Oude Paden schreef:Gian schreef:Oude Paden schreef:Ik moet zeggen z'n levensbeschrijving vondt ik indrukwekkend.
Zijn preken zijn m.i. helaas doortrokken met een remonstrantse lijn.
Ik herken hem niet in onze eigen Hollandse oudvaders en ook de Schotste oudvaders gingen in hun verbondsvisie veel minder ver.
Overigens is het een man van uitersten. Hij heeft ook preken die oercalvinistisch zijn. Nee, ik vindt hem niet evenwichtig. Ook als nieuweling krijg je bij hem niet een duidelijk gevoel welke kant hij op wil!
Mischien wordt het wat begrijperlijker als je je eigen theologie even aflegt.
Vertel eens, wat is nou die romonstrantese lijn in zijn prediking?
Gian,
Christus zoenoffer beschikbaar stellen voor iedereen!
en nu zul jij reageren: dat is toch voluit reformatorisch!
Mijn vraag aan jou: wat is voor jou remonstrants?
Beste oude paden,
Christus verzoenoffer voor iedereen beschikbaar stellen, is dat Remonstrants ?
Kun je dit een uitleggen ? Als dat zo is, dan waren Thomas Boston, Ralph & Ebenezer Erskine, Jonathan Edwards en Johannes Calvijn (en vele andere puriteinen) allemaal Remonstrants ?
Als men het heeft over beschikbaar stellen, dan betekent niet direct dat De Here Jezus Christus voor iedere niet bekeerde zondaar is gestorven, maar Christus is wel beschikbaar voor een ieder die zijn toevlucht neemt tot het kruis.
Trouwens om Spurgeon een Remonstrant te noemen, klinkt als iemand die een hyper calvinist is.
Helaas zijn de volgende citaten alleen in het engels (m.b.t Spurgeon) :
Some persons love the doctrine of universal atonement because they say, "It is so beautiful. It is a lovely idea that Christ should have died for all men; it commends itself," they say, "to the instincts of humanity; there is something in it full of joy and beauty." I admit there is, but beauty may be often associated with falsehood. There is much which I might admire in the theory of universal redemption, but I will just show what the supposition necessarily involves. If Christ on His cross intended to save every man, then He intended to save those who were lost before He died. If the doctrine be true, that He died for all men, then He died for some who were in hell before He came into this world, for doubtless there were even then myriads there who had been cast away because of their sins.
Once again, if it was Christ’s intention to save all men, how deplorably has He been disappointed, for we have His own testimony that there is a lake which burneth with fire and brimstone, and into that pit of woe have been cast some of the very persons who, according to the theory of universal redemption, were bought with His blood. That seems to me a conception a thousand times more repulsive than any of those consequences which are said to be associated with the Calvinistic and Christian doctrine of special and particular redemption. To think that my Savior died for men who were or are in hell, seems a supposition too horrible for me to entertain. To imagine for a moment that He was the Substitute for all the sons of men, and that God, having first punished the Substitute, afterwards punished the sinners themselves, seems to conflict with all my ideas of divine justice. That Christ should offer an atonement and satisfaction for the sins of all men, and that afterwards some of those very men should be punished for the sins for which Christ had already atoned, appears to me to be the most monstrous iniquity that could ever have been imputed to Saturn, to Janus, to the goddess of the Thugs, or to the most diabolical heathen deities. God forbid that we should ever think thus of Jehovah, the just and wise and good!
There is no soul living who holds more firmly to the doctrines of grace than I do, and if any man asks me whether I am ashamed to be called a Calvinist, I answer—I wish to be called nothing but a Christian; but if you ask me, do I hold the doctrinal views which were held by John Calvin, I reply, I do in the main hold them, and rejoice to avow it. But far be it from me even to imagine that Zion contains none but Calvinistic Christians within her walls, or that there are none saved who do not hold our views. Most atrocious things have been spoken about the character and spiritual condition of John Wesley, the modern prince of Arminians. I can only say concerning him that, while I detest many of the doctrines which he preached, yet for the man himself I have a reverence second to no Wesleyan; and if there were wanted two apostles to be added to the number of the twelve, I do not believe that there could be found two men more fit to be so added than George Whitefield and John Wesley. The character of John Wesley stands beyond all imputation for self-sacrifice, zeal, holiness, and communion with God; he lived far above the ordinary level of common Christians, and was one "of whom the world was not worthy." I believe there are multitudes of men who cannot see these truths, or, at least, cannot see them in the way in which we put them, who nevertheless have received Christ as their Savior, and are as dear to the heart of the God of grace as the soundest Calvinist in or out of heaven.
We are often told that we limit the atonement of Christ, because we say that Christ has not made a satisfaction for all men, or all men would be saved. Now, our reply to this is, that, on the other hand, our opponents limit it: we do not. The Arminians say, Christ died for all men. Ask then what they mean by it. Did Christ did so as to secure the salvation of men? They say, "No, certainly not." We ask them the next question — Did Christ die so as to secure the salvation of any man in particular. They answer, "No." They are obliged to admit this, if they are consistent. They say, "No, Christ has died that any man may be saved if" — and then follow certain conditions of salvation. Now, who is it that limits the death of Christ? Why, you. You say that Christ did not die so as infallibly to secure the salvation of anybody. We beg your pardon, when you say we limit Christ's death; we say, "No, my dear sir, it is you that do it." We say Christ so died that He infallibly secured the salvation of a multitude that no man can number, who through Christ's death not only may be saved, but are saved, must be saved and cannot by any possibility run the hazard of being anything but saved. You are welcome to your atonement; you may keep it. We will never renounce ours for the sake of it
:
