery in Whitfield’s time was very different then that which turned very ugly with the invention of the Cotten gin. Just a few years prior, some southern state legislatures were considering some manner of ending it, but cotton became king and the demand for cheep labor was about to reap the judgment Whitfield predicted.

For those wanting more in-depth Cambridge University Press has this available:

George Whitefield on Slavery: Some New Evidence on JSTOR

 

[Reformed]

I may be wrong, but I recall that Whitfield’s views of slavery were more that it was not anti- Scriptural. Yet, he did hold that inhumane treatment would bring God’s judgment. He campaigned for slavery (as an economic necessity) but also promoted humane treatment and established educational institutions that the life of the slave would be lifted above that estate.

Here is a short article about his own conflicted thinking: (Slaveholding Evangelist)

Slavery in Whitfield’s time was very different then that which turned very ugly with the invention of the Cotten gin. Just a few years prior, some southern state legislatures were considering some manner of ending it, but cotton became king and the demand for cheep labor was about to reap the judgment Whitfield predicted.

For those wanting more in-depth Cambridge University Press has this available:

George Whitefield on Slavery: Some New Evidence on JSTOR

Robert Lewis Dabney has a similar reputation. Dabney was a 19th-century Presbyterian theologian that was the personal chaplain of Stonewall Jackson. While a distinguished theologian and author, Dabney was a proponent of antebellum slavery. Once again, his contribution to theology is not to be questioned, although his support for slavery is part of his reputation and cannot be divorced from it.

 

[thatbrian]

Thanks for the info. Sheds some light on why these young Calvinists annoy me so badly.

Does it? Exactly how?

 

[thatbrian]

P.S. I would be remiss if I did not mention Whitfield's advocacy of slavery in the American colonies. While many ministers were proponents of slavery, that position cannot be excused and any right account of history must mention their part in it.

Do you feel an obligation to mention the error of ALL theologians and figures in church history that you quote?

 

[Jerome]

Do you feel an obligation to mention the error of ALL theologians and figures in church history that you quote?

He didn't mention that John L. Dagg was a slavery apologist. Dagg was a Baptist theologian; he's a favorite of the Founders faction.

 

[Reformed]

Do you feel an obligation to mention the error of ALL theologians and figures in church history that you quote?

No. Just those who fall into the vortex of my capricious nature. Any other questions?

Sent from my Pixel 2 XL using Tapatalk

 

[agedman]

Robert Lewis Dabney has a similar reputation. Dabney was a 19th-century Presbyterian theologian that was the personal chaplain of Stonewall Jackson. While a distinguished theologian and author, Dabney was a proponent of antebellum slavery. Once again, his contribution to theology is not to be questioned, although his support for slavery is part of his reputation and cannot be divorced from it.

Stonewall would gather as many children of slaves together as he could and hold Sunday school. He and Lee both were not in the war because of slavery, but because of the northern aggression. Typical of the Southerner, they put great authority into local and state rights and considered the congress of the US a hindrance.

But isn’t that what much of the problem is in this day?

Perhaps, Paul”s declaration, that believers are to support those who rule, show that same condition in his time, too.

 

[Reynolds]

Stonewall would gather as many children of slaves together as he could and hold Sunday school. He and Lee both were not in the war because of slavery, but because of the northern aggression. Typical of the Southerner, they put great authority into local and state rights and considered the congress of the US a hindrance.

But isn’t that what much of the problem is in this day?

Perhaps, Paul”s declaration, that believers are to support those who rule, show that same condition in his time, too.

Correct. The war was not about slavery. The war was about economics and Federal control of economics. Slavery was simply one of the many pieces of that economic puzzle.

 

[agedman]

Correct. The war was not about slavery. The war was about economics and Federal control of economics. Slavery was simply one of the many pieces of that economic puzzle.

And it carried the image to the northern population of recovering what was righteousness and placing human aspects upon the issue rather than things.

We see that appeal regularly in the media and even in churches.

 

[agedman]

I wonder if there are aspects of reformed thinking that are more highlighted in the South and others more in the north?

I would consider that cultural divides would also be shown in how one considers aspects of important theology.

