Common Grace .... not a Reprobation thread

[cygnusx1]

1. Is the Doctrine of Common Grace Reformed?
2. Grace Uncommon
3. A Triple Breach in the Foundation of the Reformed Truth
4. A Brief Answer to Common Grace

ALL LINKED TO THE HYPER PRC !


like asking a fox to look after my chickens !

 

[Iosias]

ALL LINKED TO THE HYPER PRC !


like asking a fox to look after my chickens !

So in discussing Common Grace we are not allowed to look at why people disagree with it

 

[cygnusx1]

When studying the issue of common grace how does this relate to the covenants?

Common Grace has several meanings throughout Reformed use , sometimes refering to the time of the New Covenant onwards .... all men are called to Chrsit .

In the Old Covenant it tends to be used of the nation Israel as a mixed , elect and reprobate , bunch , all under God's covenant .

 

[Iosias]

Common Grace has several meanings throughout Reformed use , sometimes refering to the time of the New Covenant onwards .... all men are called to Chrsit .

In the Old Covenant it tends to be used of the nation Israel as a mixed , elect and reprobate , bunch , all under God's covenant .

Can you illustrate this please?

 

[cygnusx1]

So in discussing Common Grace we are not allowed to look at why people disagree with it

there are just better places to go ...... if I wish to find out about Calvinism I don't log onto John Wesleys web site !

well seeing as PRC has an axe to grind , and these are the only Reformed Presbyterians who hold this view it should come as no surprise what they will be spouting , after all it is the reason they are seperated from all other Reformed Church's , they are out of step and a sub set minority group by their own reluctance to repent.

I even talked this over with their leader who assured me that "there are difficult texts" for them.

 

[Iosias]

there are just better places to go ...... if I wish to find out about Calvinism I don't log onto John Wesleys web site !

But then Wesley was not a Calvinist which the PRCA certainly are.

well seeing as PRC has an axe to grind , and these are the only Reformed Presbyterians who hold this view it should come as no surprise what they will be spouting , after all it is the reason they are seperated from all other Reformed Church's , they are out of step and a sub set minority group by their own reluctance to repent.

The fact that they are a minority does not really mean anything after all God deals with remnants.

I even talked this over with their leader who assured me that "there are difficult texts" for them.

There are difficult texts for all positions. Who is their leader?

Seeing this thread is about Common Grace...perhaps you should start a new thread on the PRC so you can bash them there?

 

[cygnusx1]

In all of the Reformed Confessions the phrase "common grace" occurs only once:

that is one more time than the word 'Trinity' is used in scripture ...... anyone who wishes to see where most Calvinist Reformed Theologians stand on this can google common grace ....... it is certainly not used once in Calvinist writings !

 

[Iosias]

that is one more time than the word 'Trinity' is used in scripture ...... anyone who wishes to see where most Calvinist Reformed Theologians stand on this can google common grace ....... it is certainly not used once in Calvinist writings !

But two things are plain:

1. It is a very recent term so if you were to Google it the writers will most likely be Dutch Reformed post Abraham Kuyper. I doubt you will find it used by Calvin and the Puritans in the same theological sense.
2. To be Reformed one must agree with the Reformed Catechisms and Confessions so if one is unable to find the doctrine of Common Grace in them one must ask if it is a Reformed doctrine.

At the very least you can not charge those who disagree with is as being unReformed if their own confessions are silent upon the issue.

 

[Iosias]

1. http://www.prca.org/prtj/apr96c.html
2. http://www.prca.org/prtj/apr97.html#AnotherLookCommonGrace
3. http://www.rfpa.org/Scripts/prodView.asp?idproduct=69
4.

 

[cygnusx1]

But then Wesley was not a Calvinist which the PRCA certainly are.

#

irrelevant!


the point I am making remains , if you wish to read any subject without extreme bias , then wisdom asks "don't go for answers" from those most prejudiced against it ..... the fact that the PRC is "Calvinist" is neither here nor there , they hate common grace , and write with a chip on their shoulder because they were seperated from all the Reformed Calvinist Church's mainly over this issue.

The fact that they are a minority does not really mean anything after all God deals with remnants.

well it does make a difference if the preaching is indicating God only loves the elect ...... to hell with everyone else !
This will surely bring insulation , smugness and a certain negativity to anything evangelistic except for a narrow plowing ... "only for sensible sinners" approach .... ...

all hypers throughout history act the same way as their denom's diminsh into oblivion ...... using the same sad logic !

