SBC Leader Cites Calvinism as Top Challenge

NASHVILLE, Tenn. (ABP) – A Southern Baptist Convention official says one of the top challenges facing the nation’s second largest faith group behind Roman Catholics is the increasing influence of Calvinism in churches.

“I think one of the issues which is a tremendous challenge for us is the theological divide of Calvinism and non-Calvinism,” Frank Page, CEO of the SBC Executive Committee said in a blog interview posted Oct. 18 at SBC Today.

“Everyone is aware of this, but few want to talk about this in public,” elaborated Page, who assumed the post of president and CEO of the SBC fiduciary and executive agency last year. “The reason is obvious. It is deeply divisive in many situations and is disconcerting in others. At some point we are going to see the challenges which are ensuing from this divide become even more problematic for us. I regularly receive communications from churches who are struggling over this issue.”

Page, a former South Carolina pastor who served as SBC president 2006-2008, authored an 80-page booklet in 2000 titled Trouble with the TULIP: A Closer Examination of the Five Points of Calvinism. In it he termed Calvinism a “man-made” doctrine not supported by Scripture and defended what he called "the true teachings of grace."

The book countered a common acronym for the five main points of Calvinism, a theological model named after Protestant reformer John Calvin. They are: Total depravity, Unmerited election, Limited atonement, Irresistible grace and Perseverance of the saints.

Page presented an alternative acronym of GRACE. “Given through Christ, Rejected through rebellion, Accepted through faith and Christ died for all” that summarized four points of a counter view of Calvinism called Arminianism. Page’s final “E” departed from Arminian thought with “everlasting life/security of the believer, a Calvinist doctrine held by most...........

“God hardened Pharaoh’s heart after Pharaoh’s had already decided, many times, in very obvious circumstances to ignore God. This did not determine Pharoah’s fate, Pharaoh’s did.”

As a Calvinist I don’t essentially deny that. I agree that Pharoah hardened his heart (the Bible says he did). I also believe that God hardened Pharoah’s heart (the Bible says He did).

>>> You can’t pour water twice out of the same boot. If Pharoah’s fate was due to his rejection of the truth (see Romans chapter 1) then God’s further hardening of his heart did not affect his destination, rather just his behavior here on earth (by not letting the Jews free, pursuing them, etc).

How can both things be true? I don’t know. I don’t know how Jesus turned water into wine, either. But if the Bible says God hardened Pharoah’s heart - He did.

>>> Why do you imply that “hardening a heart = Fate?” This is a assumption!!! Can you prove it?

“Calvinism is “another gospel”.....If you doubt, why do we call it “Calvinism”? “

I might say why do we call your persuasion “Arminianism?”

>>>> I don’t call myself an Arminian, I don’t know anybody who does, and you just ascribed a whole bunch of beliefs onto me....Why would you want to do that? You describe yourself as a Calvinist, therefore you should defend Calvinism. There are more than two schools of thought. To not be Calvinist is does not imply anything else than not accepting a proof that is not self evident from the scriptures. Arminianism was (just as Calvinism was) a shakey structure built upon going further than the scripture supports.

I could say I believe mankind is totally lost with no possibility of saving himself, that he is elected to salvation by God before he fulfills any particular condition, that Jesus died specifically for His chosen people, that no one can resist God, and that anyone who is truly saved can never be lost.

Or I can say I’m a Calvinist. It’s shorthand.

>>>> Jesus died FOR ALL MANKIND. Some of us choose to accept his gift.
This is biblical — can you refute it? I can list dozens of scriptures that cite God’s willingness to save all mankind. So if God is all powerful, they why can’t he? Because he has by his own will, given mankind the ability to choose, we call it FREE WILL. Please try to show where God only (from time of creation) intended only his chosen be saved.

You are no doubt a Trinitarian, an inerrantist, an Arminian, a dispensationalist. None of these terms is another gospel. They are shorthand words, that’s all.

