 |
| A new slandering the old as hyper! |
https://www.facebook.com/sing.f.lau/posts/2102432475879
October
14, 2011
A Calvinist states these about hyper-Calvinism:
1.
Denies that the gospel call applies to all who hear, OR
2.
Denies that faith is the duty of every sinner, OR
3.
Denies that the gospel makes any “offer” of Christ, salvation, or mercy to the
non-elect (or denies that the offer of divine mercy is free and universal), OR
4.
Denies that there is such a thing as “common grace,” OR
5.
Denies that God has any sort of love for the non-elect.
What
do you think of each of them... regardless of who believes or rejects them?
Let's discuss each one of them.
Joseph
Re:
#1 - affirm
Re:
#2 - affirm
Re
#3 - while the gospel is given to be disseminated generally, it will only have
its effect specially. It is to be delivered with the command to repent & be
converted to all men under its sound, yet it will only have its effect on the
regenerated elect (whether regenerate at the time of hearing or to be
regenerated at some time in the future). Since we know not the state of all men,
we as ministers are to broadcast and let the Lord work the effect.
Re:
#4 - if by "common grace" is meant the rain falling on the elect
& the non-elect, blessings on the house of a non-elect as a benefit
stemming from blessings upon an elect in their household, etc., then I agree.
If by "common grace" one means there is sufficient grace bestowed upon
the non-elect to allow for their redemption, then I proclaim
"hogwash"!
Re:
#5 - affirm. The Lord hates the wicked, and that right proper!
Michael
A belief in sovereign election and particular redemption coupled with the Fullerite idea of a "free offer" of salvation to all via the gospel makes for an uncomfortable indictment on the Veracity of God. How is the claim that God offers salvation to those who are not embraced in His covenant favor morally consistent with Divine Holiness? Our God is not schizophrenic.
Sing
The
elitist calvinists are oblivious to their utter inconsistencies and
confusion... while they haughtily bash their 'intellectually' inferior
'arminians' cousins! <LOL>
Sing
5.
Denies that God has any sort of love for the non-elect.
=====
Let's
deal with this first.
A biblical distinction is the essence of sound theology.
God,
as the Creator, in the covenant of creation, bound Himself to love and takes
care of all His creatures.
God,
as the Redeemer, in the covenant of redemption, bound Himself to love His elect
only.
Redemptive
love of the Redeemer is restricted to the elect only.
Providential
love of the Creator extends to all His creatures.
When
someone is incapable of distinguishing the two, he should just keep quiet for a
while instead of denying this and that.
knocking off!
Michael
Regarding
#4 and #5, it is crucial to distinguish between God's benevolence (His general
goodwill toward all His creatures, arising from His loving nature) and God's
love of complacency (His special, particular affection for his own and the
delight He finds in relationship with them). When Scripture speaks of God's
"love", it speaks in terms of the second definition. When His benevolence
is under consideration, it speaks of His kindness, goodness, etc (i.e.
"His tender mercies are over all His works;" "The Lord is good
to all...").
Sing
1.
Denies that the gospel call applies to all who hear...
=========
The
gospel is the good news of what HAS HAPPENED, i.e. what the Triune God has done
to save for Himself a people.
And
the gospel call is to call out those whom God has saved to believe the truth of
such salvation by the power and grace of God.
The
gospel call is IRRELEVANT to all them that are not embraced in the redemptive
work of God. To say otherwise is to impugn upon the wisdom and character of
God...
The
preacher DOES NOT need to know who the elect are to declare that the gospel
is relevant ONLY to those embraced in the redemption by Jesus Christ.
Scriptures declare plainly that Christ came to save His people... and the
gospel is relevant to His people only... and the gospel call is relevant to His
people only.
If
some preachers are schizophrenic, God is not.
God
is not like the US government. Only the USA government offers everything to the people
in the USA - legal citizens as well as illegal aliens! Worse, often favoring
the criminals.
Only
universalists can consistently insist that the gospel call applies to all who
hear... since they believe Christ died to save all, and the decision of the
hearers determines their salvation!
Sing
2.
Denies that faith is the duty of every sinner
=========
If
believing in Jesus Christ is the duty of every sinner, then Christ must have
died for every sinner.
...
if you are not a stiff-necked die-hard Arminians, you will protest that Christ
did not die for every sinner.
Ok,
if Christ did not die for every sinner, and you insist that it is the duty of
every sinner to believe that Jesus Christ is their Savior, are you not
insisting that it is the duty of some sinners to believe something which is not
true of them, i.e. to believe a fat lie.
Ah,
that your god - one who requires people to believe a lie, and permits his
servants to peddle LIES. It is like Obama telling all them illegal aliens that
they are citizens... welcome to the USA!
