Calvin

by

The Arminian Christ vs. The Christ of the Bible (a short addendum)

Grant Swart

The scene above pictures the absolute powerlessness of man against the elements of nature in which we live. Man and matter at the mercy of a mere ocean wave. Although it certainly is an imposing wave and a very small island, it depicts a miniature occurrence in the scope of the vastness of Creation and the (un)known universe. A single solar flare from our own sun contains sufficient energy to vaporize, in an instant, everything we recognize as our home, planet Earth and beyond.

Considering these facts, it seems ludicrous that we would even think to challenge or question the omnipotence of God in relation to our salvation, in the way that those of Arminian persuasion do. Those who believe, by their pride, that they occupy positions of particular importance before a Sovereign God and that they can ‘choose’ God on behalf of His Son; that they can simply decide by themselves to change their sinful behaviour and thereby manipulate His decision regarding their salvific position, are surely deceived.

A few months ago I wrote an article entitled The Arminian Christ vs. The Christ of the Bible. You can find it in our articles section of July 2011 or you can link to it by clicking here:. More recently, one of Charles Spurgeon’s quotes was brought to my attention (one of many by the great preacher), which illustrates his position on this exact subject. Many of his quotes are certainly worth reminding ourselves of from time to time. This one is no exception:

I do not serve the god of the Arminians at all; I have nothing to do with him, and I do not bow down before the Baal they have set up; he is not my God, nor shall he ever be; I fear him not, nor tremble at his presence…The God that saith today and denieth tomorrow, that justifieth today and condemns the next…is no relation to my God in the least degree. He may be a relation of Ashtaroth or Baal, but Jehovah never was or can be his name.” – C.H. Spurgeon

_______________________________________________________________

Copyright © For the Love of His Truth 2008 – 2013  All Rights Reserved. No part of this page or its images may be reproduced without Grant and Elmarie Swart’s  express consent. See our contact us page for email details.

by

The Christian’s Sufficiency In Christ

John Calvin

Institutes of the Christian Religion

We see that our whole salvation and all its parts are comprehended in Christ [Acts 4:12]. We should therefore take care not to derive the least portion of it from anywhere else. If we seek salvation, we are taught by the very name of Jesus that it is “of him” [1 Cor 1:30]. If we seek any other gifts of the Spirit, they will be found in his anointing. If we seek strength, it lies in his dominion; if purity, in his conception; if gentleness, it appears in his birth. For by his birth he was made like us in all respects [Heb. 2:17] that he might learn to feel our pain [cf. Heb. 5:2].

Continue reading →

by

Hyper-Calvinism: the perennial misnomer

GRANT SWART

In response to those who often refer to a group of people mistakenly labeled “hyper”-Calvinists, I felt it imperative to outline a few important distinctions between true Calvinist doctrine and what is referred to as “hyper”-Calvinism. If the 17 points I have listed below are those which supposedly distinguish and constitute “hyper”-Calvinism, then by that very implication, those points cannot also be what Calvinists believe. If those are the points which allegedly separate “hyper”-Calvinists from Calvinists, then those points cannot be ascribed to both sides, for then they would not be distinguishing points.

Nowhere in Calvin’s theology did he teach any of the 17 points which I list toward the end of this article, yet these points are perennially ascribed to those who agree with the doctrines of Grace. I might remind the reader here that TULIP was not Calvin’s invention, but was an acronym for the pronouncements of the Synod of Dort (1618) tasked with defending biblical doctrine, not Calvinism per se, against obvious destructive heresies of the time. Even so, it is clear that, when the doctrines as laid out in the five points of Calvinism or TULIP are understood, none of the distinguishing 17 points as I have listed below can be ascribed to TULIP. It is quite clear therefore that the term “hyper”-Calvinism is a misnomer and has no foundation in or relation to true Calvinism.

