John Richard Rice

[Rippon]

God may decide some matters for men but never moral matters of right and wrong . ( Page 67)



... the blood of Christ has purchased people for salvation who do not take salvation . ( page 72)



The Bible ... never says that God is an absolute unlimited sovereign.( page 79)

God is love and love limits absolute sovereignty . (page 80)

This is a rehash of post #3 of mine with some eliminations.

 

[Rippon]

On page 11 of his book he stated "This doctrine [of Calvinism --Rip]insists that we need not urge a man to turn to Christ." I said that was nonsense , I still insist that it is . JOJ , ask your Calvinist friend if Calvinists think we should not urge people , plead with them, implore and command them in the Name of the Lord to repent , believe and turn to the Lord . Your grandfather's statement ( and he said it more than once ) was not true .

JRR had the stance that anyone believing in TULIP was a hyper-calvinist. Was Spurgeon a hyper-calvinist then ? Do you know or acknowlege a cleavage between hyper-calvinism and calvinism? Your grandfather was respected by many in the Fundamentalist camp . Many followed his assertions whole , without examination.

Not once in your grandfather's book did he mention the Gospel Standard folks . Many of them are godly and there is a lot of good teaching . However they , and like-mined people deny duty faith and a free proclamation of the gospel ( among other doctrinal deviations ). They are hypercalvinists . Investigate and see for yourself. If he didn't know the facts he should not have gone into print on the subject . But that hasn't stopped Dave Hunt and others.

This was from my 20th post.I edited rather heavily.I want to convey the essence of my position with a minimum of heat.

 

[Rippon]

In his celebrated classic he habitually calls Calvinists hyper-calvinists . He normally spurns their views as scripture-twisting , man-made , and extreme.

The original copyright year of his book was 1958 . He was about 63 years old then . Surely at that age , being in the ministry for such a long time , he would have been privy to basic facts . He was 63 ! He wasn't 23 . Did he ever revise the contents ? Did he ever apologize for this error-filled book over the next 22 years of his life ? No .

He had to have known Ian Paisley . Paisley was a good friend of Bob Jones Jr. Paisley is an ardent Calvinist . He not only believes in the 5 points but says " and all of them are sharp ! " However Paisley is a fervent soul seeker . Did JRR consider Ian Paisley a hyper-calvinist ?

Winning souls is not antithetical to Calvinism . That is why believers in the doctrine of grace were the ones who pioneered the missionary movement of the 1790's . That's why they have had a history before and after Calvin as great evangelists/theologians /authors etc. In Puritan times you would have been hard-pressed to find an Arminian aside from 3 or so exceptions.

If someone preaches and teaches to all within earshot -- not being selective as to who his listeners are -- loves the souls of those who are outside of Christ -- believes it is the duty of all to repent and trust the Lord alone for salvation -- How can that person rightfully be called a hyper-calvinist ? Have you ever listened to Al Martin ? He is an extraordinary Reformed Baptist preacher out of the Puritan mold . He loves the Lord and has a transparent love for the lost . He extolls Christ in every sermon . Calvinism is not the same as hyper-calvinism .

I have said this before and I will say it again -- there are true h-c's . They are Gospel Standard people in England and some Primitive Baptists in the States -- plus a few other related bodies but the most extreme H-C is Brandon Kraft . True Calvinists would recoil from such .



BTW , Donald G. Barnhouse former pastor of 10th Presbyterian Church in Philly was called an arrogant hyper-calvinist by Rice . ( see pages 7 and 101 ) . Rice also slandered Rolfe Barnard ( pages 101,102 )though not by name . Rice said Barnard came to utter ruin.

This is what is left of my 35th post after some more heavy editing.I just want to get the facts out.

 

[Rippon]

Let's start with the Table of Contents . Chapter 10 ( he uses Roman Numeral x) is entitled " The Harm Done By Hyper-Calvinism Heresy".

On page 6 -- " The hyper-Calvinistic heresy is particularly appealing to the carnal nature , unwilling to have the heartbreak , the burden for soul winning ... "

Still on page 6 -- " But extreme Calvinism , the teaching that some people , by the foreordained plan of God, are predestined to be lost , that their destinies were settled before they were born , is a wicked heresy contrary to the Bible , that dishonors God , and has done incalculable harm . "

On page 7 : " Note some of the foolish statements of hyper-Calvinists . It has been said that ' there are babes in Hell not a span long ..."