That
duty is imposed by some liars so that many sinners are to believe a LIE! Let God
be true but every man a LIAR!
That's
not the God I believe. The God I believe requires His people to believe the
truth of their salvation by His free and sovereign grace.
Sing
3.
Denies that the gospel makes any “offer” of Christ, salvation, or mercy to the
non-elect (or denies that the offer of divine mercy is free and universal),
==========
Please
go and offer some food to the dead, like the superstitious heathen do, before
you deny this or affirm that <LOL>
Christ
said, 'GO... FEED... FEED... FEED my sheep... lambs...'
Deceived
and deluded preachers think they are sent to go around to OFFER... OFFER...
OFFER... and offering to the dead in trespasses and sins, with the hope that
their offering may be blessed to bring eternal life to the dead!!!
Go
and FEED... but only deceived and deluded preachers believe that the Lord Jesus
tells them to go and FEED the dead!
Could
there be a greater tragedy than this confusion!This must surely be one of those
doctrines of the devils warned by Apostle Paul... 1Ti 4:1 Now the Spirit
speaketh expressly, that in the latter times some shall depart from the faith,
giving heed to seducing spirits, and doctrines of devils;
Think
about this:
Offering
salvation to those that are still dead in their trespasses and sin is plain
foolishness.... as foolish as the superstitious Chinese do offer food to their
dead ancestors! They even offer paper Rolls Royce to them.
Offering
salvation to those that are saved (already effectually called to grace and
salvation) is equally foolish, and presumptuous... the offer not only comes too
late but also irrelevant. Why offer salvation to someone whom God has already
bestowed salvation by His free and sovereign grace? Shameless presumption to do
so!
So,
to whom are the preachers, Calvinists, and Arminians alike, offering salvation?
(as though they were sent out to OFFER salvation!)
Christ
didn't send His servants out to OFFER anything. The devil does that. Christ
sends out His servants to FEED His sheep, the elect whom He has given eternal life.
They are sent to proclaim the good news of salvation to God's children, thus nourishing them with the truth of their salvation by God's free and sovereign grace.
Charles
@Joseph,
you said "whether regenerate at the time of hearing or to be regenerated at
some time in the future"
Would regeneration clearly have to be accomplished in the past before hearing?
Charles
On
the surface, I am in agreement with all the above. However
'Hyper-Calvinism" is akin to the word we use here in America to define
African Americans as "nigger". Both words are defamatory and ridiculing
You
cannot name a single hyper-Calvinist to my understanding. To my knowledge, the
closest comes to Abraham Kuyper, yet I have two of his books I read and it is
good Calvinism, no free offer!
Sing
Would
regeneration clearly have to be accomplished in the past before hearing?
========
The
issue is whether regeneration is conditioned upon hearing of the gospel,
whether the gospel is the necessary means to bring about regeneration.
The
sincere gospel regenerationists insist that without their preaching, there is
no regeneration.
Regeneration
is independent of human means.
Gospel
may have been preached to an unregenerate; he will perceive the preacher a foolish
babbler... and the gospel foolishness.
Sing
To
all the new school Calvinists, all the old school Calvinists are hyper-Calvinists.
However,
the tragedy is, many new school Calvinists are embracing bland Arminianism
now... e.g.
"Saving
faith precedes imputed righteousness."
The new school Calvinists are just a deluded bunch... they make themselves the standard.... those to their right are hyper... and those to their left are Arminians.
Sing
Would
regeneration clearly have to be accomplished in the past before hearing?
=======
Depends on what hearing you have in mind?
Without
regeneration, there would no hearing of spiritual things.
Of course, a man might have been preached to and heard the gospel outwardly... but there can be no spiritual hearing without the new birth!
Charles
The
canon of Dordt rejected the notion that regeneration and believing could be at
the same time and nearly indistinguishable and yet in essence this is precisely
the modern Reformed position. Its position is one itti bitti step into
Arminianism something they adamantly deny!!!
The
SBC is one itti bitti step going into reformed theology soon they will unite
into a one-world religion. That's syncretism for you!
Sing
The
half-baked Calvinists are calling the old school reformed people hyper not
realizing it is they themselves that have degenerated toward bland
Arminianism!!!
Charles
It
is not idle playful talk Sing, it is anguishing truth and especially for me
right now, this very morning. It is a tormenting truth that has ripped my own
family apart and when I speak to them about all this "Calvinism" they
are mean and attack me even though we have a criminal pervert as a part of our
faction. My own daughter has now said if Danny (the pervert) and Daddy are
going to heaven then I want to go to hell.
Sing
Brother,
I assure you that I experience some of those perverse hateful talk all because
we desire them to know the truth!
Truth
is no idle talk... and all who would live godly SHALL suffer persecution.