>>> I can prove the Trinity from the bible, I can prove the the source of scripture (beyond a doubt), and I am NOT a dispensationalist as YOU view it.
God does NOT change his mind. However, there are different covenants. So you might say I am a believer that Jews are saved differently (but through the same person, Jesus). This because Jesus gave us a new covenant, in his blood, vs the old covenant.

Of course I have read Romans, more times than I can count, and as you know Romans describes predestination/election more succinctly than any other book in the Bible, although most if not all books refer to it.

>>> You see through calvinistic glasses. I see through sola scriptura. You should not read what you want to into the passages to fit your view.

Summed up so beautifully in Romans 9:

“What shall we say then? Is there unrighteousness with God? Certainly not! For He says to Moses, “I will have mercy on whomever I will have mercy, and I will have compassion on whomever I will have compassion.”

>>> This says “man” has no right to question God! This is a different assertion that where does his salvation come from! Can’t you see you are taking that verse and extending it way, way beyond what it says? It’s like your child says “I don’t want to go to bed, why should I go to bed” and you say, “I am your parent, you should not question why”. God has the RIGHT to have mercy on whomever.....The question is who? What does the bible say about WHO God wishes to SAVE? Here is ONE of many instances in which God says he wants to save ALL.

<< 1 Timothy 2 >>
King James Version
1I exhort therefore, that, first of all, supplications, prayers, intercessions, and giving of thanks, be made for all men; 2For kings, and for all that are in authority; that we may lead a quiet and peaceable life in all godliness and honesty. 3For this is good and acceptable in the sight of God our Saviour; 4Who will have all men to be saved, and to come unto the knowledge of the truth. 5For there is one God, and one mediator between God and men, the man Christ Jesus; 6Who gave himself a ransom for all, to be testified in due time

>>> You need to know, the verse below you quoted says “what if” — it’s doing so because it’s showing that YOU have no right to question God — it’s NOT making the assertion — if it WERE true, the author would come right out and SAY IT!!!! —— The author would out and out say it!!!!! Again, you are reading into a passage something that is NOT there.

So then it is not of him who wills, nor of him who runs, but of God who shows mercy. For the Scripture says to the Pharaoh, “For this very purpose I have raised you up, that I may show My power in you, and that My name may be declared in all the earth.” Therefore He has mercy on whom He wills, and whom He wills He hardens.

You will say to me then, “Why does He still find fault? For who has resisted His will?” But indeed, O man, who are you to reply against God? Will the thing formed say to him who formed it, “Why have you made me like this?” Does not the potter have power over the clay, from the same lump to make one vessel for honor and another for dishonor?”

What if God, wanting to show His wrath and to make His power known, endured with much longsuffering the vessels of wrath prepared for destruction, and that He might make known the riches of His glory on the vessels of mercy, which He had prepared beforehand for glory, even us whom He called, not of the Jews only, but also of the Gentiles?”

“>>> You can’t pour water twice out of the same boot. If Pharoah’s fate was due to his rejection of the truth (see Romans chapter 1) then God’s further hardening of his heart did not affect his destination, rather just his behavior here on earth (by not letting the Jews free, pursuing them, etc).”

The Bible doesn’t say “FURTHER” hardening. You are inserting that. I can’t go with inserting things.

“Why do you imply that “hardening a heart = Fate?” “

I don’t. I believe it is God’s will being exerted. I do not believe in any type of ‘fate.’

“I don’t call myself an Arminian, I don’t know anybody who does.”

I do, it is a shorthand term from someone who believes man’s efforts/will are not constrained by God’s will, in other words, that mankind can indeed resist God’s will. I did not invent the term, it has been used since Jacobus Arminius, professor of theology at the U. of Leiden, proposed the notion. (circa 1603). Nothing new about the term.

“I can list dozens of scriptures that cite God’s willingness to save all mankind. So if God is all powerful, they why can’t he? “

He CAN. He chooses not to. As evidence of this, I point to the fact that there are people in hell; and that He is God and totally sovereign. I quoted at length a passage from Romans 9 in support of that. An honest reading can conclude nothing less.

