A statement and venting about Calvinism and its current trends.

I feel that this popularity of Paul Washer has converted a lot to Calvinism and is pushing this erroneous movement and a lot of the reason is that they venerate Him because they are young in the faith. So, I am not so sure it is totally good to send out his messages especially when this is one of his pet doctrines. I wonder why so many emphasize these things more then the bible does. I also don't think its all that wise to venerate Luther and such since they were anti Semitic like Hitler with an anti Christ spirit in their replacement theology. Israel is the apple of God's eye and it is a great blasphemous doctrine and devilish. Faith is not a work as Paul clearly over and over through the whole epistle to the Romans. It is also heinous and directly blasphemous to polarize scripture and teach that God plans prepares and predestines people to a lake of fire where there is weeping and gnashing of teeth and the worm does not die for His pleasure. I will also remark on the reply from Calvinist's about this doctrine they subtly sly away from this doctrine by using slick words like compatibilism and so forth but in the end they are teaching that GOD SENDS MEN TO HELL FOR HIS PLEASURE APART FROM THEIR WILL AND ISRAEL IS NOTHING TO GOD. I think this is not a game and not play time it is fueled by a false spirit and the flesh and so forth. I tolerated this doctrine and I was looking into it but now see it clearly for what it is. I do really respect the teaching or John and Paul Washer and what not and they have some really good truths that they emphasize but I feel they have polarized so far in intellectualism and zeal that they also carry a strong mix with them of poisons. I am not saying to end these ministries I don't know what the lord wants to do I just want to say and speak the error I see for the edification of the saints in love.

Make sure that you are positive that you are hearing from the Lord before speaking against these brothers. Just a friendly warning :-)

Also, don't throw the baby out with the bathwater. I am not a Calvanist, but the bible does speak about some of the beliefs of the Calvanist doctrine, as it does with Armenian doctrine.

You have free will AND God elects. I don't understand it, but I believe it. Why, because He says so.

Miccah,

Thanks you for the exhortation Miccah. I do believe that I am speaking scripturally and wisely I cant say I had a direct revelation from God on a profound level though. I also as I stated in my post am not throwing the baby out with the bathwater. I said that there is some serious error mixed in and it is not good but do not say their ministries should be stopped. I also agree with you about the mystery in the Scripture and the 2 sides to the matter. So yeah I agree with what you are saying but just want to clarify that I am not condemning them or their complete ministry but the doctrine itself. I just feel that one should be wise in dispersing these knowing that many young Christians will be vulnerable to it and fall down that path. I think there is a pastoral responsibility that should be maintained and cared for. And I believe that this teaching should be shown for what it really is in that it claims that God sends men to hell for His pleasure apart from their will and replaces Israel which is the apple of God's eye.

*Sigh, putting on Helmet of Salvation, buckling belt of truth*

Here we go.

David, perhaps some people hold to these things because they believe it is the most faithful understanding of the truth revealed in God's word, and not merely because some Brain Washer or Pied Piper (puns intended) fed them a line about God's grace being the source of all salvation.

The Predestinarians here are just as passionately convinced that the opposite side is in error. Shall we have a post each day about Finney, Wilkerson, Poonen, and all else, simply because we differ? I hope not! Does it not seem more prudent to discuss the doctrines in question rather than the men who have held them?

I will say for myself, however, that the jewel of my hope is that God freely made a determination to save me victoriously by Christ's real atonement and regenerating Spirit, when I would have otherwise chosen hell. That is my joy, which is the glory of God.

There is a reason why I came to Christ under Washer, and to joy in sanctification under Piper. It was not because they promised me a bed of worldly roses. It was because they preached a clear, God-Almighty gospel worthy of Christocentric faith.

Brother Davidt, You know the Gospel is very hard to believe. We serve a crucified Savior! The doctrines of grace are not appealing to man because they nullify our autonomy and raise a number of hard questions. It is much EASIER to NOT believe them.

