Donations for the month of May">

We have received a total of $30 in donations towards our goal of $175.

Don’t want to use PayPal? Go HERE


Current Time
Eastern Standard Time
Search

Featured Member
Registered: Tuesday, August 31, 2004
Posts: 999
Forum Stats
663 Members
32 Forums
5738 Topics
46233 Posts

Max Online: 30 @ Tuesday, September 8, 2009 12:23 AM
Top Posters
Pilgrim 12760
J_Edwards 4843
Tom 3621
Wes 3553
CovenantInBlood 2375
MarieP 2311
RJ_ 2235
chestnutmare 1980
John_C 1805
gotribe 1767
Top Posters (30 Days)
chestnutmare 425
Pilgrim 26
Jobeluan65 11
John_C 6
Robin 6
Tom 5
li0scc0 5
Lynda 3
AC. 3
sojourner 2
Recent Posts
Two new articles by Richard Bennett have been added.
by Pilgrim
Today at 03:05 AM
The Holy Spirit proceed
by Tom Mor
Yesterday at 09:39 AM
How do you think the homosexual movement
by Pilgrim
Wednesday, May 16, 2012 5:42 AM
James 5:14-16
by Lynda
Wednesday, May 16, 2012 3:09 AM
What is your understanding of this passage?
by Pilgrim
Tuesday, May 15, 2012 10:45 AM
John Owen on The Spirit in the Life of Christ
by Pilgrim
Tuesday, May 15, 2012 6:01 AM
Topic Options
Rate This Topic
Hop to:
#44149 - Wednesday, February 3, 2010 10:10 PM Gill a Hyper-Calvinist?
Tom Offline
Needs to get a Life

Registered: Sunday, April 8, 2001
Posts: 3621
Loc: Kelowna, British Columbia, Can...
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

Top
#44150 - Thursday, February 4, 2010 7:14 AM Re: Gill a Hyper-Calvinist? [Re: Tom]
Pilgrim Offline

Head Honcho

Registered: Tuesday, April 3, 2001
Posts: 12760
Loc: NH, USA
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., the 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.
_________________________


simul iustus et peccator


Top
#44153 - Thursday, February 4, 2010 2:13 PM Re: Gill a Hyper-Calvinist? [Re: Pilgrim]
Tom Offline
Needs to get a Life

Registered: Sunday, April 8, 2001
Posts: 3621
Loc: Kelowna, British Columbia, Can...
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


Edited by Tom (Thursday, February 4, 2010 2:17 PM)

Top
#44154 - Thursday, February 4, 2010 2:34 PM Re: Gill a Hyper-Calvinist? [Re: Tom]
Pilgrim Offline

Head Honcho

Registered: Tuesday, April 3, 2001
Posts: 12760
Loc: NH, USA
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
_________________________


simul iustus et peccator


Top
#44163 - Sunday, February 7, 2010 3:17 PM Re: Gill a Hyper-Calvinist? [Re: Pilgrim]
Tom Offline
Needs to get a Life

Registered: Sunday, April 8, 2001
Posts: 3621
Loc: Kelowna, British Columbia, Can...
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


Edited by Tom (Sunday, February 7, 2010 3:22 PM)

Top
#44165 - Sunday, February 7, 2010 6:33 PM Re: Gill a Hyper-Calvinist? [Re: Tom]
Pilgrim Offline

Head Honcho

Registered: Tuesday, April 3, 2001
Posts: 12760
Loc: NH, USA
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."

_________________________


simul iustus et peccator


Top


Moderator:  Robin 
Who's Online
1 registered (chestnutmare), 9 Guests and 1 Spider online.
Key: Admin, Global Mod, Mod
Newest Members
goldenoldie, Ann, traub78law, Tomtgm, Fredrick Fleming
663 Registered Users
Shout Box

May
Su M Tu W Th F Sa
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 31
Today's Birthdays
No Birthdays
Our Gallery
A gift for Forum folks...
Adoption
The Engagement of my Daughter
In Memorandum