Calvinism is the gospel

I still do associate myself with Calvinism though. Calvinists shouldn't say that Calvinism is the Gospel of Jesus Christ; to do that would Conflate the two. I think that for the average Calvinist, if we were able to probe them a little; they would not mean to Conflate the Doctrines of Grace with the Gospel of Jesus Christ...

I say that Calvinism is 'like' the Gospel of Jesus Christ...
And I'm sure you're very right there Rev. Many Calvinists might not hold to that. Thing is though the poster quoted from shall we call them experts in the subject? Very, very well known Calvinists. We're always told that somebody that knows the doctrines doesn't Conflate the two. There are many of those with expertise in it do though, thus the cause for genuine and great concern.
 
And I'm sure you're very right there Rev. Many Calvinists might not hold to that. Thing is though the poster quoted from shall we call them experts in the subject? Very, very well known Calvinists. We're always told that somebody that knows the doctrines doesn't Conflate the two. There are many of those with expertise in it do though, thus the cause for genuine and great concern.
Agreed...
 
Agreed...

I teach science, and one of subjects I teach is modern Physics. So I teach about Black holes. I recently came across a YT video, "Astrophysicist Explains Black Holes in 5 levels of Difficulty (Child, Teen, College Student, Grad Student, Expert)".

It points out that in order to explain something to someone, you need to know who your audience is, and you have to have some idea of their previous knowledge.

I approach the gospel in the same way.
You can explain what the gospel is in MANY different levels of expertise. Usually, if we are evangelizing, we assume no prior knowledge, and so we present it in its simplest form:

1) God is holy;
2) Man has sinned;
3) The wages of sin is death;
4) All men are condemned to death for their sins.
5) God chose to be merciful, and sent His son to die to atone for sin.
6) If you believe in God's son Jesus Christ, you will be saved.

But you can go into more detail:

1) What is sin? This is why Ray Comfort's approach is to appeal to the Ten Commandments and to personal experience;
2) Where did sin come from?
3) What does "death" mean?
4) Who is God's son?
5) Did God's son need to be perfect?
6) Did God's son need to be God?
7) What does it mean to "believe"?
8) Where does "belief" come from?
9) How do faith and works relate to one another?
10) etc.
11) etc.
12) etc.

And so on, and so on...
So depending on your audience and your intended comprehensiveness, you can present the gospel on a tract the size of a credit card, or you may fill a 300+ -page book.

I don't believe Spurgeon (and he is the ONLY one they can find to depend on this "quote") was saying that if an Arminian presents the gospel without appealing to Calvinism, or that if he includes the prescription of "free will", that it wasn't the gospel.

I believe Spurgeon's only point was that if you take the gospel to its most complete and comprehensive end, what you end up with is "Calvinism".

Which makes the poster's repeated criticism a worthless joke.
 
Last edited:
Can you tell everyone you shared the gospel with the following ? yes or no

1- God loves you
2- Jesus died for your sins
1. What if I am sharing the gospel with Esau? Should part of the message be, "Be assured that if you don't accept Christ, that God has prepared a very special place for you in hell because He loves you so much."?
2. Jesus died for the sins of those who believe. That does not mean that it can't be part of the gospel message, because, if they believe and are saved, then Jesus did in fact die for their sins. If they don't believe, then Jesus did not die for their sins. The concept is actually very simple.
 
1. What if I am sharing the gospel with Esau? Should part of the message be, "Be assured that if you don't accept Christ, that God has prepared a very special place for you in hell because He loves you so much."?
2. Jesus died for the sins of those who believe. That does not mean that it can't be part of the gospel message, because, if they believe and are saved, then Jesus did in fact die for their sins. If they don't believe, then Jesus did not die for their sins. The concept is actually very simple.
You avoided the questions but I completely understand why you did, I use to answer them just like you. Your response confirms I'm right. So thank you.

hope this helps !!!
 
And I'm sure you're very right there Rev. Many Calvinists might not hold to that. Thing is though the poster quoted from shall we call them experts in the subject? Very, very well known Calvinists. We're always told that somebody that knows the doctrines doesn't Conflate the two. There are many of those with expertise in it do though, thus the cause for genuine and great concern.
Good points brother
 
You avoided the questions but I completely understand why you did, I use to answer them just like you. Your response confirms I'm right. So thank you.

hope this helps !!!
Um... I take it you don't understand the Socratic Method? I notice that you couldn't answer my questions without completely undermining your position, so you went this way instead. You proclaimed yourself the victor without actually fighting, as your kingdom is burning down behind you. Nice.

The gospel is not that God is love, but that God, who is just sent His Son to take our penalty that we can stand before God forgiven. If we put too much on God is love, then we may become universalists such as yourself.

