Comments on: As a Calvinist, do you REALLY agree with Spurgeon?

By: Robert

Robert — Fri, 25 Apr 2008 21:08:33 +0000

Nathan,
Hmmm…I read the quote…nothing “anti-Calvinistic” that I can see.

I’m not as sharp as you though…

bob

By: Nathan White

Nathan White — Fri, 25 Apr 2008 22:25:49 +0000

Bob–
I agree completely. There is nothing anti-calvinistic there. I just know that, given the Calvinistic view of evangelism/ministry, and the fact that we have less ‘converts’ that those other systems which we judge unsound…well, you see the point. I was just wondering what others thought…

By: Jim

Jim — Sat, 26 Apr 2008 14:27:34 +0000

Christ is the only Savior there is and he is promised as the Savior of all who turn to Him. Spurgeon understands (as do all good Calvinists) that we must beseech all men indiscriminately to believe in Christ . . . so they may take to themselves the promises of God . . . knowing that they are enabled to do so as the Lord quickens their dead hearts and removes their unwillingness and stubbornness.

By: JamesK

JamesK — Wed, 30 Apr 2008 01:44:46 +0000

“those who never exhort sinners are seldom winners of souls to any great extent”

This really makes it sound as if the efficacy of the Gospel and of Christ’s election depends on the knowledge, persuasiveness and skill of the preacher, doesn’t it?

I don’t think this is very “Calvinist” of Spurgeon.

By: Bill Formella

Bill Formella — Wed, 30 Apr 2008 02:36:13 +0000

Actually James, I didn’t take it that way at all. God will build His kingdom, true worshipers will be created and the Lamb will have His inheritance. However, the disobedient preacher is not likely to be blessed by God and know the joy of seeing that happen through the ministry he’s been given. His ministry will likely be charactized by “dead orthodoxy” and little real fruit.

By: Gordan

Gordan — Wed, 30 Apr 2008 12:16:08 +0000

I agree with the Spurgeon quote, but let me bring up a notion that I hear tossed around in relation to this:

A. The Sunday service is a service of Worship.
B. Only the regenerate church actually worships.
C. Since A and B, then the Sunday sermon should not be evangelistic.
D. Therefore, something other than the Gospel call is more appropriate for sermonizing on Sundays.

I agree with A and B, but don’t think that C and D have to follow from that, but I think this is what is behind it when you hear people decrying the idea of evangelizing from the pulpit.

By: Gordan

Gordan — Wed, 30 Apr 2008 12:18:18 +0000

Sorry, but I meant to include above the speculation that this idea may be a conservative reaction against the Seeker Sensitive movement. (Church isn’t for seekers, it’s for worshippers, that sort of thing.)

By: Bill Formella

Bill Formella — Wed, 30 Apr 2008 14:17:31 +0000

Gordan, I think that speculation may be somewhat accurate. I think we are sometimes guilty of over reacting to the abuses around us. I’ve seen people paranoid about repeating a chorus out of fear of being like those that emphasize building emotion over lyrical depth. The church I was a member of during the time I was brought to believe the doctrines of grace came right out and said that Sunday morning was for evangelism and Sunday evening is for teaching. Worship, of course, would be that 15 minutes of singing before everything else started. I’m sure your options C & D are a reaction to that kind of error.

On the other hand, though I’m not a preacher, I’m having a hard time understanding the difficulty of incorporating the gospel into preaching on any text. I can’t see what you might preach on that wouldn’t lead to the grace of God and a time of explaining how that grace is administered to to the sinner. Just a thought from a layman. (If you say that fast it sounds like “lame man”.)