So why do so many of us love these difficult doctrines? Because we are convinced beyond a shadow of a doubt that they are the correct exposition of the Scriptures. I cringed when I first heard them but as I read through the New Testament all the verses I used to pass over because I didn't understand them now fell into place and it *clicked.

Brother, If you have heard of these doctrines from critical sources rather than ones which are simply giving explanation and exegesis rather than attacks then you cannot help but have a negative view about them.

Fair and balanced debate is always the best way to approach these issues since each side is then able to give a response. I encourage you to listen to this debate by the authors of, "Calvinism, Tried and Found Wanting" and "The Potter's Freedom". Both are experts on the subject and it is a very professional and engaging debate. You can download it here:

http://www.box.net/shared/1mdiz2uog9

We are united in the Gospel.

Mike,

*Sigh, putting on Helmet of Salvation, buckling belt of truth*

Here we go.

David, perhaps some people hold to these things because they believe it is the most faithful understanding of the truth revealed in God's word, and not merely because some Brain Washer or Pied Piper (puns intended) fed them a line about God's grace being the source of all salvation.

The Predestinarians here are just as passionately convinced that the opposite side is in error.

Shall we have a post each day about Finney, Wilkerson, Poonen, and all else, simply because we differ? I hope not! Does it not seem more prudent to discuss the doctrines in question rather than the men who have held them?

I will say for myself, however, that the jewel of my hope is that God freely made a determination to save me victoriously by Christ's real atonement and regenerating Spirit, when I would have otherwise chosen hell. That is my joy, which is the glory of God. There is a reason why I came to Christ under Washer, and to joy in sanctification under Piper. It was not because they promised me a bed of worldly roses. It was because they preached a clear, God-Almighty gospel worthy of Christocentric faith.

I am writing these things because I am displeased in my inner man and have come to more clarity on these issues and feel that not much has been spoken specifically about what I am saying here I am venting and making a statement that I believe to be beneficial. I think not only is the doctrine wrong but that those in the reformed movement are often immature in the sense that they never cease to speak of these things and emphasize it more then the Bible and make it their eccentric hobby and go to totally other Churches in division and so on and so on. I would also like to add a couple things to my original post. I do not have a doctorate in Church history and so cant say every thing with complete confidence but I have come upon a couple things:

Here is an article I found about Luther's writings and how Hitler was influenced by it and how the erroneous teaching of replacement theology has in part been responsible and I believe is a threat today and a big error in light of how important Israel is. It is a great error to reject Israel the beloved and chosen people of God who we are in debt to for bearing Christ:

Unfortunately, the Reformation produced no changes in attitude. In fact, the hatred of the Jews was reinforced and intensified by the writings of Martin Luther, the very man who launched the Reformation. Initially, Luther was sympathetic toward the Jews because he believed their rejection of the Gospel was due to their recognition of the corruption of the Roman Catholic Church. But when they continued to reject the Gospel, Luther turned on them with a vengeance. In 1543 he wrote a pamphlet entitled “Concerning The Jews and Their Lies.” The document was an anti-Semitic diatribe. In it, he referred to the Jews as:

* “A miserable and accursed people”
* “Stupid fools”
* “Miserable, blind and senseless”
* “Thieves and robbers”
* “The great vermin of humanity”
* “ Lazy rogues”
* “ Blind and venomous” (20)

Having dehumanized and demonized them, Luther then proceeded to make some startling proposals for dealing with them:

1. Their synagogues and schools should be burned.
2. Their houses should be destroyed.
3. Their Talmudic writings should be confiscated.
4. Their Rabbis should be forbidden to teach.
5. Their money should be taken from them.
6. They should be compelled into forced labor.

