 |
| C. H. SPURGEON. |
Although Spurgeon was a Calvinist, he actually sounds like an advocate of Free Grace theology when he shares the following thoughts on Matthew 11:28. Notice what Spurgeon says in a sermon titled “Christ’s Word With You” ‒ it’s still true today!
“‘Come unto me,’ says He, ‘and I will give you.’ That is the Gospel. ‘I will give you.’ You say, ‘Lord, I cannot give thee anything.’ He does not want anything. Come to Jesus, and He says, ‘I will give you.’ Not what you give to God, but what He gives to you, will be your salvation. ‘I will give you:’ that is the Gospel in four words. Will you come and have it? It lies open before you. Jesus wants nothing of you. Suppose you were to become Christ’s disciple, and serve Him with all your might throughout your life ‒ in what way would that enrich Him? He has died for you: how can you ever pay Him for that? He lives in heaven to plead for you, and He loves you; how can you ever reward Him for that? Our hope is not in what we can give to Him, but in what He gives to us.”[1]
2 comments:
I have read several sermons by Spurgeon, and I always come away with a thought that he understood God’s grace. I don’t think any single human gets it completely right, but I have gone to him for wisdom on more than one occasion. Great post.
Thanks, I agree. You know, as I've said before (and this goes to your point too) is that we don't have to agree with everything a person says, or more specifically, everything a Bible teacher says. For example, they may speak truth in one area but be wrong in another area. So for example, I don't have to agree with everything that Spurgeon ever said (as I mentioned, he was in many ways a staunch Calvinist, from what I understand). But if I agree with Spurgeon on certain things, that's fine. As I've mentioned before too (and as another example), I agree with John MacArthur in some areas of doctrine, such as on the deity of Christ. Who wouldn't? If it's biblical, what's the problem? And of course, the deity of Christ is completely biblical. And so I don't have to hide that or be ashamed that I agree with Calvinists in some areas of doctrine. As another example, Dr. Charlie Bing said in his critique of Wayne Grudem's book against Free Grace theology that "I probably agree with more of his theology than disagree." I think this is a fair and balanced analysis, and wise counsel. Obviously Charlie Bing is not advocating Lordship Salvation, but there are areas of agreement on other topics, such as (to go back to my previous example) on the deity of Christ, to name just one thing. But of course there are others, other areas of agreement too. So that's sort of how I look at this whole issue. I don't try to make Free Grace theologians (for example) out to be inspired, they're not (of course we know that) -- and I'm sure they would agree! As you said, probably no one gets everything completely right. So that takes a lot of pressure off because I'm not trying to necessarily defend a certain theologian per se. I think we can get in trouble doing that, I think of how Bob Wilkin followed Zane Hodges almost blindly into the heresy of the "crossless" gospel, for example. That's what can happen when you try to defend everything your favorite Bible teacher says. It can become an obsession and almost idolatry, almost blindly following a man in disregard for a more well-rounded approach of listening to a wider circle of Bible expositors. "There is wisdom in a multitude of counselors" (Prov. 11:14, also 15:22). So that's what I try to do, and that's also why I'm building the Free Grace Library, because I want to help people see that there is a multitude of Bible teachers beside their pet favorite teacher, and there is wisdom in going back to what these men have said instead of only listening to your little circle of "us four and no more and I don't know about you" type of attitude. I think some people have this almost high school or "adolescent clique" type of attitude in regards to their little circle of favorite Bible expositors, which is not necessarily wrong, but I think the danger is that it can lead to an almost inbred theology, as I mentioned earlier with the example of Zane Hodges and Bob Wilkin.
Post a Comment