#Hyper_Calvinism
"Hyper-calvinism," so loathed by
the new-school Calvinists, is the only true "Calvinism", true and
faithful to the original."
That is most certainly true.
For example, John Gill, in his day, was representative of the 'Calvinism' of his era. His exposition of the biblical
doctrine of grace was highly respected and esteemed by all his contemporary
'Calvinists' from different denominations.
Gillism was the ONLY Calvinism of his day; Fullerism that arose later and peddled as Calvinism is a
perversion.
Dr. Robert L. Reymond, in his 'A New
Systematic Theology of the Christian Faith' (Thomas Nelson, 1998) describes
John Gill (1697-1771), the author of 'The Cause of God and Truth' (1735-38) in these words:
"A Baptist puritan pastor, writes a THOROUGH (emphasis mine) defence of
Calvinistic theology." (Selected General Theological Bibliography, page 1137)
A theological giant who wrote a thorough
defence of Calvinistic theology in his days is loathed and slandered as a
hyper-Calvinist by dwarves of latter days.
This is how strange things can be.
=====
Niko J. Andrews
@Sing. I don't know if I'm "hyper"
or not; for I possess a great amount of peace. LOL But truthfully though, I’ve
had more than my fair share of “run-in’s” with the Fuller crowd… 🙂
Sing
"Gillism' is the only biblical calvinism
there was, and is, and shall be.
When 'fullerism' (the new and popular form of
calvinism promoted by the new school theologians) first came on the scene it
was soundly condemned by the calvinists of his time as heresy.
But time has changed - Fullerism is the new Calvinism of this generation. They have left the BIBLICAL teachings of the old-school theologians. So, they slander them as hyper - showing themselves FALLING
SHORT of their forefathers (they claim so, even though they are really
bastards!)
They departed from the original 100 miles,
then they realised their errors, and they moved back 20 miles, and they
sincerely thought they had returned to where their fathers were!
How time has changed. It is very easy to
SLIDE away from the original. Human nature, basically Arminian to the core, is
strongly inclined towards FULLERISM.
It requires great effort to resist that tendency
to drift away from the ORIGINAL.
Sing
As a general rule, it is HARD (not
impossible) to go beyond the truth revealed to us in the Scriptures, but it is
VERY EASY to fall short of the standard.
Why? Man's heart is deceitful above all
things, and desperately wicked: who can know it?
In doctrines, very many prefer those that
are 'wide' and 'broad' - they are more suited to man's nature!
Matthew 7:
13 Enter ye in at the strait gate: for wide
is the gate, and broad is the way, that leadeth to destruction, and many there
be which go in thereat:
14 Because strait is the gate, and narrow is
the way, which leadeth unto life, and few there be that find it.
(Please note, the passage DOES NOT say
'eternal life'... NOR DOES it say 'eternal hell'! This is not a passage about
eternal salvation - how to be saved by God! It is a passage about discipleship
- how to live as God's children.
Niko J. Andrews
@Sing…Matthew 7: 13 Enter ye in at the strait gate: for wide
is the gate, and broad is the way, that leadeth to destruction, and many there
be which go in thereat:14 Because strait is the gate, and narrow is the way,
which leadeth unto life, and few there be that find it.
You said: “(Please note, the passage DOES NOT
say 'eternal life'... NOR DOES it say 'eternal hell'! This is not a passage
about eternal salvation - how to be saved by God! It is a passage about
discipleship - how to live as God's children.”