Spurgeon and Whitefield , Carey and David Brainerd , certainly showed their Calvinism was anything but dry dogma ..... and obviously as good actions spring from good doctrine so bad action (or inaction) stems from bad doctrine.

There are difficult texts for all positions. Who is their leader?

David Engelsma is their main leader and spokesman.

Seeing this thread is about Common Grace...perhaps you should start a new thread on the PRC so you can bash them there?

I have no wish to bash anyone ........ try not being pompous or presumptious it only undermines your understanding.

 

[cygnusx1]

Can you illustrate this please?

why ?

you have already stated "I have heard it all before."


such comments are very informative of your openess and reasonableness or otherwise.

 

[Iosias]

irrelevant! ... the point I am making remains , if you wish to read any subject without extreme bias , then wisdom asks "don't go for answers" from those most prejudiced against it ..... the fact that the PRC is "Calvinist" is neither here nor there , they hate common grace , and write with a chip on their shoulder because they were seperated from all the Reformed Calvinist Church's mainly over this issue.

Of course they are biased aginst it and this because the do not accept it. In the same way others are biased in favour of it becasue they accept it.

Hoeksema and a few other Christian Reformed ministers were kicked out of the CRC over the issue of common grace and the well-meant offer of the gospel. They then established the PRC as I am sure you know.

We should listen to their reasons for rejecting these doctrines and test them against Scripture with a Berean spirit. To dismiss their arguments as irrelevant because they disagree with CG is absurd. IMO

well it does make a difference if the preaching is indicating God only loves the elect ...... to hell with everyone else !

I do not follow your logic here I am afraid.

This will surely bring insulation , smugness and a certain negativity to anything evangelistic except for a narrow plowing ... "only for sensible sinners" approach .... ...

(a) The PRC would not accept the 'sensible sinner' position I hold.
(b) That is entirely possible but not inevitable.
(c) A great emphasis upon evangelism could bring about a divorce between doctrine and presentation. I know of ministers who confess to be Calvinists who would be happy to declare "God loves you, Christ died for you" from the pulpit on the grounds of common grace!

all hypers throughout history act the same way as their denom's diminsh into oblivion ...... using the same sad logic !

I think you are alittle unfair here. The Plymouth Brethren which I recently left (because of their Arminianism) has declined and this is not aresult of hyper-calvinistic tendencies. Indeed general church attendance has steadily decline in the UK over the past decades and this is not because the UK is dominated by Hyper-Calvinists.

Spurgeon and Whitefield , Carey and David Brainerd , certainly showed their Calvinism was anything but dry dogma ..... and obviously as good actions spring from good doctrine so bad action (or inaction) stems from bad doctrine.

That is true but it is also ossible to have good doctrine and bad actions as well as bad doctrine with good actions. The experimental writings of Philpot, Nunn and Gadsby are a real blessing as are the writings of Gill and the PRC. I have been reading High Calvinists in Action which I would heartily recommend you read. (You can borrow it from the Gospel Standard Library for 3 months and you only have to pay P&P)

I have no wish to bash anyone ........ try not being pompous or presumptious it only undermines your understanding.

This was said tongue in cheek

 

[Iosias]

you have already stated "I have heard it all before."

That was directed to the article you posted not your own views.

 

[cygnusx1]

Peter Toon writes ;

"The combined influence of the Hyper-Calvinists mentioned above was to produce in the Churches connected with them, and amongst those whom they influenced, a tendency only to maintain their Churches but not to expand them. Of John Gill’s particular influence, C. H. Spurgeon wrote: “The system of theology with which many identify his name has chilled many Churches to their very soul, for it has led them to omit the free invitations of the Gospel”.7 Also, as W. T. Whitley has pointed out, in the very years when Gill shut himself in his study to expound the New Testament, George Whitefield was preaching several times daily to thousands of people on Newington Common, Blackheath, and Kennington Common; and in the same year that Brine published a refutation of the tract, The Modern Question, Newton of Olney went to Moorfields and by the light of lanterns saw Whitefield preaching to thousands, leading to repentance on one occasion more than eleven times as many sinners as there were saints listening to Brine a quarter of a mile away.8 The spirit which Hyper-Calvinism bred is seen in old John C. Ryland’s shout from the chair when William Carey suggested the formation of a missionary society: “Sit down, young man; when God pleases to convert the heathen He will do it without your aid or mine”. It is a fact that to this day the Gospel Standard Strict Baptist Churches officially support no missionary societies. However, the more liberal Strict Baptists have supported for the last hundred years the Strict Baptist Mission which maintains a small work in India, and amongst Tamil-speaking Indians elsewhere."