Needless to say, the Nazis gleefully quoted Luther as they rose to power and launched the Holocaust. In his book Mein Kampf, published in 1925, Adolf Hitler referred to Martin Luther as “a great warrior, a true statesmen, and a great reformer.” Keep in mind that Hitler was a professed Christian. In 1924 at a Christian gathering in Berlin, Hitler spoke to thousands and received a standing ovation when he made the following proclamation: “I believe that today I am acting in accordance with the will of Almighty God as I announce the most important work that Christians could undertake - and that is to be against the Jews and get rid of them once and for all.”(21) Hitler then proceeded to talk about the influence of Luther on his life: “Martin Luther has been the greatest encouragement of my life. Luther was a great man. He was a giant. With one blow he heralded the coming of the new dawn and the new age. He saw clearly that the Jews need to be destroyed, and we’re only beginning to see that we need to carry this work on.”(22) At the Nuremberg trials after World War II, the Nazi leader, Julius Streicher, defended himself by saying, “I have never said anything that Martin Luther did not say.”(23)

The terrible truth that Christians do not like to face, and which many are unaware of, is that the Holocaust was the product of 1,900 years of virulent Christian anti-Semitism.

Also, as I googled I found an article that I believe to be from Robert W who posts here on SI:

"On the Jews and Their Lies" (Martin Luther Sowing Seeds of Anti-Semitism)

When I first heard of the tractate “On the Jews and their Lies” by Martin Luther I was overcome with disbelief. It caused me to somewhat question a lot of teachings and things about him that I had held so dearly. But the thing that you must consider is that there are no “Comic Book” figures in scripture. God has allowed nearly every man and woman of God in scripture to be shown in the light of their humanness and frailty. God did not hide David’s sin, nor did He hide Moses’ smiting of the rock. God told us about Elijah’s trip to the cave and Samuels sons who “knew not the Lord.” This list is almost as long as all the names in scripture. God never allows us to view his servants as anything more than what they are- humans with a fallen nature. Paul and Barnabus’ split could have been hidden and so could have Peter’s respect of persons that Paul refers to in Galatians. Men after the apostolic age are no different. They all had issues of some sort or another.

When it comes to past believers and teachers of truth after the apostolic age, there are some issues that immediately come into the limelight to demonstrate that we can never look back and try to emulate what these men were- and that, because God has consistently been leading Christ’s bride (the Church) to perfection and getting Her ready for His return and these were imperfect men. We learn from them and appreciate the progress that God brought through them; but they are not where Christ wants us.

Since John the Revelator passed on the Church has lacked an emphasis on Love. As you follow the creeds, councils, and controversaries of the ante-nicene era you see a Church almost preoccupied with refining theological concepts. The Church moved to Ephesus (as it were) and then on to Rome. From there a struggle against those who oppose Christendom began. Even fighting in the later centuries with Muslim’s. It is as though the Catholic Church at one point took up the whole “Jihad” philosophy and began Crusades and other violent acts. I am told that the passage to justify these acts were “The Kingdom of Heaven suffers violence and the violent take it by force.” This is wildly out of context. We know that this was not the "Remnant Church" acting and doing these things; but you must know that they were done in the name of Christianity and we are to some degree tainted by their iniquity many of the Jews eyes.

John Calvin and Martin Luther are who I wish to focus on in this immediate study. John Calvin had Michel Servetus burned alive at Geneva because of his heretical teachings. No matter what you say about Calvin’s contributions to Christianity- this act stands out like a sore thumb. No one can give a biblical justification for such an act in scripture. Paul turned such people as this over to Satan so they would learn not to blaspheme. In the end Paul said “Alexander the Coppersmith has done me much evil, the Lord reward him according to his works.” It is a meekness that acknowledged God's sovereignty as being in control of the affairs of men. Paul's method is what scripture teaches is to be done- not applying fire as did the Catholics to the Lollards at Smithfield and elsewhere. The Catholic's applied fire and later did the Protestants.