On page 14 he goes on to say that Calvinism " means that this doctrine was formulated by Calvin , and those who hold it get it from him Calvin . And their statement of faith follows exactly and literally every doctrinal position of Calvin."

On page 16 he calls Dr. Loraine Boettner " a narrow-minded , warped sectarian."


On page 19 he says ... " hyper-Calvinism is a philosophy developed by men and depending on fallible logic and frail human reason, with the perversion of some Scriptures , and the misuse of other Scriptures , and the total ignoring of still other Scriptures."

This is post #45 edited for the convenience of BB-readers.What do think of JRR's statements?

 

[Rippon]

On page 20 he says : " How strange that , after 1,400 years of Christianity , practically no one had understood the Bible to teach Calvin's doctrine of predestination until he formed the philosophy."

On page 21 : " Who can find these five points listed in the Bible ? Where does the Bible indicate that there are any definite and exclusive five points as a foundation for theology?"

On page 41 : " The atonement of Jesus Christ on the cross paid for the sins of every poor sinner ever born!"

On page 54 : " When God commands people to repent , He makes it possible for them to repent."

On page 57 : " The fact that God says ' whosoever ' means that all can will to come to Him."

Yet more whittling-down of post #47 this time.

 

[Rippon]

How could I feel toward God , if I should find out that when He said , " whosoever will " he did not mean that , because He had made men so that many of them could not repent if they would ? How would I feel toward the Saviour if I found that , though He professed to die for the sins of the whole world , He had already consigned some people to Hell with no chance to repent , no matter how much they wished to do so ? ( page 58 )



So if we can show that the Bible teaches that men do resist the grace of God , do resist the moving and conviction of the Holy Spirit , we have proved that extreme Calvinism is simply not true , that it is unscriptural , a man-made philosophy contrary to the Bible . ( page 69 )



" But how could it be wrong for a man to reject Christ , if he had no power to accept Him ? How could God bring a lost sinner to judgment for his sins and his Christ-rejection if the man had no choice ? Don't you see that the very nature of right and wrong , as taught in the Bible and proceeding from God Almighty , makes it so that God cannot coerce the human soul on these matters ? " ( page 77 )

This was from my 50th post.Remember,here I am just giving JRR's quotes with the removal of my original comments.

 

[Rippon]

There is no essential difference between the unbelieving fatalism of Calvinists and the fatalism of Moslems or other heathen people . Essentially Calvinism would teach that there is no real right and wrong , no moral responsibility for men and women . Essentially Calvinism would teach that the laws of sowing and reaping , of rewards and punishments , are not valid , honest laws . All the fundamental doctrines involved in sowing and reaping , in praying and getting the answer , in winning souls or leaving them to go to hell because of our cold , compassionless hearts -- I say these basic fundamentals are denied by Calvinism . Yes , Calvinism is a moral impossibility in the light of Bible doctrine . ( page 81 )


Rice quotes Ro. 9:11-13 and then says regarding the twins " Neither was predestined to be saved , and neither was predestined to be lost . " ( page 86 )


It is not that predestination causes people to trust Christ and be saved . No , they are only predestined to be saved because God knows that they will put their trust in Christ . ( page 90 )


[ The election of Christians ] is not the cause of their being saved . ( page 91 )
[/quote]

This is an edited form of my original post #51.I'm just airing his theology.

 

[lbaker]

I want to mention two times when I said " nonsense " referring to JRR . Again , he was trying to categorize all Calvinists as believing some preposterous things . He painted with a broad brush and did not allow for any differences . On page 11 of his book he stated " This doctrine insists that we need not urge a man to turn to Christ . " I said that was nonsense , I still insist that it is . JOJ , ask your Calvinist friend if Calvinists think we should not urge people , plead with them, implore and command them in the Name of the Lord to repent , believe and turn to the Lord . Your grandfather's statement ( and he said it more than once ) was not true .

Correct me if I'm wrong here but doesn't Calvinism teach that God will save who He wants to save, regardless of what we do or don't do? If that is the case then I can see how preaching, missionary work, etc. would simply be trying to give God some help He doesn't need or want. Can you explain why this is not the case?