 

[Iosias]

Peter Toon

George M. Ella has shown in a number of works that Peter Toon's research has not been 100% accurate.

Free Articles Include
http://www.evangelica.de/John_Gill_and_Hyper-Calvinism.htm
http://www.evangelica.de/John Gill and His Successors.htm
http://www.evangelica.de/John_Gill_and_the_Cause_of_God.htm
http://www.evangelica.de/Reformation Today.htm

Books Include
http://www.go-newfocus.co.uk/pages.php?section=6&artID=108
http://www.go-newfocus.co.uk/pages.php?section=6&artID=112
http://www.go-newfocus.co.uk/pages.php?section=6&artID=111
http://www.go-newfocus.co.uk/pages.php?section=6&artID=114

"The combined influence of the Hyper-Calvinists mentioned above was to produce in the Churches connected with them, and amongst those whom they influenced, a tendency only to maintain their Churches but not to expand them.

What complete rubbish. This is part of the popular myth that seeks to label High Calvinists as anti evangelism but as myth is wholly untrue.


In a Sermon preached at the Ordination of the Reverend Mr. John Davis, at Waltham Abbey in August 15, 1764 Gill stated:

And this is the business that you, my Brother, should be constantly employed in, in instructing men that they are not to be saved by their own works, duties and services; that God saves and calls men, not according to their works, but according to his purpose and grace; that men are to expect the pardon of sin, not on the account of their repentance and humiliation, but through the blood of Christ, and according to the riches of God’s grace; that by the deeds of the law no flesh living can be justified in the sight of God but that a man is justified by faith in the righteousness of Christ, without the deeds of the law; that men are not saved by the best works of righteousness done by them, but by the abundant mercy and free grace of God, through Christ. You are to acquaint all that you are concerned with, that salvation is by Christ alone; that God has chosen and appointed him to be his salvation to the ends of the earth; and that he has appointed men to salvation alone by him; that he has sent him into the world to be the Saviour of them;this is the faithful saying, and worthy of all acceptation, you are to publish and proclaim, that Christ came into the world to save the chief of sinners; and that by his obedience, sufferings, and death, he is become the author of eternal salvation to them;and that there is salvation in him, and in no other; and that there is no other name given under heaven among men whereby they can be saved. Souls sensible of sin and danger, and who are crying out, What shall we do to be saved? you are to observe, and point out Christ the tree of life unto them; and say, as some of the cherubs did to one in such circumstances, Believe on the Lord Jesus Christ, and thou shalt be saved, Acts 16:31. Your work is to lead men, under a sense of sin and guilt, to the blood of Christ, shed for many for the remission of sin; and in his name you are to preach the forgiveness of it to them; you are to direct believers, under your care, to go by faith daily to Christ the mediator, and deal with the blood of sprinkling for the remission of their sins, and the cleansing of their souls; which sprinkled on them speaks peace and pardon, purges the conscience from dead works, and cleanses from all sin. You are to point out the righteousness of Christ, as the only justifying righteousness of men, by whose obedience only men are made righteous; the ministration of the gospel is a ministration of righteousness, even of the righteousness of Christ, which is revealed in it from faith to faith; and such should he your ministration. You are to acquaint men, that this righteousness is unto all, and upon all that believe; and that, such are justified from all things by it, from which they could not be justified by the law of Moses; and that the acceptance of men with God, is only in Christ the beloved. You are to observe to men the atoning sacrifice of the Son of God and to direct them, as one of the cherubs did, pointing to him, and saying, Behold the Lamb of God, which taketh away the sin of the world! John 1:29, to bid them view the sin-bearing and sin-atoning Saviour, and look to the Lamb in the midst of the throne as though he had been slain; by whose slain sacrifice sin is put away, and they perfected for ever that are sanctified. But more of this may be observed.

