Forum Search
Member Spotlight
Anthony C.
Anthony C.
NJ/PA
Posts: 706
Joined: May 2016
Forum Statistics
Forums31
Topics8,376
Posts56,576
Members992
Most Online4,295
May 22nd, 2026
Top Posters
Pilgrim 15,047
Tom 4,893
chestnutmare 3,466
J_Edwards 2,615
John_C 1,906
Wes 1,856
RJ_ 1,583
MarieP 1,579
Robin 1,080
Top Posters(30 Days)
Pilgrim 34
Tom 3
John_C 2
Robin 1
Recent Posts
The Glorious Security of the Children of God
by NetChaplain - Mon Jun 08, 2026 11:52 AM
"There fell down many slain, because the war was of God."
by Pilgrim - Mon Jun 08, 2026 7:47 AM
"Ye that love the Lord hate evil."
by Pilgrim - Sun Jun 07, 2026 6:54 AM
Facts From Colossians
by NetChaplain - Fri Jun 05, 2026 11:23 AM
"The Lord shut him in."
by Pilgrim - Fri Jun 05, 2026 5:09 AM
Previous Thread
Next Thread
Print Thread
Rate Thread
Hop To
#44149 Thu Feb 04, 2010 2:10 AM
Joined: Apr 2001
Posts: 4,893
Likes: 49
Tom Offline OP
Needs to get a Life
OP Offline
Needs to get a Life
Joined: Apr 2001
Posts: 4,893
Likes: 49
Many have heard the accusation that John Gill the predecessor of CH Spurgeon was a hyper-Calvinist.
For those who are interested, I found an interesting article on the subject.

Tom

Tom #44150 Thu Feb 04, 2010 11:14 AM
Joined: Apr 2001
Posts: 15,047
Likes: 286
Head Honcho
Online Content
Head Honcho
Joined: Apr 2001
Posts: 15,047
Likes: 286
Tom,

I would have to agree with the article, with what I know of Gill from reading some of his works, that he was is not rightly labeled a "hyper-Calvinist"... depending upon how one defines that term. In modern theological discussions, three of the most prominent 'marks' of hyper-Calvinism are:
  1. Denial of the "free offer", i.e., that the Gospel should be preached indiscriminately to all and to require of them to repent of their sins and believe upon Christ, looking to God to enable them to do so.
  2. Denial of "common grace" (a misnomer, IMHO), i.e., that although God has no love for the reprobate, He does act in a benevolent way upon all men in that He makes provision of their earthly temporal needs, gifts them at times with high intelligence and talents.
  3. Denial, to some degree, that God uses means to call the elect, e.g., the preaching of the Gospel, sacraments and prayer.

Now, it is true that Gill, John Brine and others did hold to the serious error of "eternal justification". However, I personally don't include this error as being part and parcel and necessary to be included in the definition of hyper-Calvinism. But fortunately, some of these men were not consistent in applying what this doctrine implies, i.e., they did believe that the elect sinner when he repents and turns to Christ due to the efficacious calling/work of the Holy Spirit are justified at the time they exercise faith and not before. Others were consistent and insisted that at the time faith is exercised, the sinner only comes to realize that he was elect and justified already rather than actually being reconciled to God, and clothed with Christ's righteousness at that moment in time. Some Dutch theologians and even Karl Barth held to this view albeit in different ways.


[Linked Image]

simul iustus et peccator

[Linked Image]
Pilgrim #44153 Thu Feb 04, 2010 6:13 PM
Joined: Apr 2001
Posts: 4,893
Likes: 49
Tom Offline OP
Needs to get a Life
OP Offline
Needs to get a Life
Joined: Apr 2001
Posts: 4,893
Likes: 49
Pilgrim

Thank you that was helpful. smile

I especially found what you had to say about "eternal justification" interesting.
It got my mind thinking and I found the following site helpful in understanding what this term means in a deeper way.
http://www.biblicalstudies.com/bstudy/soteriology/etjustif.htm

Tom

Last edited by Tom; Thu Feb 04, 2010 6:17 PM.
Tom #44154 Thu Feb 04, 2010 6:34 PM
Joined: Apr 2001
Posts: 15,047
Likes: 286
Head Honcho
Online Content
Head Honcho
Joined: Apr 2001
Posts: 15,047
Likes: 286
Tom,

Would you believe there are articles on The Highway that also deal with this matter of "Eternal Justification"? giggle

For example, there is:

- Eternal Justification, by Louis Berkhof

And

- The Reflections of a Puritan on Conversion and Regeneration, by Michael Haykin. In this article, Haykin focuses upon Benjamin Keach (Baptist) and scrolling down the article to the heading: Critical of Hyper-Calvinism, he discusses those who were "hyper-Calvinists" who espoused "eternal justification". Interesting that he lumps this view in with the hyper-Calvinists. You would do well to read this article too. wink


[Linked Image]

simul iustus et peccator

[Linked Image]
Pilgrim #44163 Sun Feb 07, 2010 7:17 PM
Joined: Apr 2001
Posts: 4,893
Likes: 49
Tom Offline OP
Needs to get a Life
OP Offline
Needs to get a Life
Joined: Apr 2001
Posts: 4,893
Likes: 49
Pilgrim

Thank you for those links, I am finding this thread to be extremely interesting. bravo

I am a person who even when I understand a particular doctrine, often have a hard time expressing what I believe in words. Often, it becomes apparent (usually my fault) that what I wanted to say was not understood by people reading what I said.
At times I like to quote people in order to avoid misunderstanding, however I would rather us my own words.

