A free-standing castle of a wealthy man!Don't let appearance deceives you!
A Calvinist quote Spurgeon... and the exchanges took place
“I believe that very much of current Arminianism is simply ignorance of gospel doctrine; and if people began to study their Bibles, and to take the Word of God as they find it, they must inevitably, if believers, rise up to rejoice in the doctrines of grace.” - Charles Spurgeon
Alex
Good job. Mr Spurgeon is dead then, he must have forgotten Hebrews 6:4 and Hebrews 10:26. silly man !!
Frank
He was not silly
Davida
@Alex I would love to see how you exegete those verses. For, they are in no way contrary to the doctrines of Grace. I'm sure if we were to take out the title doctrines of grace and Arminianism you would be 100% for Spurgeon's stance.
Frank
HEBREWS 6:4 IS ABOUT WHO REALLY BELIEVED AND WERE BORN AGAIN, 10:26 ACTUALLY IS FOR THOSE WHO HE REFUSE SALVATION IN THE NAME OF JESUS AFTER KNOWING THE TRUTH.
Davida
Also, when you have a chance check out some of Spurgeon's sermons you will find that he was very blunt and outspoken on the topic of sin. www.spurgeongems.org
Sing F Lau
Not silly, just gouty, and that makes him say silly things.
Arminians read and study their Bibles well too. And they will defend their understanding vehemently too. They are not simply ignorant of the gospel doctrine... they are convinced of their beliefs.
To say 'they must inevitably, if believers, rise up to rejoice in the doctrines of grace' is just unrealistic, contrary to all observation, and WICKEDLY implies that if they do not embrace the doctrine of grace, they can't even possibly be believers in Jesus Christ! That's wicked!
"O Father, Lord of heaven and earth, that thou hast hid these things from the wise and prudent, and hast revealed them unto babes: even so, Father; for so it seemed good in thy sight."
Frank
Grace is for those who believe and receive Jesus, not superficially, but with sincerity and are born again, they will not apostate cuz the one that bean the good work in them shall finish it.
Sing F Lau
Frank, I give you a tip on understanding Hebrews:
The epistle was written to Hebrew believers (real and genuine children of God who were believers in Jesus Christ) who were tempted to revert back to the old covenant way of worship.
If you fail to understand this context, you interpretation is off from the start!!!
The Scriptures doesn't waste time with those who are not God's children. He addressed them that are His children.
Frank
We are all real and genuine children of God... the context is the same for everybody God treats everybody the same...
Davida
@Sing that you must adhere to the "Doctrines of Grace" to be saved would be erroneous. The believers final authority is not a system of theology but the Holy Scriptures. Yet, to say that you believe scripture and not the doctrines of Grace... is an oxymoron for the scriptures teach the doctrines of grace and not Arminianism. The scriptures teach that we are totally dead and can only follow the Lord once made alive BY HIM AND TO HIM. It teaches that he came and died for the elect and that those who are truly elect and saved will be sustained by him and be glorified in the end. And Christ also teaches that His sheep hear his voice and follow Him PERIOD.
These are the doctrines of Grace found in the scriptures and there is no way around that, you can play with the text and take it out of context but in the end we must all allow scripture to interpret itself.
God bless you.
[sing: I affirm the doctrine of grace, not Calvinism. The two are quite distinct!]
Davida
Hey @Sing, are you trying to say that because the book was written generally to believers that it cant address unbelievers?????
Am I understanding you correct?
Would you agree that in the scripture we see at times those who came out from us but were not of us??
Sing F Lau
The Holy Scriptures is addressed to God's children [ the elect that are regenerated by the free and sovereign grace of God, without gospel instrumentality.]
Among God's children, some are believers, and some are not yet believers. Among the believers, there are those who believe the truth of their salvation more correctly, and there are those who believe the truth of the salvation less correctly.
The gospel ministry is for the SPECIFIC and RESTRICTED purpose of bringing God's children to the truth of their salvation.
The Scriptures does speak of those who are not children of God to warn His children about them, etc.
Do you believe, like Spurgeon do, that a person who does not embrace the doctrine of grace, he can't possibly be a child of God?