Martin Luther has a vile stain upon his life that has caused more pain and suffering than Calvin could have ever done by burning Severtus. He wrote a tractate called “On the Jews and the Lies.” The Nazi’s used this tractate in inferences and such in their philosophy of the “Final Solution.” I have read a good portion of this translated work and could read no further. It is readily available for all to read and see discussed by simply typing in key words “On the Jews and their Lies” into google or any search engine. The connection between this tractate and the holocaust is clear. Protestants who have never heard of this will likely be shocked. these were mortal men and do not deserve to be idolized as we often do. That does not please God. We have tried to hide their sin, but God never did that. You must understand that this is one of the great obstacles to sharing the faith with the Jews. They see the Cross as a Sword dipped in 1900 years of Jewish blood in many cases. I will leave you to your own studies.

Int3grity,

Brother Davidt, You know the Gospel is very hard to believe.

So why do so many of us love these difficult doctrines? Because we are convinced beyond a shadow of a doubt that they are the correct exposition of the Scriptures.

Brother, If you have heard of these doctrines from critical sources rather than ones which are simply giving explanation and exegesis rather than attacks then you cannot help but have a negative view about them.

Dear David,

Brother ... Can I ask you to slow down a bit?

There is good reason for this. One of the chief reasons, and actually your post is very timely, is that we have been discussing amongst ourselves (as moderators) something geared towards toning down a lot of the rhetoric of these two constructs.

Rather then get into all the details now - it amounts to just far too much strife. This site is rich with [i]both[/i] persuasions and contrary to what might be thought, not everyone falls into one or the other, in fact that I believe is far often more the trouble - That the tendencies are to color everything [i]through[/i] them in the first place, ... I digress.

What I did want to offer however was a couple of things you might want to take a look at. One, regarding Luther - It caught me somewhat off guard in being somewhat a stickler for source material but also due to the context that Luther wrote what we consider such an ill-advised treatise - Rather than go into it all ...

[url=https://www.sermonindex.net/modules/newbb/viewtopic.php?mode=viewtopic&topic_id=22516&forum=40&start=70&viewmode=flat&order=0]Luther , Calvin , Zwingli and the reformation.....[/url]

If you scroll down a couple of replies there are a handful of links to that which I mentioned. It is still difficult but might give you some other considerations.

The other is the following, taken from (and highly recommended) John Piper's series of biographies of past saints, one who has become a new favorite that I had never knew of, Charles Simeon:

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

But he had little sympathy for uncharitable Calvinists. In a sermon on Romans 9:16, he said,

Many there are who cannot see these truths [the doctrines of God's sovereignty], who yet are in a state truly pleasing to God; yea many, at whose feet the best of us may be glad to be found in heaven. It is a great evil, when these doctrines are made a ground of separation one from another, and when the advocates of different systems anathematize each other. . . . In reference to truths which are involved in so much obscurity as those which relate to the sovereignty of God mutual kindness and concession are far better than vehement argumentation and uncharitable discussion (Horae Homileticae, Vol. 15, p. 357).

An example of how he lived out this counsel is seen in the way he conversed with the elderly John Wesley. He tells the story himself:

Sir, I understand that you are called an Arminian; and I have been sometimes called a Calvinist; and therefore I suppose we are to draw daggers. But before I consent to begin the combat, with your permission I will ask you a few questions. Pray, Sir, do you feel yourself a depraved creature, so depraved that you would never have thought of turning to God, if God had not first put it into your heart?
Yes, I do indeed.

And do you utterly despair of recommending yourself to God by anything you can do; and look for salvation solely through the blood and righteousness of Christ?

Yes, solely through Christ.

But, Sir, supposing you were at first saved by Christ, are you not somehow or other to save yourself afterwards by your own works?

No, I must be saved by Christ from first to last.

Allowing, then, that you were first turned by the grace of God, are you not in some way or other to keep yourself by your own power?

No.

What then, are you to be upheld every hour and every moment by God, as much as an infant in its mother's arms?

Yes, altogether.

And is all your hope in the grace and mercy of God to preserve you unto His heavenly kingdom?

Yes, I have no hope but in Him.