My reply: although I agree with your basis
about not going beyond Scripture as a rule; it is the second part to which I
differ. This passage in Mathew 7 does indeed not say anything ‘specific’ about
eternal salvation or hell, but the implication is clearly present in this
verse. How so? Well, the Greek word being used here is Apoleia, which means
destroying, utter destruction of vessels, or the destruction which consists of
eternal misery in hell. The same Greek word is used elsewhere for instance…
“What if God, willing to shew his wrath, and
to make his power known, endured with much longsuffering the vessels of wrath
fitted to destruction: 23 And that he might make known the riches of his glory
on the vessels of mercy, which he had afore prepared unto glory” (Rom. 9:22)
And…
“Let no man deceive you by any means: for
that day shall not come, except there come a falling away first, and that man
of sin be revealed, the son of perdition.” (2 Thes. 2:3)
And…
“But they that will be rich fall into
temptation and a snare, and into many foolish and hurtful lusts, which drown
men in destruction and perdition.” (1 Tim. 6:9)
Then, there are several other verses which
also carry the same intent being: destruction, perdition and even eternal fire
or damnation along with them.
While I do agree and believe the point of
your comment is accurate about ‘the straight and narrow road’ of discipleship,
the need and requirement; this particular text, I do not believe, makes the case
perhaps as well as some other verse might. Should you want some verses which
more clearly illustrate your point, let me know and I will try to find a few
that bring out the full intent of your admirable position. 😉
Sing
Nicholas @ My reply: although I agree with your
basis about not going beyond Scripture as a rule, it is the second part to
which I differ. This passage in Mathew 7 does indeed not say anything
‘specific’ about eternal salvation or hell, but the implication is clearly
present in this verse. How so? Well, the Greek word being used here is Apoleia,
which means destroying, utter destruction of vessels, or the destruction which
consists of eternal misery in hell. The same Greek word is used elsewhere, for
instance…
===========
That 'the same Greek word is used elsewhere'
means nothing more than that THE SAME SOUNDING WORDS are used elsewhere. It does
not necessarily mean those same SOUNDING words have the same SENSE!
Mt 7 passage speaks of the life and
destruction that is CONDITIONED upon man's activities. Unless you want to DENY
eternal salvation wholly and solely and completely by the FREE grace of God,
you can consistently choose to interpret the passage as teaching eternal
salvation and damnation.
Rom 9 passage speaks of the God's sovereign
act of election.
So, the same sounding words are used in very
different CONTEXT!
Three sound rules of interpretation:
1st: CONTEXT, 2nd: CONTEXT, and 3rd: CONTEXT!
Beware of SOUND-BYTE-ism!
Kate Richardson
I would be content to be called a (real)
Christian. All the Gill's and Pelagian's, and Henry's, and Fuller's mean
zip-zero to me.
Niko J. Andrews
Sing F Lau. I get it. Now you're a Greek
Scholar? Sing, establish yourself, preferably in the Truth rather than your own
wisdom! I gave you only three verses as an example; you refuted only one. There are about fifteen more which support what I stated. But the simple fact is that
a word, even in the Greek language, with sometimes several connotations, still
has a meaning! That’s why we study, write, speak, and don’t just grunt! Go
ahead; build a premise which supports discipleship, of which I would agree. I’m
just asking you to do so with actual text which sustains it properly, that’s
all.
Sing
@Nicholas, If you interpret Mt. 7:13,14 to
mean Eternal life, then doesn't that also mean that unless one walks the narrow
way they are doomed to hell? You claim you believe in salvation by Grace, but
then you skirt around it by saying salvation is by and through works.
As Bro.
Sing put it so plain: these verses are for the Lord's sheep, NOT a way to
obtain Eternal life.
Sing
Nicholas, I am no Greek scholar at all. But I
am a student of God's word in KJT. I surely hope you are not saying that one
needs be a Greek scholar before he can learn and know the word of truth.
You gave me 3 verses, and I at least
entertained one of them! Why do I need to entertain another one when they are
automatically disposed off because the principle involved is the same? I am
puzzled.
Perhaps you can tell us what you want to make
the other two verses to say... then I will comment on them.
Sing
"I would be content to be called a
(real) Christian. All the Gill's and Pelagian's, and Henry's, and Fuller's mean
zip-zero to me."
========
That NO DOUBT sounds sweet and pious!
But not very helpful, though!