His grace is SUFFICIENT for all; there is nothing He cannot do (except sin), but since the foundation of the world he foreknew and predestined those he would save.

We don’t know who these elect are, nor is it our job to ferret them out. It is our job to proclaim the gospel, to plead for men to turn to Christ, and to be faithful Christians ourselves.

But it is biblical to say, because it is the Bible itself that says:

“And we know that all things work together for good to those who love God, to those who are the called according to His purpose. For whom He foreknew, He also predestined to be conformed to the image of His Son, that He might be the firstborn among many brethren.

Moreover whom He predestined, these He also called; whom He called, these He also justified; and whom He justified, these He also glorified.” (Romans 8:28-30)

We must accept and believe God as He reveals Himself; not as we would design Him.

“You see through calvinistic glasses. I see through sola scriptura.”

I absolutely see sola scriptura, and will accept no other standard.

“further” in regards to TIME. Pharoah first hardend his heart.

But How could God say he will/would harden Pharoah’s heart?

When we speak, we speak as a creature in time. For example there is a different verb for past, present and future. God however, exists beyond, and across all time. God knows the beginning from the end. The is the Great “I AM” across all time. Therefore, God knew Pharoah would harden his heart, and did not affect the outcome at all, even though he to, did harden Pharoah’s heart. This is because God, unlike man, knows what actions are motive and which are not.

I have YET in 50+ years EVER met anyone (real Christian not a theological “professor”) who said they were Arminian. There however, is an admitted Calvinist behind every bush.

I believe they “get” a sense of “satisfaction” in their “chosen-ness”.

Hell was created for the imprisoned fallen angels. Man, will go there of their OWN will. As the scriptures say, some would rather curse God and die than to admit the Lordship of God.

As the earlier comment says, Predestined is from MAN’S point of view. If you look at the scripture, it’s written from the viewpoint of man trying to understand the workings of God. There IS no pre-post destiny with God. He knows all things before they happen. We mortals only can KNOW something is going to happen in the future (vs suspect it to) by causing something to happen. God can KNOW in certainty that something is GOING to happen because he exists in all time (he is omnipresent, omnipotent and created time)

It is like a man, being in a room, who can look over and see an object, feel it, and be assured it is there. God exists in time like we exist in the room. He can see our future decisions, and KNOW what will occur WITHOUT having caused the result. Therefore, he can work to conform a believer to his will, and to harden Pharoah’s heart all without affecting our free will!

What do I base this theory (interpretation) on? Subjective reasoning from the scriptures about the nature of God vs the nature of Man and the creation.

Here is the GOD I KNOW AND THE GOD I SERVE. HE IS MIGHTY WITH POWER AND NOT WILLING THAT ANY SHOULD PERISH — WHO IS YOUR GOD?

“For God so loved the world that He gave His only begotten Son that whoever believes should not perish but have everlasting life.” (John 3:16)

“[God] who desires all men to be saved and to come to the knowledge of the truth.” (1 Tim. 2:4)

“[Jesus] gave Himself a ransom for all.” (1 Tim. 2:6)

“But we do see Him who was made for a little while lower than the angels, namely, Jesus, because of the suffering of death crowned with glory and honor, so that by the grace of God He might taste death for everyone.” (Heb. 2:9)

“and He Himself is the propitiation for our sins; and not for ours only, but also for those of the whole world.” (1 Jn. 2:2)

“9 There will be tribulation and distress for every soul of man who does evil, of the Jew first and also of the Greek, 10 but glory and honor and peace to everyone who does good, to the Jew first and also to the Greek. 11 For there is no partiality with God.” (Rom. 2:9,10)

Do I take any pleasure in the death of the wicked? declares the Sovereign LORD. Rather, am I not pleased when they turn from their ways and live? Eze 18:23

“Say unto them, As I live, saith the Lord God, I have no pleasure in the death of the wicked; but that the wicked turn from his way and live: turn ye, turn ye from your evil ways, for why will ye die, O house of Israel?”—Ezek. 33:11.