With that in mind I thought I would say something concerning this topic and see if you/others agree/understand with me.

I believe one is justified when they believe and not before. That means that there was a time when every single one of us before we believed and was justified, was guilty and condemned to hell.
However, it is important to realize that those chosen before the foundation of the world (Eph 1:4) will upon belief be justified. If one is chosen, it is a foregone conclusion that they will eventually be justified.
I believe it is a mistake to believe that when one believes upon Christ, they have a realization of what God has already done in the act of eternal Justification; mainly because it puts justification before saving faith. Thus making light of saving faith.

Tom

Last edited by Tom; Sun Feb 07, 2010 7:22 PM.
Tom #44165 Sun Feb 07, 2010 10:33 PM
Joined: Apr 2001
Posts: 15,047
Likes: 286
Head Honcho
Online Content
Head Honcho
Joined: Apr 2001
Posts: 15,047
Likes: 286
Tom,

There is one more quote which comes from HERE which I am sure you will find most instructive. Dr. Joel Beeke brings out some of the further difficulties (errors) which those who hold to "eternal justification" end up with.

Quote
We must also firmly reject Antinomian or hyper-Calvinistic tendencies which adhere to a justification from eternity that negates the need for actual justification in time by becoming personal partakers of Christ by faith. For example, Abraham Kuyper went beyond the Synod of Dort in describing justification by faith as merely "becoming conscious" of the fact that we were already justified by God from eternity and in the resurrection of Christ. William Gadsby, J. C. Philpot and most of the Strict Baptists speak similarly by affirming that the believer is justified in time only with respect to his own conscience by the Spirit's witness. This erroneous view already existed in Puritan times among those with Antinomian tendencies, as Thomas Goodwin's apt response to it reveals: "It is vain to say I am justified only in respect to the court of mine own conscience. The faith that Paul and the other apostles were justified by, was their believing on Christ that they might be justified (Galatians 2:15, 16), and not a believing they were justified already."

The view that an actual justification by faith in time does not exist for the believer faces three additional obstacles: First, it is contrary to Romans 4:6-8 which clearly affirms the imputation of Christ's righteousness in time. Second, time itself would then be a mere parenthesis, for God's people would not be viewed prior to regeneration as being "children of wrath, even as others" (Ephesians 2:3). If justification by faith does not transfer a sinner from the state of wrath to that of grace, and is merely a recognition of justification from eternity, all historical relevance of justification by faith alone is swept away. Third, if justification by faith is not a personal and historical necessity, the fruits of justification in deadness to sin and aliveness to Christ would likewise be a matter of indifference. One could then ask in all seriousness, "Shall we not sin, that grace may abound?" (Romans 6:2). This Paul strenuously opposes in Romans 6. We have shown that the absence of works is impossible for a true Christian. That faith which justifies is a working faith. "Faith without works is dead" (James 2:21) — yes, dead, not just sick or dying. Saving faith does not exist where it is not accompanied by good works. A fruitless Christian is a misnomer. Where Christ saves, He will also exercise His lordship. Contrary to the primary tenet of Antinomianism — the believer may disregard the law altogether (anti=against: nomos=law) since he is freed from its demands as a means of salvation — Christ sends the saved believer, who was condemned by the law prior to being justified by faith, back to the law to live out of gratitude under His lordship in obedience to His Word. Luther said that the law was like a stick: "God first used it to beat me, but later I used it to walk with."
[Linked Image]


[Linked Image]

simul iustus et peccator

[Linked Image]

Link Copied to Clipboard
Who's Online Now
0 members (), 253 guests, and 22 robots.
Key: Admin, Global Mod, Mod
Newest Members
Bosco, Mike, Puritan Steve, NSH123, Church44
992 Registered Users
ShoutChat
Comment Guidelines: Do post respectful and insightful comments. Don't flame, hate, spam.
June
S M T W T F S
1 2 3 4 5 6
7 8 9 10 11 12 13
14 15 16 17 18 19 20
21 22 23 24 25 26 27
28 29 30
Today's Birthdays
There are no members with birthdays on this day.
Popular Topics(Views)
1,892,181 Gospel truth