“Hyper”-Calvinism is a term which has been brandished as a whimsical weapon by those who Continue reading →

by

What the Bible Says about The DOCTRINES OF GRACE

Taken by Avalon - Vernelle Imaging

Romans 9:20-24

(20) But who are you, O man, to answer back to God? Will what is molded say to its molder, “Why have you made me like this?”  (21)  Has the potter no right over the clay, to make out of the same lump one vessel for honorable use and another for dishonorable use?  (22)  What if God, desiring to show his wrath and to make known his power, has endured with much patience vessels of wrath prepared for destruction,  (23)  in order to make known the riches of his glory for vessels of mercy, which he has prepared beforehand for glory–  (24)  even us whom he has called, not from the Jews only but also from the Gentiles?

Nathan Pitchford

“Ever since the Serpent first tempted Eve in the garden by casting doubt on God’s word and his character as he had revealed himself to her, mankind has always been engaged in the idolatrous pursuit of fashioning a god after his own imagination…There is no cure for this, but to cast off all our prior ideas of who we think God should be, or what we think he should mean when he speaks of his love, his grace, his justice, and his salvation, and to go to His Word for all our answers.” (from the Introduction)

DOCTRINES OF GRACE – CATEGORIZED SCRIPTURE LIST

God has recently given us the opportunity to discuss some theological issues with other Christians who believe differently than we do on a number of points, most notably the doctrines of grace. In such a circumstance, given the overwhelming supply of scriptural evidence that comes to bear on the topic, it seemed to me that the best approach would be a simple categorized scripture list: the fact that the entire paper would be scriptures, with the exception of a few brief explanatory notes, would underscore the truth that this is God’s own word and teaching; and the fact that it would be categorized would facilitate the ready comparison of scripture with scripture so as to lead one to a full-orbed understanding of the biblical teaching. Although I found a few good scripture lists of that nature available online, none of them was laid out in quite the progression that I was looking for, and so I developed my own. I’m posting it

Continue reading →

by

Free Will—A Slave


Delivered on Sabbath Morning, December 2, 1855, by the
REV. C. H. Spurgeon
At New Park Street Chapel, Southwark.

“And ye will not come to me, that ye might have life.”—John 5:40.

This is one of the great guns of the Arminians, mounted upon the top of their walls, and often discharged with terrible noise against the poor Christians called Calvinists. I intend to spike the gun this morning, or, rather, to turn it on the enemy, for it was never theirs; it was never cast at their foundry at all, but was intended to teach the very opposite doctrine to that which they assert. Usually, when the text is taken, the divisions are: First, that man has a will. Secondly, that he is entirely free. Thirdly, that men must make themselves willing to come to Christ, otherwise they will not be saved. Now, we shall have no such divisions; but we will endeavour to take a more calm look at the text; and not, because there happen to be the words “will,” or “will not” in it, run away with the conclusion that it teaches the doctrine of free-will. It has already been proved beyond all controversy that free-will is nonsense. Freedom cannot belong to will any more than ponderability can belong to electricity. They are altogether different things. Free agency we may believe in, but free-will is simply ridiculous. The will is well known by all to be directed by the understanding, to be moved by motives, to be guided by other parts of the soul, and to be a secondary thing. Philosophy and religion both discard at once the very thought of free-will; and I will go as far as Martin Luther, in that strong assertion of his, where he says, “If any man doth ascribe aught 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.

Continue reading →

by

Great theologians on the subject of animals

Grant Swart

John Calvin devoted much time in his extensive (exhaustive) teachings to animals and nature. Here is one link which describes this briefly, there are more, of course: http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_qa3817/is_199903/ai_n8845145/?tag=mantle_skin;content

It becomes obvious from this, and from much work of other similarly great theologians, that far too little attention is given to teaching on these matters in the church. People have become obsessed with human earthly matters and how to deal with those things from the point of view of the church. Adaptation to a comfortable life while attempting to conform to biblical standards.

This is a reality, even though the natural world is a subject which affects every moment of Christian’s lives, as we play our part in all of creation. It is also a very common topic of informal discussion among church members. I feel it deserves far more attention from the Continue reading →

by

Debate on Calvinism – James R White

 

by

How Charles Finney’s Theology Ravaged the Evangelical Movement

Sharing my thoughts in short.