Niko J. Andrews
@ Sing. Perhaps there really is an English
barrier here?
Sing F Lau
@Nicholas - Chinese my first language, Malay
my second, English my third... that's the best I can do! So, please be very
patient with me. I am just proficient enough to communicate decently.
If anything comes across as unclear, I will do my
best to clear it up.
Niko J. Andrews
Jerry Chapin, you said; If you interpret Mt.
7:13, 14 to mean Eternal life, then doesn't that also mean that unless one
walks the narrow way, they are doomed to hell? You claim you believe in
salvation by Grace, but then you skirt around it by saying salvation is by and
through works. As Bro. Sing put it so plain: these verses are for the Lord's
sheep, NOT a way to obtain Eternal life.
I did NOT say eternal life, friend. Read what
I said; I only stated what the actual Greek word was referring to; perish can mean
TEMPORAL or ETERNAL DESTRUCTION. Secondly, your inference is quite incomplete, is it not? For Jesus states that “few” find it, which some point out refers to
the ‘elect’ of God anyway. Lastly, if this verse is pertaining to the sheep, which I am not denying, please give me your complete exegesis of the passage
without going off on me, which is what you did quite arrogantly, I might add…
Again, the word is: Apoleia; which means
destroying, utter destruction of vessels, or the destruction which consists of
eternal misery in hell. Now, however you wish to interpret the passage is
entirely up to you. The text, again as a reminder, is; “Enter through the narrow
gate. For wide is the gate and broad is the road that leads to destruction, and
many enter through it. But small is the gate and narrow the road that leads to
life and only a few find it.” (Mat. 7:13)
Niko J. Andrews
@Sing. Good enough for me. First of all, I do
not think we actually disagree, but instead are not communicating effectively.
As you know, I adhere to the doctrine of grace, but do not see this text as a
disciple training verse.
I rather view it as a testimony to the fact
that only very few; the elect of God, will enter eternal life since the road is
extremely narrow (Thlibo; Greek: constricted). The road which is quite large
(Euruchoros; Greek: spacious) will lead many to destruction since they are not
chosen and neither were they loved by God from before the foundation of the
world. I hope this helps…
Sing F Lau
@Nicholas. Ok let talk a bit over Mt 7:13-14.
Concerning the 'few' and the 'many' - don't
they belong to the same category, from the same common pool? Do I make sense?
Anyway I have written a bit on the passage
here: "Which gate, and which way, for you?" here -
https://things-new-and-old.blogspot.com/2009/10/which-gate-and-which-way-for-you.html
I will consider any reasonable objection...
Jerry Chapin
Bro. Sing, I completely agree with your
interpretation of these verses. To make them say anything else, and apply them
to an Eternal sense rather than a timely condition, IMHO, it contradicts other
Scripture, i.e;
"After this I beheld, and Lo, a great
multitude, which no man could number, of all nations, and kindreds, and people
and tongues, stood before the throne, and before the Lamb, clothed with white robes.
and palms in their hands. And cried with a loud voice, Salvation to our God,
which sitteth upon the throne, and unto the Lamb." Rev. 7:9,10
Jerry Chapin
To make this into an Eternal proposition
makes Heaven almost unpopulated...what do you do with the multitudes which no
man could number?? I simply don't see how this can be anything other than a
destruction of the life of an Elect who enters into the Broad Way and misses
the joy and happiness to be found walking the Narrow Way.
Niko J. Andrews
@Sing. Thanks for the link. Btw, the word
translated "strive" just means to enter, period. Eiserchomai, Greek
(verb), more accurately should be; to go out or come in: to enter, or to arise,
come into existence, begin to be.
While after reading your blog, I can partly
agree with your premise, I still find the conclusion evasive and extraneous to
a degree. I don’t know; maybe I’m dense here, but open to hear more. Perhaps you
have other passages which may support your end result? Thanks.