Then, Sir, with your leave I will put up my dagger again; for this is all my Calvinism; this is my election, my justification by faith, my final perseverance: it is in substance all that I hold, and as I hold it; and therefore, if you please, instead of searching out terms and phrases to be a ground of contention between us, we will cordially unite in those things wherein we agree. (Moule, 79f)

[url=https://www.sermonindex.net/modules/newbb/viewtopic.php?viewmode=flat&order=0&topic_id=25079&forum=34&post_id=&refresh=Go]Spurgeon - Mueller - An Important Series ~ Piper's Biographies[/url]

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

For the record I am neither\\both - A long time ago I made up my mind, refusing to confine my thoughts into a construct and then find workarounds for everything that puts them to a challenge. But beyond that I have held a very healthy suspicion that neither of these two main men of such a long running feud amongst Christians ever conceived or purposed to set them forth as the constructs they have now become. In fact in some recent notices elsewhere came across some notations that Calvin actually downplayed some his earlier stances later on in life (I do not know this for fact).

I am putting forth more than I care to here but there is a great deal of unnecessary emphasis either way, that is that it often becomes a contrivance of intellect, a battle of wits, warring over scripture and gets us all precisely nowhere further than we started. My advice to all is to pretend as if you never heard any of it, as if anyone who is presented or represented here never held to either - Then you are never left guessing, wondering or having some nagging suspicion if this or that preacher is ____ or ______.

It's greatly overstating it, a bit of hyperbole but other than those who have made mention of it, a Spurgeon, a Wesley most I do not really know nor care to know and I love both of these men of God. It's not that the subject matter isn't worth discussing, it's just not worth ... drawing swords over.

One of these days I will get back to a project that I started here. The idea was to present as many seemingly contradicting out-takes of various holders of these two constructs, but without naming them right away. Presenting Finney alongside Calvin and Spurgeon and Wesley and any other number, taken from right in our midst. With the sole purpose of showing how much more these men gave to us all then these lone perspectives of a multifaceted diamond.

And betting that many would be quite surprised hearing them detached from those moorings. Likely not even able to guess who was who.

something geared towards toning down a lot of the rhetoric of these two constructs.

Thank heavens.

MC

something geared towards toning down a lot of the rhetoric of these two constructs.

Thank heavens.

Double amen to that!

crsschk,

Brother ... Can I ask you to slow down a bit?

What I did want to offer however was a couple of things you might want to take a look at. One, regarding Luther - It caught me somewhat off guard in being somewhat a stickler for source material but also due to the context that Luther wrote what we consider such an ill-advised treatise - Rather than go into it all ... Luther , Calvin , Zwingli and the reformation..... If you scroll down a couple of replies there are a handful of links to that which I mentioned. It is still difficult but might give you some other considerations.

As for all the resources and what not I have been over them and I also agree with your stance doctrinally so cheers for that. And I am not completely denouncing anyone just pointing out some of the problematic issues that I see.

Hi davidt...

In considering the debate (which usually deviates to a debate over [i]eternal security[/i]/[i]once saved-always saved[/i]), I have been thinking about certain conversations that I've had. One brother even told me that we cannot fall away from God if we truly have come to Christ.

Yet I am daily reminded about how easily I could turn to sin. Sin is ALWAYS at the door...always calling us with temptation. I'm not just talking the little foxes that destroy the vines -- but the big sins too! How many men do you know who are tempted to lust...or worse? While the magnitude of that is different with different men, the opportunity for temptation is there for all of us. I am so aware of my own humanity...and human flaws! I remember Paul Washer, in the [i]10 Indictments[/i] message, telling people that he wouldn't trust his son with a young woman because he "[i]doesn't trust his son's father[/i]."

We are all capable of falling into sin. I believe in the "bottom line" regarding this issue. The bottom line? Don't die while in sin! That is too great a risk to take -- and it is unrealistic (in my view) to simply claim that God will not recognize our sin simply because we placed our hope, faith and trust in Christ at one time. Rather, we die DAILY.

Anyway, I didn't mean to deviate from the topic. This is just something that has been on my mind lately.