I stumbled on this article and more, and found it important to share with those interested and who is following the teachings of Finney. I truly hope and pray this may bring some insight to those who find the Doctrines of Grace difficult. Men like Finney and others have long ago introduced heretical teachings.

Ephesians 2:8 (Amplified Bible)

For it is by free grace (God’s unmerited favor) that you are saved (delivered from judgment and made partakers of Christ’s salvation) through [your] faith. And this [salvation] is not of yourselves [of your own doing, it came not through your own striving], but it is the gift of God;

The result thus has been that some believers, believe that they must work for their salvation. This has also been the cause of many heart aching arguments that was unnecessary.

Here is prove and more that those who follow and believe Finney’s teachings are in danger of following a heretical false teacher. It is not my intent to have any discussion on this article, it is purely for information to the reader hereof. Therefore I will close the comments section on this article. We may however be emailed see our Email us page.

Continue reading →

by

Grace: Glorifying God, saving sinners

Grant Swart

These are two excerpts which I borrowed from Charles Spurgeon’s address to the inaugural ceremony of the opening of the Metropolitan Tabernacle in London. Spurgeon presided over the ceremony in which he had invited other prominent pastors to expound on the Doctrines of Grace.

The record of the entire proceedings of that day are a lengthy read, but well worth the time. From these and other similar expositions it is clear that those who deny or adapt the Doctrines of Grace, also then deny or adapt the Word of God, the essence of the Christian Faith and the perfection of the sacrifice of our Lord and Saviour, Jesus Christ.

Excerpt 1, on the origin of the Doctrines of Grace and the reason why different understandings of biblical doctrine cannot all be accepted by the true church: !

Continue reading →

by

Why I Am a Calvinist, Part 5 – 8 of 8

by Phil Johnson – Grace to You

Why I Am a Calvinist, Part 5

. . . and why every Christian is a Calvinist of sorts.

Part V: Why this issue is really a lot simpler than most people think

At the end of the previous post, I described how even in my Arminian days, I affirmed an awful lot of truth about the sovereignty of God: I would have affirmed with no reservation whatsoever that God is God; that He does all His good pleasure; that no one can make Him do otherwise; that He is in control and in charge no matter how much noise evildoers try to make; and not only is He in charge, He is working all things out for my good and His glory. As a matter of fact, my confidence in the promise of Romans 8:28 was what motivated my prayer life.

That’s Calvinism. If you believe those things, you have affirmed the heart of Calvinism, even if you call yourself an Arminian. Those are the basic truths of Calvinism, and if you already believe those things, you are functioning with Calvinist presuppositions.

In fact, the truths of Calvinism so much permeate the heart of the gospel message, that even if you think you are a committed and consistent proponent of Arminianism, if you truly affirm the gospel you have already conceded the principle points of Calvinism anyway.

Continue reading →

by

Why I Am a Calvinist, Part 1-4 of 8

by Phil Johnson – Grace to You

Why I Am a Calvinist, Part 1

. . and why every Christian is a Calvinist of sorts.  


Part I: Is Arminianism damnable heresy?

I love the doctrines of grace and don’t shy away from the label “Calvinist.” I believe in the sovereignty of God. I’m convinced Scripture teaches that God is completely sovereign not only in salvation (effectually calling and granting faith to those whom He chooses); but also in every detail of the outworking of Providence. “Whom He predestined, these He also called; whom He called, these He also justified; and whom He justified, these He also glorified” (Romans 8:30). And He makes “all things work together for good to those who love God, [i.e.,] to those who are the called according to His purpose” (Romans 8:28). Quite simply, He “works all things according to the counsel of His will” (Ephesians 1:11).

That’s what people commonly mean when they speak of “Calvinism.” When I accept that label, I am not pledging allegiance to the man John Calvin. I am not affirming everything he taught, and I’m not condoning everything he did. I’m convinced Calvin was a godly man and one of the finest biblical expositors and theological minds ever, but he wasn’t always right. As a matter of fact, my own convictions are baptistic, so I am by no means one of Calvin’s devoted followers. In other words, when I accept the label “Calvinist,” it’s only for convenience’s sake. I’m not saying “I am of Calvin” in the Corinthian sense.