Sing F Lau
David, a teacher greatly respect as a proponent of the doctrine of grace said this:
"Nobody is born into this world a child of the family of God. We are born as children of wrath. The only way we enter into the family of God is by adoption, and that adoption occurs when we are united to God's only begotten Son by faith. When by faith we are united with Christ, we are then adopted into that family of whom Christ is the firstborn."
[Don't worry about his name now.]
What do you think of his idea about adoption?
Is it doctrine of grace, or is it HERETICAL, a complete denial of the doctrine of grace? Go to my wall and rest the comments there.
So, what is the doctrine of grace? Whose definition? See the point?
Davida
You say, "does those who do not believe yet," are you suggesting that all will believe??
And yes I agree with Spurgeon, for the Doctrines of Grace is the gospel. On the other hand, I believe that there are many who consider themselves Arminians ...and are saved for they have believed the gospel but are confused by their particular tradition and have not repented of their natural way of thinking. And so though I believe that there are elect Arminians, I am very concerned for their souls.
Davida
Adoption is a doctrine of Grace and is completely biblical. I agree whole heartedly with the writer. We are all born into this world as sinners and it is only by Gods Grace through faith that we are saved. It is by Gods Sovereign Grace that He has elected and adopted us. Yet we are naturally sinners.
Davida I can give the scripture references but I am sure you know them. If not then you would have to agree that your opinions are not qualified.
Did John the Baptist not sin??
Was he not in need of a savior??
Is there any without sin??
Any who could by his own merit or goodness attain salvation??
Any who needs not the intervention of the savior Christ?
We have all fallen short brother and it is only by Grace that we are saved.
Anything other than that is Heresy. And any one who teaches a different doctrine is accursed.
You get no glory and mine and your goodness and or attempts at pleasing a Holy God is as dirty as filthy rags according to the standard of Gods righteousness.
At the end of the day God gets all the Glory. We get none!
For while we were helpless, Christ died for us.
Max
'And Calvinists Refuse To Believe That 'All' Means All Unless It Fits With Their Preconceived Theology' (Rom. 5:18,19; Rom. 11:32; 2 Cor. 5:14,15) Bj
Davida
@Max we all are clapping our hands after Hundreds of years you have finally debunked d Calvinism! Aren't you extremely wise. No really, of course we don't accept that all means all as you would attempt to define. Wanna know why???? Because it doesn't mean "all" the way you define it. Read the bible again and let it do the defining for you.
Sing F Lau
David, are you even thinking when you read that statement by a 'doctrine of grace ' teacher?
The 'reformed' view expressed by acclaimed and adored calvinist Roaring Crazy Sprawl is really the Deformed and Deficient view on adoption.
The Scriptures declare these truth about the elects, their:
- Adoption to sonship PREDESTINED in Christ in eternity.
- Adoption to sonship LEGALLY transacted by Christ at the cross.
- Adoption to sonship PERSONALIZED, vitally born as son and adopted into God's family at the effectual calling out of the native state of sin and death to that of grace and salvation.
- Adoption to sonship EXPERIENCED by faith in Jesus Christ, 'But as many as received him, to them gave he power to become the sons of God, even to them that believe on his name...'
- Adoption to sonship GLORIFIED on the day of resurrection.
Deficient:
He knows a fraction of the truth of adoption taught in the Scriptures - the experiential aspect. His picture of adoption is like a one-fingered hand, a hideous monstrosity.
Heretical:
- One whom God has not adopted as son is able to believe in order to be adopted by God as son.
- One whom God has not united to Christ is able to believe in order to be adopted by God as son.
That's what a great and adored Calvinist believes, and teaches and trains other little calvinists to believe!See More
Max
The Calvinist Watering Down Of The Word 'All' to Mean 'All Kinds', The Elect Only, Or Something Else Only Results In The Refuting Their Own Points.
Davida
Yes as a matter of fact I was thinking and what it sounds like is your trying to argue something that isn't there.
The excerpt you are using to try and slander RC does not say what you are saying he said.
Please send a link to the original statement.
Davida
And so your a Universalist, Max. I get it. Good luck trying to reconcile your erroneous definition with the entirety of scripture.
Sing F Lau
The person (a RC admirer) who posted it gave no link.
But his words are plain enough... at best the context will only show that he is inconsistent.
"Nobody is born into this world a child of the family of God. We are born as children of wrath. The only way we enter into the family of God is by adoption, and that adoption occurs when we are united to God's only begotten Son by faith. When by faith we are united with Christ, we are then adopted into that family of whom Christ is the firstborn."