 

[Benjamin]

Wow! Dreamed last of seeing my grandmother and giving her a hug and kiss. Now went through and re-read this old tread. Did all this stir up some memories for the day! Sorry for the interuption.

 

[tinytim]

In another thread I mentioned having read and marked extensively JRR's book : " Predestined for Hell ? No ! " I will quote some elections from his booklet and put my original remarks at that time in parenthesis . He usually just called Calvinists hyper-calvinists and heretical .

I am convinced that Whitefield and Spurgeon were both influenced , by the pressure of Arminian theology in their day , to call themselves Calvinists , although neither was in actual practice and emphasis . ( pages 6&7)

They did invite people to choose Christ

Some will think we have misrepresented Calvinism . But ... we are very carefully giving the meaning ... page 10

Need more info... What was JRR def. of Calvinism

This doctrine insists that we need not urge a man to turn to Christ (page 11)

True.. if God has chosen... Just ask Pinoy.

... God in mercy , elects some men to do certain tasks ... (page 24)

Sounds like Calvinism to me

The Bible has no doctrine of ' reprobation , ' and the Bible does not use that word , nor any word like it , in reference to predestination . It is a human word for a human conception .(page 24)

No representation here...

[ Abraham ] had the same chance for salvation that every other man has . He was no more elected to be saved than others are foreordained to be saved .( page 31)

True, Abraham could have said, NO.

God does plan ahead in the affairs of men and works things according to His will .( page 31)

Right, If God didn't, he wouldn't be God

Esau could have been saved , possibly was saved -- we don't know . No one is predestined to be saved or predestined to be lost . ( page 32)

Last part true, first part I disagree with.. But still not 100% sure Esau went to hell.. Bible doesn't say.

I thought I would bring this topic up again because JoJ has recently said he proved me wrong regarding my stance on his grandfather's positions.

I still maintain that JRR slandered specific Calvinistic men in his book.And he characterized people holding to Calvinism with blatant falsehoods.

Beyond that he had troublesome theology.

I don't see what you claim either. But I do see you trying to slander JRR.

 

[ReformedBaptist]

Correct me if I'm wrong here but doesn't Calvinism teach that God will save who He wants to save, regardless of what we do or don't do?

lbaker,

I have corrected your misunderstanding in other posts. Rather than correct it again, I am going to ask you to prove your claim from the writings of prominant Calvinists.

RB

 

[lbaker]

lbaker,

I have corrected your misunderstanding in other posts. Rather than correct it again, I am going to ask you to prove your claim from the writings of prominant Calvinists.

RB

"God preordained...a part of the human race, without any merit of their own, to eternal salvation, and another part, in just punishment of their sin, to eternal damnation. " John Calvin

This sure sounds like God picks them regardless of behavior.

Um, actually you kind of bailed out before really explaining what I saw as conflicting statements:

RB here: Not in the way you mean it. lol Does election make certain the salvation of some? Absolutely. Will they be saved regardless of what they do? NO.

 

[ktn4eg]

Although I didn't have to opportunity personally to meet John R. Rice prior to his death in 1980, having lived not too far from Murfreesboro, TN , I was thankful for the times that I was able to participate in activities that were somehow related to him or his family: Things that I'm sure he would have approved.

Often were the times we would attend activities at his home church, Franklin Road BC. Some were related to the Christian schools that were connected w/ the TN Assn of Christian Schools (TACS), and others were just to hear great preachers.

Once you turn off Interstate 24 to get on to Franklin Road, you'll cross over John Rice Blvd. I told one of the sales persons at the Sword of the Lord Bookstore that, except for maybe Jesus Christ Himself, I couldn't think of a better name for a street than that!

I've purchased books by JRR. As a previous post mentioned, his book on the Home is a classic. And I haven't found a better book on the Charismatic Movement than his.

I appreciate the ongoing works that his descendants have carried out, be it in writing, in music, or (as in the case of my BB friend JoJ) missions work.

Now, does that mean I agree with every single aspect of JRR's theology? No, I don't! [I don't even agree with every single aspect of my own pastor's theology either, BTW.] But that doesn't keep me from respecting the great work that JRR has done and the legacy that he has bequeathed to not only his own family, but also to the entire family of God.

I don't prefer to call myself a Calvinist for various reasons--not the least of which are how he viewed baptism. I do, however, firmly believe that it was God, not me, who took the initiative in saving and keeping me.