And a paragraph later;

And this, my Brother, is a principal part of your work, as one of the cherubs, to direct to Christ the mercy-seat, the channel of the grace and mercy of God to the souls of men; as God set forth Christ in his eternal purposes and decrees to be a propitiation, ιλαζηθιον, Romans 3:25, the same word the Greek interpreters use for the mercy-seat in Exodus 25, so you are to set him forth in your ministrations as the propitiation, propitiatory, and mercy-seat: let the mercy-seat be ever in view; keep in sight in all your ministrations the doctrine of atonement and satisfaction by the blood and sacrifice of Christ; let this be the pole-star by which you steer the course of your ministry; direct souls to the throne of grace, to the mercy-seat, to God in Christ, where they may hope to find grace and mercy to help them in time of need: and, for your encouragement, observe the situation of the cherubim, they were upon the mercy-seat, at the ends of it, being beaten out of the same mass of gold with that; denoting the nearness of ministers to Christ, their union to him, and dependence on him, and support by him, who holds the stars in his right hand:and also his presence with them; for between the cherubim, the shekinah, or glorious majesty of God, dwelt; and Christ has promised to be with his ministers unto the end of the world.

http://www.pbministries.org/books/gill/Sermons&Tracts/sermon_73.htm

Also
http://www.pbministries.org/books/gill/Sermons&Tracts/sermon_72.htm

I would suggest you read a copy of High Calvinists in Action which you can borrow from the Gospel Standard Library.

It is a fact that to this day the Gospel Standard Strict Baptist Churches officially support no missionary societies.

The GS were engaged in a great deal of mission within the UK hence the establishment of the Gospel Standard Aid & Poor Relief Societies. This is also evidenced by the works of William Gadsby in the centre of Manchester as can be seen in his sermons and the biography of him in High Calvinists in Action.

Gadsby
"He travelled over 60,000 miles, many of them on foot and preached nearly 12,000 sermons. He was influential in establishing 40 new places of worship." http://www.gospelstandard.org/author.asp?name=wgadsby

 

[cygnusx1]

ella .....

 

[Iosias]

ella .....

You may yawn but the evidence he brings to the table is in stark contrast to those who charge Gill etc of being anti mission...blah...blah...blah...

 

[cygnusx1]

You may yawn but the evidence he brings to the table is in stark contrast to those who charge Gill etc of being anti mission...blah...blah...blah...

yes I do yawn , anything by Ella the arch Hyper apologist is to be taken with a pinch of salt .... and how many missionary societies does the Gospel Standard Strict Baptist church support today > and they consider Gill their leading Theologian.

know them by their fruit , not just by "clever" arguement.

 

[Iosias]

yes I do yawn , anything by Ella the arch Hyper apologist is to be taken with a pinch of salt .... and how many missionary societies does the Gospel Standard Strict Baptist church support today > and they consider Gill their leading Theologian.

no them by their fruit , not just by "clever" arguement.

Your views brother...I however prefer to listen to both sides and come to a conclusion. From what I have read by Gill (and that is a lot) I can find no real evidences of the Hyper-Calvinism that you perceive. Nor do I find any evidences in history that Gill was anti-Mission.

You ask me "how many missionary societies does the Gospel Standard Strict Baptist church support today" to which I reply with an honest I do not know. Even if they supported none I do not blame them in that the mission societies that exist today are full of Arminianism and from such we are to separate.

Why are you so worried? If they are anti-Mission they will die out soon and surely you would celebrate that? As for me, like the Anglican William Nunn who was a dear friend of William Gadsby and Augustus Toplady who was a dear friend of Gill, I will, as an Anglican maintain my friendship with the Gospel Standards.

 

[cygnusx1]

For those not entrenched by tunnel vision here is a good place to find the truth , for others , I pray for you ;


Thanks for bringing up this issue. Too many people (including Nettles' poor treatment of the subject) are of the opinion that Gill was not hyper (he IN FACT was in that he denied the free offers and duty-faith), but Spurgeon's own view is on record in his Commenting and Commentaries, as you well know:

"Gill is the Coryphaeus of hyper-Calvinism, but if his followers never went beyond their master, they would not go very far astray."

Commenting and Commentaries, page 16, Kregel 1998.

http://phillipjohnson.blogspot.com/2006/01/letter-from-london.html