Sing
Nicholas@ "Btw, the word translated
"strive" just means to enter, period. Eiserchomai, Greek (verb), more
accurately should be: to go out or come in: to enter, or to arise, come into
existence, begin to be."
=======
'Strive' - to my common-sense English just
means 'to labour fervently' or 'to endeavour with strenuous zeal' in order to
achieve something.
I take it that ONLY those whom God has given
eternal life are able to strive to enter the strait gate and walk the narrow
way. If we cannot agree with this simple premise, then we are not on the same
page.
Do you enter the gate to come into existence?
I always thought one must exist first before he can enter the strait gate and
walk the narrow way...
ONE MUST HAVE ETERNAL LIFE FIRST BEFORE HE
CAN WALK IN THE WAY OF LIFE? Maybe I am just simple and naive - actually, that's all I am.
Just what do you think, I am evasive and
extraneous? Please elaborate. I will do my best to relieve you of that
discomfort.
Keep on talking. For in this way we are all
driven closer to the Scriptures.
Niko J. Andrews
@Sing. You said, " ' Strive '- to my common-sense English just means 'to labour fervently' or 'to endeavour with strenuous
zeal' in order to achieve something."
I am not saying that the English word does
not mean such. What I am telling you is that the word translated
"strive" in the KJV is incorrect. The passage is not in Mathew, but
in Luke 13:24. Here the word means to contend, to take very seriously.
(Agonizomai, Gr.)
You say; "I take it that ONLY those whom
God has given eternal life are able to strive to enter the strait gate and walk
the narrow way. If we cannot agree with this simple premise, then we are not on
the same page." I concur exactly. Amen.
You say; "ONE MUST HAVE ETERNAL LIFE
FIRST BEFORE HE CAN WALK IN THE WAY OF LIFE? Maybe I am just simple and naive
- actually, that's all I am." Again, I concur exactly. Amen.
So where is the dilemma? Probably it’s in how
you state your case and sentiments. I realize that you are not a master of the
English language; quite frankly neither am I. But I may be able to assist you
somewhat in explaining yourself a little more clearly. If that interests you,
let me know? May God grant your heart’s desire according to His grace and
appointed time... 🙂
Sing
Nicholas, go right on. Render your assistance
so that I may explain myself a a little more clearly. That would be of great
help.
Sing
Nicholas @ "I am not saying that the
English word does not mean such. What I am telling you ...is that the word
translated "strive" in the KJV is incorrect. The passage is not in
Mathew, but in Luke 13:24. Here the word means to contend, to take very
seriously. (Agonizomai, Gr.) "
=============
Why is 'strive' incorrect? The word 'strive'
is a very active word, and implies great effort, exertion and labour.
Perhaps you think to transliterate the word
as 'to agonize' would be more suitable.
Niko J. Andrews
Love you brother! You've got a lot to share
and add I can see, but appear to just become a little more straight forward.
People have short attention spans and "sheep" are not that bright,
either. LOL 😉
Niko J. Andrews
Agonize is the logical root, but it does not
bring out the whole meaning. To earnestly contend, take seriously, to strain,
to consider all worth the cost. This may be better adapted for your purpose, and
the Greek implies this, as well. Does that help?
Niko J. Andrews
Btw, what can be the point of the word;
destruction do you suppose? (Apoleia, Gr.)
Sing
To this Chinese lad in the south seas,
"To earnestly contend, take seriously,
to strain, to consider all worth the cost..." is another nice way of saying
"'to labour fervently' or 'to endeavor
with strenuous zeal' in order to achieve something."
However, to me 'to content' presupposes the
presence of enemies. You don't have to content when you don't have enemies.
'To strive' presupposes difficulties, within
and without, that need to be overcome in order to make progress.
Do I make sense?
Sing
So, is Mt 7:13-14 speaking of eternal
salvation?
Niko J. Andrews
YES! Good.
Niko J. Andrews
So, is Mt 7:13-14 speaking of eternal
salvation?
Nope