The first two sentences are true. The rest are wholly diametrically opposed to free grace.
Of course to lovers of RC like you, he is incapable of errors, even though his words plainly and NECESSARILY implies these blatant humanistic view: i.e.
- One whom God has not adopted as son is able to believe in order to be adopted by God as son.
- One whom God has not united to Christ is able to believe in order to be united to Christ, then adopted by God as son.
This is a repudiation of free grace that unites an elect to Christ, and adopts into God's family... free grace divine activities that make believing by God's children (regenerated and adopted) POSSIBLE!
Davida
Max Wow I didn't catch how ridiculous your statement was the first time I read it, forgive me lol!!!
That has got to be one of the worst explanations and comparisons I have ever heard. You are trying to be funny right??
Max
Well, David This Is A Testament To Your Insincerity And Dishonesty. One Minute After I Post My Message, You Have Already Read It And Made A Judgment. Sorry, Too Long To Read And Absorb And Comment In One Minute. You Are Full Of Yourself And Your Ideas, And You Don't Listen To Anyone But Yourself.
Max
Hmm. David Is Not Using Scriptures, I Am, I Rest My Case.
Davida
@Sing I find your comments very disrespectful.
1 I'm not just an RC Lover. I'm a lover of God and all mankind.
2. In no way is RC even close to being infallible. As a matter of fact I take issue with many things he says. Yet, I can assur...e you that he did not say nor suggest what you are claiming. How can I say that? Because I have heard and read a multitude of his sermons and know that, that is not his view. How many of his sermons have you heard or reviewed? Not many, I am certain.
Why you would want to try and debunk men like RC and MacArthur I don't know but i would assume from the way you are talking it's about making yourself known. I'm not about that brother neither are they. We want to make Christ known.
Loga
Wow..lol This is all I have though, Calvinism > Arminianism
Davida
@Max there is nothing I appreciate more than dialoguing about the things of God and the doctrines of scripture. However, your bending over backwards to make scripture say what you want it to say turns me off especially when I am trying to sleep. I would love nothing more than to continue the discussion tomorrow. Truth is that the argument you bring to the table does not require any hard thinking at all, that is why i sent a response so quickly. Your view on scripture is simply erroneous. On the other hand @Sing's position I can respect and will wrestle with a little more as it is scriptural and interpreted by scripture for the most part. I hope you understand.
Sing F Lau
“I believe that very much of current Arminianism is simply ignorance of gospel doctrine; and if people began to study their Bibles, and to take the Word of God as they find it, they must inevitably, if believers, rise up to rejoice in the doctrines of grace.”
================
Max is a classic example that Spurgeon's statement above is gouty and plainly wrong. CHS is gravely mistaken!
It is NOT simply ignorance! Too patronizing of Spurgeon to say that. Max does study his Bible too, and an ardent believer in Jesus Christ, but he is still an earnest opponent of of the doctrine of grace, instead of rising up and rejoice in the doctrine of grace! Spurgeon's assessment is just to sentimental!
Max is not ignorant... but WILLFULLY reject the teaching of Scriptures that eternal salvation from beginning to end is by the free and sovereign grace of God, with those saved being completely passive. Any activity on their part is the result and effect of the salvation ALREADY bestowed upon them freely by God's sovereign grace.
Max FAILS to rightly divide the word of truth.
Loga
I honestly think trying to have a discourse via Facebook commenting is very fallible when it comes to speaking theological issues. Especially within the Calvinism and Arminian debate. I'd much rather do it via Skype w/ online friends or if the person goes to college with me, I'd talk w them about it over lunch.
Davida
@Sing I agree with you almost completely.
Davida
Yet, I agree with Spurgeon in that I believe that if everyone picked up their Bibles and studied it naked of our traditions we would all embrace the doctrines of Grace for it is simple the doctrines of scripture.
Sing F Lau
Why you would want to try and debunk men like RC and MacArthur I don't know but i would assume from the way you are talking it's about making yourself known. I'm not about that brother neither are they. We want to make Christ known.
======
I am not debunking any man. I am about defending the gospel of Jesus Christ. And RC's statements plainly promote man's role in their adoption as sons by God. When errors are promoted by teachers adored by many, they are all the more dangerous.