You CANNOT PROVE THAT GOD is a vindictive puppet master, because he is NOT! He sacrificed himself for US SINNERS! Why would he prefer one sin over another? We have all sinned! The ONLY unpardonable sin is that of grieving the Holy Spirit — that is, namely, rejecting God. So again, this leads us back to free will.

If there is no free will, then there is no sin! For how can we do anything other than the will of God? The idea of a Predestination (as defined by modern Calvinists) mean that the wages of sin only “apply” to those that God has chosen not to forgive, in effect by predestining then to hell (the dreaded double predestination). How can you have predestined to Heaven without Predestined to Hell? To argue one without the other is about as intelligent an argument as how many angels can dance on the head of a pin.

In summation, Calvin postulated in a cause/effect world, where God reasons and acts in time just as a man. This is not the case. God is above and beyond time and space. He limited himself to one particular time/space when he lowered himself to become Jesus Christ. However, as GOD, he knows the beginning from the end (Isaiah 46:10, Rev 22:13). I know there is a lot of effort expended by Calvinists to place God IN time. But if Time exists outside of God (e.g. he did not create it), then is God really God? Was there a time when God was NOT God, or when he will NOT be GOD? Clearly, the idea that God did NOT create time LIMITS GOD (which is the same libel that Calvinists use when describing those who believe in free will).

I worship a BIG GOD. I don’t believe in a petty, “god” who might not have existed sometime before. I believe in a God that created time, matter, and every atom. In fact, If it were not for God’s constant FORCE, the universe would evaporate — Col 1:17 — We look in vain for why atoms “stay” together, when you add the weak and strong forces, and even look at the total forces at play, our universe should not exist — but it does, why? Col 1:17. The never will find the “God” particle until they find God himself.

The Bible says He hardened Pharoah’s heart. I don’t know how else to put it. There it is. That is what it says.

Similar illustrations of God enabling us to trust in Him:

- Ezekiel preaching to the dry bones, which were just plain old dead, and could not respond, until God caused them to respond.

- We are told in Scripture that we are DEAD in our trespasses and sins. We learn from Scripture that dead means not alive, unable to respond. We can’t.

- Esau sought repentance but could not find it, although he sought it with tears.

I could go on and on.

I serve a big God, too, but I do acknowledge Him as He describes Himself. Just because we don’t like it or don’t understand it doesn’t mean it’s not true.

“I believe they “get” a sense of “satisfaction” in their “chosen-ness”.”

Well, I hope not. One could accuse an Arminian of getting a sense of satisfaction that they in their wisdom decided to believe in Jesus. Those who don’t are by implication stupid or weak or whatever.

I don’t accuse Arminians of this, but, I could, and I don’t think it is fair for you to make that statement of all Calvinists. I believe anyone who trusts in Christ is a brother in Christ, whether we fully grasp all the behind the scenes work of the Holy Spirit or not.

I agree that God is not bound by time, however, he reveals Himself in a time oriented framework constantly, whether by the rising and setting of the sun or the deliverance of Israel from Pharoah or the finding of Ruth by Boaz or His appearance in the fiery furnace of Daniel or the birth in time and history of Jesus.

“Man, will go there (hell) of their OWN will. As the scriptures say, some would rather curse God and die than to admit the Lordship of God.”

I actually agree with you, there, we are all hell bound and express our desire to be there every time we sin. Mercifully, God rescues some of us. He is not bound to rescue any. I attribute it to His mercy that he saves some; I don’t attribute our damnation to anyone but ourselves.

“(real Christian not a theological “professor”)”

That’s a little harsh, there, some of our greatest pastors etc. over the years have been theological professors, it is a great and noble calling and should not be denigrated.

“Therefore, he can work to conform a believer to his will, and to harden Pharoah’s heart all without affecting our free will!”

I know, I have not denied that man has a free will, I have simply acknowledged that God is somehow sovereign over all.

Similarly, I confirm that Jesus is God AND man. I don’t deny one to affirm the other.

Similarly, I confirm that there is one God in three persons. I don’t deny the one to affirm the other.