Continue reading →

by

What Theology is This?

Pastor Steven J. Cole
Flagstaff, Arizona

Dave Hunt’s Misrepresentation of God and Calvinism

As I read Dave Hunt’s latest book, What Love is This? subtitled, “Calvinism’s Misrepresentation of God,” I felt both profound sadness and righteous anger. I was sad because many unsuspecting and uneducated Christians will believe that Hunt is accurate and thereby miss out on one of the richest spiritual gold mines available, namely, the life and writings of John Calvin and his heirs in the faith. I was angry because Hunt deliberately misrepresents and slanders both Calvin and Calvinism, and in the process grossly misrepresents God Himself. I know that his misrepresentation is deliberate because many Calvinists, including myself, wrote repeatedly to Hunt as the book was being written, pointing out his errors and asking him to stop misrepresenting what we believe. But sadly, he stubbornly ignored our corrections and went full steam ahead.

The resulting book is a first magnitude theological and spiritual disaster. If you rely on the supermarket tabloids as your reliable source of news, you’ll probably find Hunt satisfying for your theology. It will give you the same sort of sensational slander as the tabloids, only it is presented as if it were biblically and historically based. But if you want to grow in your knowledge of the living God, I advise you to leave this tabloid theology on the shelf.

Continue reading →

by

The Law that I love

From a sermon by Charles Haddon Spurgeon entitled “Why Am I Thus?,” delivered March 14, 1872.

Whenever you hear persons commending a low standard of religion, a low standard of morality, whenever you find them vindicating lax views of right and wrong, you may rest assured that the spirit that is in them is not the spirit of the holy God, but it is the spirit of their sinful nature; yea, the spirit of Satan may have come in to make the human spirit even worse than it was before.
by

By Faith Not Feeling

C H Spurgeon – Devotional
The just shall live by faith. (Romans 1:17)

I shall not die, I can, I do, believe in the Lord my God, and this faith will keep me alive. I would be numbered among those who in their lives are just; but even if I were perfect I would not try to live by my righteousness; I would cling to the work of the Lord Jesus and still live by faith in Him and by nothing else. If I were able to give my body to be burned for my Lord Jesus, yet I would not trust in my own courage and constancy, but still would live by faith.

Were I a martyr at the stake

I’d plead my Saviour’s name;

Intreat a pardon for His sake,

And urge no other claim.

To live by faith is a far surer and happier thing than to live by feelings or by works, The branch, by living in the vine, lives a better life than it would live by itself, even if it were possible for it to live at all apart from the stem. To live by clinging to Jesus, by deriving all from Him, is a sweet and sacred thing. If even the most just must live in this fashion, how much more must I who am a poor sinner! Lord, I believe. I must trust Thee wholly. What else can I do? Trusting Thee is my life….

Source : http://www.spurgeongems.org/fcb4.htm

by

The Pelagian Captivity of the Church

By Vernelle Imaging

by R.C. Sproul

Shortly after the Reformation began, in the first few years after Martin Luther posted the Ninety-Five Theses on the church door at Wittenberg, he issued some short booklets on a variety of subjects. One of the most provocative was titled The Babylonian Captivity of the Church. In this book Luther was looking back to that period of Old Testament history when Jerusalem was destroyed by the invading armies of Babylon and the elite of the people were carried off into captivity. Luther in the sixteenth century took the image of the historic Babylonian captivity and reapplied it to his era and talked about the new Babylonian captivity of the Church. He was speaking of Rome as the modern Babylon that held the Gospel hostage with its rejection of the biblical understanding of justification. You can understand how fierce the controversy was, how polemical this title would be in that period by saying that the Church had not simply erred or strayed, but had fallen — that it’s actually now Babylonian; it is now in pagan captivity.

Continue reading →