This I believe is the same outlook that the Apostle Paul had. It was the Apostle Paul who, under the inspiration of the Holy Spirit, wrote much about predestination and election and eternal security. Yet it was this same Apostle Paul who (next to Christ Himself) I believe was the greatest missionary in the NT era, if not of all times.

Rightly understood and applied, it is the doctrines of grace that should not only motivate us to go out and reach people for the Gospel, but also it is these same doctrines that will guarantee success in God's eyes for our missionary work.

Now, I know that both ends of the soteriological spectrum (as well as all points in between) have been misunderstood, slandered, maligned, and reviled by all sorts of people. I pray that I will never be one of them.

John R. Rice is just as much my deceased brother in Christ as are John Gill, and Charles H. Spurgeon (whom both C and A people will quote!).

I'm looking forward to meeting them all at the feet of Jesus.

And I'm positive that He will have to spend a lot of time correcting me for what my own theology has been too!

 

[Rippon]

I am convinced that Whitefield and Spurgeon were both influenced , by the pressure of Arminian theology in their day , to call themselves Calvinists , although neither was in actual practice and emphasis . ( pages 6&7)

RIP : To which TinyTim said "They did invite people to choose Christ." The point is:"Were they really Calvinists,or not?" A lot of their works have to be ignored to deny they were in actual practice and emphasis.

____________________________________________________________



... God in mercy , elects some men to do certain tasks ... (page 24)

Rip: To which TT said :"sounds like Calvinism to me." TT,that's not Calvinism.Calvinism teaches (as does the Bible)that election is to salvation. Election to do certain tasks is full-blown Arminianism.

_____________________________________________________________

The Bible has no doctrine of ' reprobation , ' and the Bible does not use that word , nor any word like it , in reference to predestination . It is a human word for a human conception .(page 24)

Rip: TT : The Bible teaches the doctrine of the Trinity.It's a word which can't be found in the Bible.But it's true.When Romans 9:22 speaks of "The objects of wrath -- prepared for destruction",is that not reprobation?There are many other verses also which flesh this out. You are not familiar with them?

______________________________________________________________

[ Abraham ] had the same chance for salvation that every other man has . He was no more elected to be saved than others are foreordained to be saved .( page 31)

Rip: TTdoes "chance"have anything to do with anyone's salvation?Are you denying that anyone is foreordained to salvation?Deal with Eph.1:4,5,11;2 Thess.2:13 and 2 Tim. 1:9.

________________________________________________________________

God does plan ahead in the affairs of men and works things according to His will .( page 31)

Rip: To which TT said :"Right.If God didn't he wouldn't be God."JRR had a germ of truth in his statement.But God works all things according to His will.And to say that God plans ahead is very weak.All of us plan ahead.Don't you think that the Lord deserves more respect than "plans ahead"?

_____________________________________________________________

Esau could have been saved , possibly was saved -- we don't know . No one is predestined to be saved or predestined to be lost . ( page 32)

Rip : TT said that he wasn't 100% sure Esau went to hell...that the Bible doesn't say.Does Romans 9:13 mean anything to you?Are you also unsure about the eternal destiny of Pharaoh,Judas,Cain and many more?

 

[Rippon]

This doctrine insists that we need not urge a man to turn to Christ

Rip : To which TT said :"True if God has chosen." TT,I would think that being on the BB as long as you have,that you would know better.You may be strongly anti-Calvinistic but you plainly misrepresent Calvinism at this point.Your mind is as firmly entrenched on this subject as it was when you were KJVO.

I will include my original comments below regarding the JRR quote.



( Nonsense . Preaching , exhorting , urging sinners to repent and turn to the Lord for salvation is a main thrust of Calvinism . Read sermons of Calvinists . Read Church history . )page 11
[/quote]

 

[Allan]

I love it one someone speaks the Word of God and its eternal truths in such a way that it causes some spue when they finally chew on the real meat of the Word of God insteal of peice-meal soup that is normally brought to their table.

Praise God for men like John R. Rice!
He wasn't perfect (as I'm sure he would most definately agree) but he was a great man of God!

 

[Rippon]

I love it one someone speaks the Word of God and its eternal truths in such a way that it causes some spue(sic) when they finally chew on the real meat of the Word of God insteal of peice-meal soup that is normally brought to their table.