“You CANNOT PROVE THAT GOD is a vindictive puppet master, because he is NOT!”

I have no desire to prove any such thing, God is a God of mercy who offered us salvation when we did not deserve it. To imply such demonic blasphemy on my part is sinful of you.

Please explain how you get from “harden his heart” in regard to Pharoah’s dealing with the Jews to the eternal abode of the soul of Pharoah.

You are ASSUMING Pharoah is lost. This may NOT be true. Do you know what Pharoah’s last actions were toward God? Might he have not come to believe before his eventual death? What about Judas? What is his abode? Do you know?
I do not. I do KNOW what Jesus called him, when he came to betray Jesus.

“And Jesus said unto him, Friend, wherefore art thou come? Then came they, and laid hands on Jesus, and took him.” Matthew 26:50

I find it HIGHLY PRESUMPTUOUS to THINK we know something about the eventual destination of souls. I think many who THINK they will be there, will no be, and vice versa. To think otherwise puts too much stock in the ideas of man.

We are DEAD in our trespasses. However, man is created as a dim image of God. We have a three-ness in our person (1) Body (2) Spirit (3) Soul. Our body is dead, dead, dead from day one. Our Soul is dying, and our Spirit (the flesh) is self-centered. This is why man cannot redeem himself. However, the Holy Spirit comes to man, and IF he accepts the light God gives, God is faithful to give more. In this manner, man is brought to life. It does not require participation in a Heavenly “lottery”.

The Dry bones is a picture of Israel, or household salvation, not individual salvation.

Because you (or Esau) seeks repentance with tears does NOT mean he accepted the TRUTH.....The bible says to be saved we must believe, not “cry” or “seek repentance”. You have the cart in front of the horse!

I do believe “systematic theology” taught at seminary is wrong. We are instructed to work out our own salvation with fear and trembling (do I need to quote the verse?) What part of “teaching” something like Calvinism, or infant baptism, or any other such “constructs” on top of the bible do to help spread the Gospel? Nothing - in fact, they detract from the spread of the Gospel.

We were warned to not follow the Nicolaitans? I believe the Nicolaitans to be those who attempt to build on the foundation of the church by ruling over (placing their stamp) by means of a particular theology.

What qualifies a Seminary attendee to rightly divide the word of God more so than a believer? Is not this “our version” of the Pope? Now for matters of church discisple, yes. But as to such imporatant matters as salvation? Let every man work out his own salvation with fear and trembling....I stand with the bible, not the works of man, be he 300 years old, highly esteemed, etc is no matter. Many good men have fallen - in fact, Satan loves to wreck havoc on ministers. This is why the high rate of divorce/adultery amongst the flock.

I have noticed two types of Protestants who have an even higher than normal rate of this -— (1) Pentecostal (2) Presbyterian.....others runs far behind. Why? Both have “specialness”. Pentecostals believe “only” them have the “gift” of tongues and are the true Christians. Presbys are so steeped in Calvinism that their salvation is often taken for granted. For awhile I attended a “Reformed” Church, but since they were a one-note johnny on preaching Calvinism, we left. Why would we join anyway? Because we, unlike Presbys DON”T BELIEVE Calvinism has ANYTHING to do with salvation, period. After 5 years, we heard about 3 sermons on something other than a relation (somehow) to Calvinism.

Calvinism is a side-show. Invented to make people feel better about themselves, and while doing so, distract them from reaching out to the lost in the world.

What about Calvinism “helps” an unbeliever, or a believer?

Look at Paul’s Gospel — when it came to spiritual gifts, or the manner of presenting the Gospel, he looked at how it affected both believer and unbeliever. Calvinism is not good for either.

“I find it HIGHLY PRESUMPTUOUS to THINK we know something about the eventual destination of souls.”

I’ll agree, but I’ll state the God does, and that He reveals this in some instances. For example the statement that Esau could not find repentance, or that God hardened Pharoah’s heart (and Pharaoh died persecuting God’s people), well, I take these at face value. God states these things for a reason.