So, if you could keep strictly to the subject, the discussion can continue! I have no respect of men. All their words must be examined in light of Scriptures.
Sing F Lau
Yet, I agree with Spurgeon in that I believe that if everyone picked up their Bibles and studied it naked of our traditions we would all embrace the doctrines of Grace for it is simple the doctrines of scripture.
=========
Very sentimental indeed!
Just look at the harsh reality around!
The Arminians and the Calvinists are both equally militantly entrenched in their respective errors.
Davida
@Sing I'm going to bed now. We can continue this dialogue tomorrow if the Lord permits but to say that you "respect no men??" Not biblical brother you know that.
And just so you know in essence I agree with most of your doctrinal points ...where I disagree is on the subject of RC teaching what you have stated and Human responsibility. I believe that there must be a Responce to the gospel. Good night brother and may God bless you.
Sing F Lau
Response to the gospel is an effect and evidence of the salvation already bestowed by God's free grace... NOT a means or instrument to obtain that salvation.
Davida
We all have error we're wrestling with brother. That includes you and your colleagues.
"For now we see in a mirror dimly, but then face to face. Now I know in part; then I shall know fully, even as I have been fully known."
Sing F Lau
So, do you reluctantly and grudgingly admit that RC is wrong on that point?
Yes, the whole exercise is to be faithful to the Scriptures... to be conformed to its revelation.
The 'now' of Paul's words above is already PAST. Paul spoke those words when the Scriptures was not completely given, thus knowing in part only then. Now we have the complete Scriptures. That doesn't mean any one have complete knowledge of the revealed Scriptures. But it does mean a student of God's word now have the full and complete revelation, i.e. Scriptures, which Paul did not have when he wrote 1Cor.
Davida
I couldn't agree with you more on that brother. Yet, scripture is clear that there is a call and the people of God will respond. Believe and confess. Thus, the elect will show fruit. The elect produce fruit. Non-elect don't.
Sing F Lau
Thus, the elect will show fruit. The elect produce fruit.
======
That's a sentimental notion, just like's Spurgeon quote above.
That's where you are completely wrong.
The Scriptures CONSTANTLY warns God's children against fruitlessness... and stating the bare plain fact that some of God's children ARE fruitless.
This is just making factual statement. This is not approving fruitlessness.
Max
David, When One Considers It A Bad Comparison When Another Shows That Calvinists Will Believe A Verse That Says 'All' Are Depraved, Because It Fits Their Calvinist Theology, But Won't Believe That 'All' Means 'All' In The Same Verse, When I...t Speaks Of Christ Dying For All Because It Doesn't Fit Their Preconceived Notions Of Limited Atonement. To Say That The Word All Being Compared To 'All' In The Same Verse Is A Ridiculous Comparison Shows Just How Far You Have Fallen. (Romans 5:18,19; Romans 11:32; 2 Corinthians 5:14,15)
Your Ignorance Is Not Predestined, It's Clearly Your Own Stupidity That Got You Where You Are.
Sing F Lau
What is the stupid raving and ranting about the word 'all'?
Any word must always be understood in its context, and its meaning must not contradict any part of the Scriptures, because there is no contradiction in the Scriptures.
Isn't it plain enough that Jesus Christ came to do His Father's will, and not the will of the Calvinists nor the Arminians????
John 6:
38 For I came down from heaven, not to do mine own will, but the will of him that sent me.
39 And this is the Father’s will which hath sent me, that of all which he hath given me I should lose nothing, but should raise it up again at the last day.
John 17:
2 As thou hast given him power over all flesh, that he should give eternal life to as many as thou hast given him.
Jesus was super clear about His mission - to save AS MANY AS the Father has given unto him, to give them eternal life.
AS MANY AS - the idiots who occupy Wall Street know what 'as many as' mean - not one more, and not one less than the exact number.
John 3:16
'For God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have everlasting life.'
John 17:9
"I pray for them: I pray not for the world, but for them which thou hast given me; for they are thine."
The word 'world' in the two verses must be understood in its context, otherwise the interpreter will make nonsense of God's inspired word.
The word of God must be rightly divided!
2Ti 2:15
Study to shew thyself approved unto God, a workman that needeth not to be ashamed, rightly dividing the word of truth.
Stop raving, please - Calvinists and Arminians alike! Thank you.