And,since you have addressed nothing specific,your post leaves nothing to masticate upon.Bring something to the table.

 

[lbaker]

Rip : To which TT said :"True if God has chosen." TT,I would think that being on the BB as long as you have,that you would know better.You may be strongly anti-Calvinistic but you plainly misrepresent Calvinism at this point.Your mind is as firmly entrenched on this subject as it was when you were KJVO.

I will include my original comments below regarding the JRR quote.



( Nonsense . Preaching , exhorting , urging sinners to repent and turn to the Lord for salvation is a main thrust of Calvinism . Read sermons of Calvinists . Read Church history . )page 11

[/QUOTE]

It may be true that Reformed/Calvinists, etc. are evangelistic. I think the point is that if God has already chosen the elect and the elect are "locked in" regardless and through no merit or action of their own, there should be no need to evangelize as God made His choice no matter what they do or don't do. Also, what a cruel joke to evangelize and urge repentence, etc. on the unelect who cannot be saved.

 

[Rippon]

It may be true that Reformed/Calvinists, etc. are evangelistic. I think the point is that if God has already chosen the elect and the elect are "locked in" regardless and through no merit or action of their own, there should be no need to evangelize as God made His choice no matter what they do or don't do. Also, what a cruel joke to evangelize and urge repentence, etc. on the unelect who cannot be saved.[/quote]

Of course no one has any merit of their own.That's what grace is for.The point is God has mandated means for the proclamation of the Gospel.The Lord has told us what to do.No where in Scripture are we told to be passive in the process.Since the Scripture tells us to evangelize,witness etc. We should do it regardless of what you may think the logic of election will lead.

We are certaintly told to tell people to repent and believe.It is their duty to comply though they are unable.

By "unelect" I suppose you mean the reprobate who are foreordained to perdition.They will not not be saved.But it's not a joke at all.They stand condemned;especially those who have heard the Word and yet have rejected it.

And does it even need to be said that none of us know who the reprobate are?We are given the task to tell all the Good News.We then leave the matter up to the Holy Spirit.The eternal destinies of every person has been settled in eternity past within the counsel of the Trinity.

 

[pinoybaptist]

It may be true that Reformed/Calvinists, etc. are evangelistic. I think the point is that if God has already chosen the elect and the elect are "locked in" regardless and through no merit or action of their own, there should be no need to evangelize as God made His choice no matter what they do or don't do.

But neither Jesus, nor God, nor the Apostles, said the purpose of evangelization is for the eternal salvation of mankind. Man is the one who said that is the purpose. The purpose of evangelization is to teach , not save, and to baptize those who, having been taught, profess to have been among those who have a hope in Christ.

Also, what a cruel joke to evangelize and urge repentence, etc. on the unelect who cannot be saved.

And who knows who are the unelect, and who are the elect ? Not even Paul knows who they are. Nor Peter. Jesus certainly knew who they are, after all, He has their names written down in His book of Life In your case, for example, given your obvious leaning towards the "whosoever" kind of preaching, are you sure that the person who walks down the aisle during your "invitation", cries rivers of tears at the "counselling" room, and testifies every Saturday night or whatever night you call for testimonies, really "saved" ?

And are you sure that those who seemed to want to come, gripped the handrails so tight their knucles turned white, yet turned away at the end of the invitation, of the "unelect" and will remain "unelect" and damned ? Are they going to be saved because of anyone's preaching, yours or your pastor's, or that wonderfully eloquent evangelist ?

The Bible says only "God knows His works from the very beginning", and Jesus says "I know my sheep, and they know me". Only God and Jesus knows who His sheep are, and the job of an evangelist is to get to as many points of the earth as He can and proclaim a finished work of salvation, not a possible and continously ongoing one as the "whosoevers" are wont to do.

And yet so many of these whosoevers I've met and associated with are quick to ridicule the Christ of the Catholics as having never gone down the cross, forgetting that the Christ they preach continually gets crucified and resurrected everytime somebody says they got "saved".

Christ's finished work is done and there is no more redemption that is being undertaken. The task at hand, during the time at Mt. Olivet and now, is to reach as many as limited mortals can in spreading the word of a finished redemption which is intended for God's people, and to them only.