As for my own soul, as God tells us in 1st John 5:13,

“These things have I written unto you that believe on the name of the Son of God; that ye may know that ye have eternal life, and that ye may believe on the name of the Son of God.”

Now if God tells me he writes these things that I may KNOW that I have eternal life, well, I take Him at His word.

“What about Judas? What is his abode? Do you know?”

Well, the Bible says it is better for him that he had not been born.

Matthew 26:24 “The Son of Man indeed goes just as it is written of Him, but woe to that man by whom the Son of Man is betrayed! It would have been good for that man if he had not been born.”

Based on that, I believe he is in hell. Because if he is in heaven, well, obviously, it would have been a good thing that he was born.

“However, the Holy Spirit comes to man, and IF he accepts the light God gives, God is faithful to give more. In this manner, man is brought to life. It does not require participation in a Heavenly “lottery”.”

You keep implying that I make assertions that I don’t make. I do not believe in any heavenly lottery. I believe God foreordained before the foundation of the world those he would save. That’s not a lottery. That’s God, a personal God, exercising His will, which he has a perfect and total right to do.

“I do believe “systematic theology” taught at seminary is wrong. We are instructed to work out our own salvation with fear and trembling (do I need to quote the verse?)”

It can be wrong, and we must examine it in light of Scripture. That is every Christian’s responsibility. However, the apostles are ordained and instructed to go and teach, elders are instructed to teach and preach, even us laypeople like Aquila and Priscilla, take people aside and show them a better way. We are supposed to be taught (only biblically) by others. That is what our church elders or bishops, depending on your translation, are for. They are to be apt to teach. Not sitting silently and leaving us alone.

“We were warned to not follow the Nicolaitans? I believe the Nicolaitans to be those who attempt to build on the foundation of the church by ruling over (placing their stamp) by means of a particular theology.”

I think they were just positing bad theology. We must be ever vigilant. Satan is like a roaming lion, seeking whom he may devour. So we have those who add to Scripture (like Jehovah’s Witnesses), those who take away (like miracle deniers), those who twist (Jesus only Pentecostals), etc.

“What qualifies a Seminary attendee to rightly divide the word of God more so than a believer? Is not this “our version” of the Pope?”

I think ordination by a Bible believing congregation generally qualifies him. That is what we find in Titus, where God instructs us as to choosing rulers who are to spend their time in the word of God and prayer, exercising church discipline, etc. I don’t think it’s seminary attendance. Anyone can attend seminary. It is harder to get ordained, and God makes it so.

Of course bad men can get ordained. Bad men can get baptized, too, there is no fool proof system where sinful men get involved. However, sticking to Scripture, you must choose elders as instructed in Titus and elsewhere and trust God for the result. Whether they attended seminary or not is up to the congregation, it seems to me. I do think a good seminary has value, in that the older men (like Paul) mentor the younger (like Timothy), I think there is a pattern established there.

“What about Calvinism “helps” an unbeliever, or a believer?”

If it’s biblical truth, it helps. It reveals more to us about who God is, and about who we are in relationship to Him.

“What part of “teaching” something like Calvinism, or infant baptism, or any other such “constructs” on top of the bible do to help spread the Gospel? Nothing - in fact, they detract from the spread of the Gospel.”

Well, I believe that teaching that God is sovereign, offers us all salvation, paid the price for such on Calvary, and, although he is under no obligation, out of His incomprehensible mercy and love makes us willing and able to believe in Him, is the Gospel. As for infant baptism, what a gorgeous picture of salvation - just like the Hebrew infants of long ago, circumcised as a sign of their belonging to God’s covenant people, so a baby today, baptized as a sign of his belonging to God’s covenant people - he did not earn it, he simply receives the grace bestowed - it is a wonderful illustration of God’s love.

But many are Calvinists who don’t go along with infant baptism, I’ll put down some great quotes by Charles Spurgeon, the Prince of Preachers, in the next comment.