Chris,

Yes I agree. I think the main thing is to abide in Christ and you will not have to worry whether your salvation will be lost or not because the topic wont come up if it is not an issue.

davidt:
I read the whole thread and really enjoyed your comments. I likewise at one time thought the world of Luther and Calvin until I read their history and got real Bible salvation that made me "free from sin" (Rom 6:18).

Luther wrote against the "Against the Robbing and Murdering Hordes of Peasants" and said "Let whoever can stab, smite, slay. If you die in doing it, good for you! A more blessed death can never be yours…"

There is no record of Luther repenting for encouraging the killing of the peasants. In fact, he later stated "I, Martin Luther, have shed the blood of the rebellious peasants; for I commanded them to be killed. Their blood is indeed upon my head; but I put it upon the Lord God, by whose command I spoke" (Table Talk, p. 276. Eisleben edition).

Calvin wrote to William Farel that "if he [Servetus] shall come [to Geneva], I shall never permit him to depart alive, provided my authority be of any avail" and true to his word he was instrumental in seeing Servetus receive the death penalty.

Calvin didn't repent of this murder, for some 8 years later he wrote to Marquis Paet, "Honour, glory, and riches shall be the reward of your pains; but above all, do not fail to rid the country of those scoundrels, who stir up the people to revolt against us. Such monsters should be exterminated, as I have exterminated Michael Servetus the Spaniard."

I likewise reject the Nero teaching of unconditional election where God is accused of taking pleasure in sending souls to hell for not coming to him while he imputes Adam's sin to their charge, brings them into this world with a nature that is bent to sinning, and when he sends out his ministers to call these people to repentance he refuses to give them the grace they need to come to him.

What an awful charge to make against a just God.

God save the world from this blasphemous doctrine.

Bob,

Thank you for your comments and further clarification on these matters. I would like to make it clear though that I don't completely reject all the teaching of Calvinism nor am I Arminian. I am a bit mysteriously in the middle. I feel as if I cannot lawfully by scripture jump into either camp doctrinally completely since I am confident that scriptures do not make it absolutely clear and without that I believe it would be unsafe to tread on such serious claims in making such assumptions.

Psa 89:3,4 I have cut a covenant with My elect; I have sworn to David My servant,I will establish your Seed forever, and build up your throne to all generations. Selah.

Psa 89:15,16 Blessed is the people knowing the joyful sound; O Jehovah, they shall walk in the light of Your face.They shall rejoice in Your name always; and they are exalted in Your righteousness.

Psa 89:20,21 I have found My servant David; I have anointed him with My holy oil. My hand shall be fixed with him; and My arm shall make him strong.

Psa 89:24-37 But My faithfulness and My mercy is with him; and his horn shall be exalted in My name.I will set his hand also in the sea, and his right hand in the floods. He shall cry to Me, My Father, You are my God, and the rock of my salvation. And I will make Him My first-born, higher than the kings of the earth. I will keep My mercy for him forever, and My covenant shall hold fast with him. And I have established his Seed forever, and His throne as the days of the heavens. If his sons forsake My Law, and do not walk in My judgments; if they profane My statutes and do not keep My commandments; then I will visit their transgressions with the rod, and their sins with stripes. But I will not annul My mercy from him, and I will not be false in My faithfulness. I will not profane My covenant, nor change what goes from My lips. Once I have sworn by My holiness; I will not lie to David. His Seed shall be forever, and his throne as the sun before Me. Like the moon, it shall be forever; and a faithful witness in the sky. Selah.

