Moderate Calvinism?

JM said:

cyg, don't fall for the Arminian trick. The man who said that wasn't a Hyper or a Gospel Standard Strict and (take a breath) Particular Baptist. The man who made that statement was waiting for a second coming of the Holy Spirit, thinking that the world would experience a Latter Rain, similar to what many Pentecostals believe today. He thought the Spirit would convert the pagans like the Jews were converted in Acts 2.

It's online somewhere, maybe Founders? If I run across the site I'll post it.

Click to expand...

Iain H. Murray mentioned this in The Puritan Hope. Murray says in all probability the quote was never uttered. It was supposedly said by John Ryland, and Ryland's son said "I never heard of it until I saw it in print, and cannot give credit to it at all...No man prayed and preached about the latter-day glory more than my father."

kenrapoza said:

Gotta love those old titles they used back then - wouldn't fly in today's marketing environment.

Click to expand...

Did you ever see the original title for David Copperfield?

the particular baptist said:

Cyg, you dont have to, but if you ever have a few hours to kill and want something to read try A Defense Of Particular Redemption Wherein The Doctrine Of The Late Mr Fuller Relative To The Atonement Of Christ, Is Tried By The Word Of God. By William Rushton, Liverpool, England, 1831.

Click to expand...

I may have it somewhere .

I have read (with displeasure) many attacks on Andrew Fuller by a one Mr Ella , I have several of his biographies including Gill , Hervey and Fuller .... this brother , I think he is too close to Hyper-Calvinism for me , has been in a battle with B.O.T . for years , and having read Ian Murray (BOT founder) on Pink and Spurgeon regarding many issues and seeing the BOT publish Fullers complete works I have to ask do I really think Ian Murray or the BOT would put out anything heretical ? the answer is no.

why did it take the likes of Fuller Carey and Ryland to start the Baptist Missionary society off in the first place if Calvinist Baptists had been missionary minded ? strikes me the answer is obvious .

recall those 3 points , articles of faith held by the GSB ;

XXVI We deny duty faith and duty repentance - these terms signifying that it is every man's duty spiritually and savingly to repent and believe... we reject the doctrine that men in a state of nature should be exhorted to believe in or turn to God....


XXIX While we believe that the gospel is to be preached in or proclaimed to all the world.... we deny offers of grace; that is to say, that the gospel is to be offered indiscriminately to all.


XXXII We believe that it would be unsafe, from the brief records we have of the way in which the apostles, under the immediate direction of the Lord, addressed their hearers in certain special cases and circumstances, to derive absolute and universal rules for ministerial addresses in the present day under widely- different circumstances...


XXXIII Therefore, that for ministers in the present day to address unconverted persons, or indiscriminately all in a mixed congregation, calling upon them savingly to repent, believe, and receive Christ, or perform any other acts dependent upon the new creative power of the Holy Ghost, is, on the one hand, to imply creature power, and, on the other, to deny the doctrine of special redemption.




Gospel Standard Strict Baptists

JM said:

Chippenham Old Baptist Chapel

Click to expand...

thanks JM , that is in Oxfordshire , not too far from me .

this seems a fair summary to my mind of Fuller ;

Andrew Fuller - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

cygnusx1 said:

I may have it somewhere .

I have read (with displeasure) many attacks on Andrew Fuller by a one Mr Ella , I have several of his biographies including Gill , Hervey and Fuller .... this brother , I think he is too close to Hyper-Calvinism for me , has been in a battle with B.O.T . for years , and having read Ian Murray (BOT founder) on Pink and Spurgeon regarding many issues and seeing the BOT publish Fullers complete works I have to ask do I really think Ian Murray or the BOT would put out anything heretical ? the answer is no.

Click to expand...

Ian Murray edited Pinks Sovereignty Of God. Only a dishonest men do that. Shame on him and BOT. I have vowed to never purchase another BOT book again because i dont trust them and until they put out Pinks work in full and apologize and admit why i wont change my mind. I have read Murray's reasons and theyre bogus. Pink never changed his positions on the love of God for the elect only and on reprobation. And even if he did, you dont EVER edit someone elses work to fit your own theological bent, only dishonest men do that. So do i think Ian Murray and BOT are at the very least dishonest ? What do dishonest men do ?