It is no novelty, then, that I am preaching; no new doctrine. I love to proclaim these strong old doctrines that are called by nickname Calvinism, but which are truly and verily the revealed truth of God as it is in Christ Jesus. By this truth I make my pilgrimage into the past, and as I go, I see father after father, confessor after confessor, martyr after martyr, standing up to shake hands with me . . . Taking these things to be the standard of my faith, I see the land of the ancients peopled with my brethren; I behold multitudes who confess the same as I do, and acknowledge that this is the religion of God’s own church. (Spurgeon’s Sovereign Grace Sermons, Still Waters Revival Books, p. 170).

I have my own opinion that there is no such thing as preaching Christ and Him crucified, unless we preach what nowadays is called Calvinism. It is a nickname to call it Calvinism; Calvinism is the gospel, and nothing else. I do not believe we can preach the gospel if we do not preach justification by faith without works; nor unless we preach the sovereignty of God in His dispensation of grace; nor unless we exalt the electing unchangeable eternal, immutable, conquering love of Jehovah; nor do I think we can preach the gospel unless we base it upon the special and particular redemption of His elect and chosen people which Christ wrought out upon the cross. (Charles Spurgeon, The New Park Street Pulpit, Vol. 1, 1856).

... and I will go as far as Martin Luther, in that strong assertion of his, where he says, ‘If any man doth ascribe of salvation, even the very least, to the free will of man, he knoweth nothing of grace, and he hath not learnt Jesus Christ aright.’ It may seem a harsh sentiment; but he who in his soul believes that man does of his own free will turn to God, cannot have been taught of God, for that is one of the first principles taught us when God begins with us, that we have neither will nor power, but that He gives both; that he is ‘Alpha and Omega’ in the salvation of men. (C.H. Spurgeon from the sermon “Free Will A Slave”, 1855).

You must first deny the authenticity and full inspiration of the Holy Scripture before you can legitimately and truly deny election. (Charles Spurgeon, Sermons, Vol. 3, p.130).

When I was coming to Christ, I thought I was doing it all myself, and though I sought the Lord earnestly, I had no idea the Lord was seeking me. I do not think the young convert is at first aware of this. I can recall the very day and hour when first I received those truths in my own soul - when they were as John Bunyan says, burnt into my heart as with a hot iron; and I can recollect how I felt that I had grown all of a sudden from a babe into a man - that I had made progress in scriptural knowledge, through having found, once for all, the clue to the truth of God ... I saw that God was at the bottom of it all, and that He was the Author of my faith, and so the whole doctrine of grace opened up to me, and from that doctrine I have not departed to this day, and I desire to make this my constant confession, I ascribe my change wholly to God. (Charles Spurgeon, Autobiography: 1, The Early Years, Banner of Truth, pp. 164-165).

George Whitefield said, “We are all born Arminians.” It is grace that turns us into Calvinists. (Charles Spurgeon, Sermons, Vol. 2, p. 124).

Calvinism did not spring from Calvin. We believe that it sprang from the great Founder of all truth. (Charles Spurgeon, Sermons, Vol. 7, p. 298).

We declare on scriptural authority that the human will is so desperately set on mischief, so depraved, so inclined to everything that is evil, and so disinclined to everything that is good, that without the powerful, supernatural, irresistible influence of the Holy Spirit, no human will ever be constrained toward Christ. (Charles Spurgeon, Sermons, Vol. 4, p.139).

I do not come into this pulpit hoping that perhaps somebody will of his own free will return to Christ. My hope lies in another quarter. I hope that my Master will lay hold of some of them and say, “You are mine, and you shall be mine. I claim you for myself.” My hope arises from the freeness of grace, and not from the freedom of the will.

I believe that Christ came into the world not to put men into a salvable state, but into a saved state. Not to put them where they could save themselves, but to do the work in them and for them, from first to last. If I did not believe that there was might going forth with the word of Jesus which makes men willing, and which turns them from the error of their ways by the mighty, overwhelming, constraining force of divine influence, I should cease to glory in the cross of Christ. (C.H. Spurgeon, Sermons, Vol. 3, p. 34).

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.