 

[Reformed]

I wonder if there are aspects of reformed thinking that are more highlighted in the South and others more in the north?

I would consider that cultural divides would also be shown in how one considers aspects of important theology.

I am of the opinion that the Civil War was a judgment on this nation because of slavery, regardless of the reasons for the war. American slavery was man stealing. It is one of America's two great national sins. Any attempt to minimize or alter it's historical context is appalling. That said, as a nation we needs move past it while at the same time learn from the sins of the past. I write this as one who does not believe in reparations or tasking people of this generation to pay for the sins of the past. But I have also had conversations with people who have a problem with the Reformed faith because of advocacy of slavery before it was abolished. The best way to respond to it is head on, not to deflect it.

Sent from my Pixel 2 XL using Tapatalk

 

[agedman]

I am of the opinion that the Civil War was a judgment on this nation because of slavery, regardless of the reasons for the war. American slavery was man stealing. It is one of America's two great national sins. Any attempt to minimize or alter it's historical context is appalling. That said, as a nation we needs move past it while at the same time learn from the sins of the past. I write this as one who does not believe in reparations or tasking people of this generation to pay for the sins of the past. But I have also had conversations with people who have a problem with the Reformed faith because of advocacy of slavery before it was abolished. The best way to respond to it is head on, not to deflect it.

Sent from my Pixel 2 XL using Tapatalk

The pre-war slavery in some areas was brutal, however the north was actually just as much at fault for the treatment as the south.

Rather then establishing just laws based upon Scriptural treatment for all which would have certainly aided the Asians, the native Americans, the Irish, ... there was huge atrociousness done both pre and post war to folks that could have been resolved with righteous laws and no civil war.

The US has never recovered from the Civil War, and such is reflected in the typical unrest of the modern groupings.

Right laws could have brought balance and brought correct thinking, that wars never can produce.

 

[Reformed]

The pre-war slavery in some areas was brutal, however the north was actually just as much at fault for the treatment as the south.

Rather then establishing just laws based upon Scriptural treatment for all which would have certainly aided the Asians, the native Americans, the Irish, ... there was huge atrociousness done both pre and post war to folks that could have been resolved with righteous laws and no civil war.

The US has never recovered from the Civil War, and such is reflected in the typical unrest of the modern groupings.

Right laws could have brought balance and brought correct thinking, that wars never can produce.

I never the United States is/was a righteous nation. Any nation that murders 60,000,000 of it's unborn citizens cannot claim righteousness. I believe God judged our nation through the Civil War and is doing so today by giving us over to the evilness of our hearts. The only hope we have is Christ.

Sent from my Pixel 2 XL using Tapatalk

 

[Reformed]

Ok. I am guilty of going far off my own OP. Course correction.

Sent from my Pixel 2 XL using Tapatalk

 

[agedman]

The gospel is the message the Apostles carried.

I don't see that message being perverted in a Calvinistic presentation of the Scriptures, for such place all authority in the hands of God, and at the same time call for repentance and belief.

What I do see is the opposite most often propagated among the non-cal.

That in some manner it comes down to humans taking the action in which results are salvation.

Start with humans, ends with failure.

Start with God, ends in victory.

 

[Reynolds]

I am of the opinion that the Civil War was a judgment on this nation because of slavery, regardless of the reasons for the war. American slavery was man stealing. It is one of America's two great national sins. Any attempt to minimize or alter it's historical context is appalling. That said, as a nation we needs move past it while at the same time learn from the sins of the past. I write this as one who does not believe in reparations or tasking people of this generation to pay for the sins of the past. But I have also had conversations with people who have a problem with the Reformed faith because of advocacy of slavery before it was abolished. The best way to respond to it is head on, not to deflect it.

Sent from my Pixel 2 XL using Tapatalk

In fairness, slavery in that time period was worldwide. Europe had freed most of its slaves, but they had only recently done it. Was slavery wrong? Sure it was wrong, but it was not unique to the USA.

 

[Rob_BW]

My pastor may be a Calvinist, for all I know. He certainly does enjoy reading Spurgeon. But when we have time to sit down and converse, we seem to spend much more time discussing practical matters. Who needs assistance, or a visitation, how can we reach more people in our community...that sort of thing.