I admire George Ella, his works, and his courage to take pen against dishonest men.

cygnusx1 said:

recall those 3 points , articles of faith held by the GSB ;

XXVI We deny duty faith and duty repentance - these terms signifying that it is every man's duty spiritually and savingly to repent and believe... we reject the doctrine that men in a state of nature should be exhorted to believe in or turn to God....


XXIX While we believe that the gospel is to be preached in or proclaimed to all the world.... we deny offers of grace; that is to say, that the gospel is to be offered indiscriminately to all.


XXXII We believe that it would be unsafe, from the brief records we have of the way in which the apostles, under the immediate direction of the Lord, addressed their hearers in certain special cases and circumstances, to derive absolute and universal rules for ministerial addresses in the present day under widely- different circumstances...


XXXIII Therefore, that for ministers in the present day to address unconverted persons, or indiscriminately all in a mixed congregation, calling upon them savingly to repent, believe, and receive Christ, or perform any other acts dependent upon the new creative power of the Holy Ghost, is, on the one hand, to imply creature power, and, on the other, to deny the doctrine of special redemption.




Gospel Standard Strict Baptists

Click to expand...

I have J.C. Philpots sermons. I can count on one hand men i've read that equal his proclamations of the everlasting gospel. The charge that old school baptists dont preach the gospel is wrong. That is entirely different than trying to convince lost people theyre saved : ie duty faith. God tells a man he is saved.

The 1689 reads;

ch. 14
"The grace of faith, whereby the elect are enabled to believe to the saving of their souls, is the work of the Spirit of Christ in their hearts,"

"By this faith a Christian believeth to be true whatsoever is revealed in the Word for the authority of God himself"

"and so is enabled to cast his soul upon the truth thus believed"

ch.15
"This saving repentance is an evangelical grace, whereby a person, being by the Holy Spirit made sensible of the manifold evils of his sin"

[FONT=&quot]The idea that all men everywhere must repent is biblical, BUT, the repentance required of the reprobate is legal. All men are guilty of breaking God's law and therefore must repent of their deeds and they never do. Sure, unsaved people feel guilt or regret over their sins but they still rage against the holy and living God. Only the elect are given the "evangelical grace" of repentance and faith that leads to eternal life.

So, I deny the duty of all men to savingly repent.

jm
[/FONT]

JM said:

I deny the duty of all men to savingly repent.

Click to expand...

I'm not comfortable with that.

I think the bible tells us that we should repent.

Job 34:33
33 Should God then reward you on your terms,
when you refuse to repent?
You must decide, not I;
so tell me what you know.

Job 36:10
10 He makes them listen to correction
and commands them to repent of their evil.

Isaiah 30:15
15 This is what the Sovereign LORD, the Holy One of Israel, says: “In repentance and rest is your salvation,
in quietness and trust is your strength,
but you would have none of it.

Isaiah 59:20
20 “The Redeemer will come to Zion,
to those in Jacob who repent of their sins,”
declares the LORD.

Ezekiel 18:32
32 For I take no pleasure in the death of anyone, declares the Sovereign LORD. Repent and live!

Matthew 4:17
17 From that time on Jesus began to preach, “Repent, for the kingdom of heaven has come near.”

Matthew 11:20
20 Then Jesus began to denounce the towns in which most of his miracles had been performed, because they did not repent.

Acts 2:38
38 Peter replied, “Repent and be baptized, every one of you, in the name of Jesus Christ for the forgiveness of your sins. And you will receive the gift of the Holy Spirit.

Acts 3:19
19 Repent, then, and turn to God, so that your sins may be wiped out, that times of refreshing may come from the Lord,

Acts 11:18
18 When they heard this, they had no further objections and praised God, saying, “So then, even to Gentiles God has granted repentance that leads to life.”