Psa. 89:29

“His seed also will I make to endure for ever.” David's seed lives on in the person of the Lord Jesus, and the seed of Jesus in the persons of believers. Saints are a race that neither death nor hell can kill: Rome and its priests, with their inquisition and other infernal cruelties, have laboured to exterminate the covenant seed, but “vain is their rage, their efforts vain.” As long as God lives, his people must live. “And his throne as the days of heaven.” Jesus reigns on, and will reign till the skies shall fall, yea, and when the heavens shall pass away with a great noise, and the elements shall melt with fervent heat, his throne shall stand. What a blessed covenant is this! Some commentators talk of conditions, but we fail to see any; the promises are as absolute as they can possibly be, and if any conditions as to the conduct of the favoured individuals can be conceived, they are disposed of in the succeeding verses. (CHS)

Psa. 89:30

“If his children forsake my law, and walk not in my judgments.” It was possible, terribly possible, that David's posterity might wander from the Lord; indeed they did so, but what then? Was the mercy of God to pass away from David's seed? - far from it. So, too, the seed of the Son of David are apt to start aside, but are they therefore cast away? Not a single word gives liberty for such an idea, but the very reverse. Expositors in their fear of Calvinistic doctrine shake off the fear of adding to the word of God, or else they would not have spent their time in talking about “the conditions” of this absolutely unconditional covenant. (CHS)

Psa. 89:31

“If they break my statutes, and keep not my commandments.” The dreadful “if” is suggested again, and the sad case is stated in other forms, But if it should be so, what then? Death and rejection? Ah, no; Blessed be God, No! If their sin be negative or positive, if it be forsaking or profanation; if either judgments or commandments or both be violated, yet there is not a word as to final destruction, but the very reverse. Legalism will import its ifs, but the Lord slays the ifs as fast as they rise. Eternal shalls and wills make glorious havoc among the and buts. (CHS)

Psa. 89:32

“Then will I visit their transgression with the rod.” Not with the sword, not with death and destruction; but still with a smarting, tingling, painful rod. Saints must smart if they sin, God will see to that. He hates sin too much not to visit it, and he loves his saints too well not to chasten them. God never plays with his rod, he lays it well home to his children, he visits them with it in their houses, bodies, and hearts, and makes them know that he is grieved with their ways. He smites home and chastens “their iniquity with stripes,” which are either many or few in proportion as the heart is properly affected by them. The rod is a covenant blessing, and is meant to be used. As sin is so frequent, the rod never rests long together; in God's family the rod is not spared, or the children would be spoiled. (CHS)

Psa. 89:33

“Nevertheless.” And a glorious nevertheless too! “Nevertheless my lovingkindness will I not utterly take from him.” O glorious fear-killing sentence! This crowns the covenant with exceeding glory. Mercy may seem to depart from the Lord's chosen, but it shall never altogether do so. Jesus still enjoys the divine favour, and we are in him, and therefore under the most trying circumstances the Lord's lovingkindness to each one of his chosen will endure the strain. If the covenant could be made void by our sins it would have been void long ere this; and if renewed its tenure would not be worth an hour's purchase if it had remained dependant upon us. God may leave his people, and they may thereby suffer much and fall very low, but utterly and altogether he never can remove his love from them; for that would be to cast a reflection upon his own truth, and this he will never allow, for he adds, “nor suffer my faithfulness to fail.” Man fails in all points but God in none. To be faithful is one of the eternal characteristics of God, in which he always places a great part of his glory: his truth is one of his peculiar treasures and crown jewels, and he will never endure that it should be tarnished in any degree. This passage sweetly assures us that the heirs of glory shall not be utterly cast off. Let those deny the safety of the saints who choose to do so, we have not so learned Christ. We believe in the gospel rod, but not in the penal swats for the adopted sons. (CHS)

Psa 89:52 Blessed be Jehovah forever. Amen and Amen!

Savannah,

This is an example of what I have been saying. In your post you quote Charles Spurgeon. I fear that Calvinist venerate these men too highly and this leads to errors and these men were often erroneous themselves to a high degree. Another example would be from your signature. The example is that Calvinist's will argue the positive sides of there view but then they don't mention the negative sides.

Brethren, this is enough. The Calvinist/Arminian threads have run their course, and it's time to lay them down. We ask that you stop creating them, and please stop debating these things on SermonIndex. Brethren, it must stop.

New threads continuing to press this debate will be locked. There is a season for all things under heaven - and the season is over for these Cal/Arm feuds.

This thread is locked. PM a moderator if you have any questions.