Steven J. Lawson, The Gospel Focus of Charles Spurgeon , Part I

[BobRyan]

BobRyan



Until you can offer a real response to jn 12:32......no one is going to take you serious:thumbs:

Quoting romans 2 and trying to introduce Heb 8....is fantasyland http://www.jesus-is-savior.com/False Religions/Seventh-Day Adventist/sda_not_christian.htm

A+ on stories in that post - but not so well on actual facts.

In real life this is where we are in the john 12 discusison -

Your complaints against John 12:32 were completely resolved here #102
Then your next argument that Paul teaches salvation by works in Romans 2 was exposed here #105

After which you basically vacated the field .

How is it that when your solution runs aground on the facts of scripture -- this is "my fault"??

Rather it is up to you to improve your position so you are not so squarely opposing scripture.

obviously.

in Christ,

Bob

 

[Yeshua1]

Spurgeon was unique in that he did not let his theological distinctives impede his gospel ministry mandate. What Spurgeon understood, and what Lawson brings out in his book, is that God ordains the means of His calling sinners to repentance and faith. How shall they hear without a preacher (Rom. 10:14)?

He did not see the scriptures as stating that either the elct are already saved regardless how they responded to jesus, nor that we are to preach unto just them, as he saw that God commanded us to preach and teach jesus to all sinners, and then let God handles the saving part!

 

[Yeshua1]

A better question is "where does it show up?" for it surely does. Here is a portion of Spurgeon's 1855 revision of the 1689 Second London Baptist Confession of Faith (underlining mine):


10. Effectual Calling

1. Those whom God has predestinated to life, He is pleased in His appointed and accepted time to effectually call by His Word and Spirit, out of that state of sin and death which they are in by nature, to grace and salvation by Jesus Christ. He enlightens their minds spiritually and savingly to understand the things of God. He takes away their heart of stone and gives to them a heart of flesh. He renews their wills, and by His almighty power, causes them to desire and pursue that which is good. He effectually draws them to Jesus Christ, yet in such a way that they come absolutely freely, being made willing by His grace.

2. This effectual call is of God's free and special grace alone, not on account of anything at all foreseen in man. It is not made because of any power or agency in the creature who is wholly passive in the matter. Man is dead in sins and trespasses until quickened and renewed by the Holy Spirit. By this he is enabled to answer the call, and to embrace the grace offered and conveyed by it. This enabling power is no less power than that which raised up Christ from the dead.

3. Infants dying in infancy are regenerated and saved by Christ through the Spirit, Who works when, where, and how He pleases. So also are all elect persons who are incapable of being outwardly called by the ministry of the Word.

4. Others are not elected, although they may be called by the ministry of the Word, and may experience some common operations of the Spirit, yet because they are not effectually drawn by the Father, they will not and cannot truly come to Christ and therefore cannot be saved. Much less can men who do not embrace the Christian religion be saved, however diligent they may be to frame their lives according to the light of nature and the requirements of the religion they profess.

Interesting to me the most here is that he, like myself, held to the 5 points, and yet also saw God at work to save infants and others unable to come to jesus through mentally assertions!

 

[Yeshua1]

A+ on stories in that post - but not so well on actual facts.

In real life this is where we are in the john 12 discusison -

Your complaints against John 12:32 were completely resolved here #102
Then your next argument that Paul teaches salvation by works in Romans 2 was exposed here #105

After which you basically vacated the field .

How is it that when your solution runs aground on the facts of scripture -- this is "my fault"??

Rather it is up to you to improve your position so you are not so squarely opposing scripture.

obviously.

in Christ,

Bob

Have you come to grips though yet with the truth that the Gospel of the SDA is NOT the one Paul preached, nor Jesus Himself?

Until you do that, your reasoning on the Bible will indeed by :as thru a glass dimly"

 

[BobRyan]

A+ on stories in that post - but not so well on actual facts.

In real life this is where we are in the john 12 discusison -

Your complaints against John 12:32 were completely resolved here #102
Then your next argument that Paul teaches salvation by works in Romans 2 was exposed here #105

After which you basically vacated the field .

How is it that when your solution runs aground on the facts of scripture -- this is "my fault"??

Rather it is up to you to improve your position so you are not so squarely opposing scripture.

obviously.

I am informed that there will be substantive response to the answers given from Romans 2 and John 12:32 in the case above. That should be interesting.

I started this with #12 - but I think john 12 and Romans 2 might be a bit easier - so let's see.

in Christ,

Bob