Acts 17:30
30 In the past God overlooked such ignorance, but now he commands all people everywhere to repent.

Link: http://www.biblegateway.com/keyword...6&startnumber=51&startnumber=76&startnumber=1

Osage Bluestem said:

I'm not comfortable with that.

Click to expand...

Not all doctrine is comfortable.

I think the bible tells us that we should repent.

Click to expand...

I do as well. The difference is between legal and saving repentance.

jm

JM said:

Not all doctrine is comfortable.



I do as well. The difference is between legal and saving repentance.

jm

Click to expand...

I don't think I understand.

JM said:

I found these descriptions online:

Legal repentance may be accompanied by pangs of sorrow for sin or even reformation. If horror of conscience and fears of hell could constitute true repentance, then Judas was a true penitent. His horror and fear were so great they drove him to despair. Yes, we may feel what some felt, and yet remain impenitent.
​

True evangelical repentance is a change of heart as well as practice. Sin becomes the greatest concern. True repentance looks to the secrets of wickedness within, which is traced to the corrupt fountain in his heart from which it flows.
​

Click to expand...

I didn't know the first one even existed. I thought that it would fall under the umbrella of conviction. Convicted people many times do not repent and harden or go nuts.

The second one is the one repentance I have ever understood. I thought there was only one repentance.

We are slicing the theological very thin. lol

the particular baptist said:

Ian Murray edited Pinks Sovereignty Of God. Only a dishonest men do that. Shame on him and BOT. I have vowed to never purchase another BOT book again because i dont trust them and until they put out Pinks work in full and apologize and admit why i wont change my mind. I have read Murray's reasons and theyre bogus. Pink never changed his positions on the love of God for the elect only and on reprobation. And even if he did, you dont EVER edit someone elses work to fit your own theological bent, only dishonest men do that. So do i think Ian Murray and BOT are at the very least dishonest ? What do dishonest men do ?

I admire George Ella, his works, and his courage to take pen against dishonest men.

Click to expand...

I think we will not find agreement over this one brother , and yes I am used to debating this subject and have all Pinks works (including some original bound copies of his magazine) do I think editing work can be good or justified ? yes .... , and dishonesty is to hide the fact that one has edited , thus the Banner Of Truth and Ian Muray are cleared .

JM said:

We are slicing the theological very thin. lol

Click to expand...

I guess so. I might not be sharp enough to slice that thin.

If you buy any of Pink's works, buy them from Baker...they do not edit out the good stuff.

j

I found this quote today ;

[FONT=&quot]The Sovereignty of God
This is the edited Banner of Truth edition of Pink's book.It leaves out the three following chapters: "The Sovereignty of God in Reprobation;" "God's Sovereignty and Human Responsibility;" "Difficulties and Objections." It also does not contain the four following appendices: "The Will of God;" "The Case of Adam;" The Meaning of "Kosmos" in John 3:16;""I John 2:2."

However, it does contain some very helpful editorial footnotes that the Baker edition does not contain.

I have enjoyed both editions and would recommend both editions
[/FONT]

BOT removed the elements of Pink's work he continued to add to and improve on. If you compare Pink's early editions with latter he tried to improve and add to the very sections BOT edited or removed.

I have a hard time believing A. W. Pink would have approved of the BOT edition.

j

JM said:

BOT removed the elements of Pink's work he continued to add to and improve on. If you compare Pink's early editions with latter he tried to improve and add to the very sections BOT edited or removed.

I have a hard time believing A. W. Pink would have approved of the BOT edition.

j

Click to expand...

I agree, the Baker Publishing Group edition is the preferred book.

Speaking of Pink, he states "If God formed a purpose before man was created, then is that purpose going to be executed according to His original designs and is He now working toward that end? What saith the Scriptures? They declare God is One "who worketh all things after the counsel of His own will" (Eph. 1:11).

Beautiful, Pink is great reading, I was blessed from the beginning to end while reading his book on the sovereignty of God.