The gospel is that Christ died for us, however, the true message of the gospel is why He died for us (sin), and what that does for those who believe.

Where does love come in? Love is the reason we preach the gospel. God's love is the reason He sent His children to tell others about the gospel. God ordaining preaching of the gospel to be the way that those He has chosen will come to Him, is the reason we preach the gospel.

I just think it is funny that you believe it to be holy and just to tell Esau that God loves him, and has a wonderful plan for his life. That is like the pinnacle of foolishness and ignorance. Man would say that Esau just has to keep doing good things, and all will be well, because God is love. God said, I hate Esau. It doesn't matter the meaning of the word hate, or what that statement means, as it does nothing to change the outcome.

For instance:
God hates Esau - Esau goes to hell.
God actually loves Esau - Esau goes to hell.
God is just a little miffed with Esau - Esau goes to hell.
Esau forgot to celebrate the anniversary of Creation - Esau goes to hell.

The end result never changes. It is clear that God "hates" Esau in terms of His justice, and because... He felt like it. Just like He felt like destroying Pharaoh and Egypt, just to make His name known to the nations all around, by His actions. One could say that this is God being evil, or God just being a pain, but that would/could only be true if God didn't CREATE us. When you look at God through the eyes of rebellious sinful men, of course you would see God in that way. How dare our Creator do anything at all...
 
Last edited:
I teach science, and one of subjects I teach is modern Physics. So I teach about Black holes. I recently came across a YT video, "Astrophysicist Explains Black Holes in 5 levels of Difficulty (Child, Teen, College Student, Grad Student, Expert)".

It points out that in order to explain something to someone, you need to know who your audience is, and you have to have some idea of their previous knowledge.

I approach the gospel in the same way.
You can explain what the gospel is in MANY different levels of expertise. Usually, if we are evangelizing, we assume no prior knowledge, and so we present it in its simplest form:

1) God is holy;
2) Man has sinned;
3) The wages of sin is death;
4) All men are condemned to death for their sins.
5) God chose to be merciful, and sent His son to die to atone for sin.
6) If you believe in God's son Jesus Christ, you will be saved.

But you can go into more detail:

1) What is sin? This is why Ray Comfort's approach is to appeal to the Ten Commandments and to personal experience;
2) Where did sin come from?
3) What does "death" mean?
4) Who is God's son?
5) Did God's son need to be perfect?
6) Did God's son need to be God?
7) What does it mean to "believe"?
8) Where does "belief" come from?
9) How do faith and works relate to one another?
10) etc.
11) etc.
12) etc.

And so on, and so on...
So depending on your audience and your intended comprehensiveness, you can present the gospel on a tract the size of a credit card, or you may fill a 300+ -page book.

I don't believe Spurgeon (and he is the ONLY one they can find to depend on this "quote") was saying that if an Arminian presents the gospel without appealing to Calvinism, or that if he includes the prescription of "free will", that it wasn't the gospel.

I believe Spurgeon's only point was that if you take the gospel to its most complete and comprehensive end, what you end up with is "Calvinism".

Which makes the poster's repeated criticism a worthless joke.
I totally agree. Talk about Worthless jokes, If you run across a big Enough black hole what you end up with is" Calvinism". No criticism intended.
 
What do you get, if you omit your final sentence? Answer: insulting, negative criticism.

What do you get, if you include your final sentence? Answer: insulting, negative criticism, and an attempt to hide the fact.
All that coming from someone whose username is “Predestined”.
 
Just as Spurgeon made this claim we read it below here from PRCA website - Calvinist- Protestant Reformed Churches of America.

“Calvinism is the Gospel. Its outstanding doctrines are simply the truths that make up the Gospel. Departure from Calvinism, therefore, is apostasy from the Gospel of God's grace in Christ. Our defense of Calvinism, then, will proceed as follows. First, we will show that Calvinism is the Gospel. This is necessary because of its detractors, who criticize it as a perversion of the Gospel. Second, we will defend it as the Gospel. In doing this, we carry out the calling that every believer has from God. Paul wrote that he was "set for the defense of the Gospel" (Philippians 1:17). I Peter 3:15 calls every believer to give an answer, an "apology," or defense, to everyone who asks us a reason for the hope that is in us. As the name indicates, Calvinism is a certain teaching associated with John Calvin; it refers to Biblical doctrines that he propounded.”

“Calvinism, then, can rightly be viewed as certain basic doctrines, the so-called "five points of Calvinism."

http://www.prca.org/pamphlets/pamphlet_31.html

Conclusion : once again I’m right most Calvinists do not know what Calvinism teaches.

hope this helps !!!

Hello "C"!

Calvinism is not the Gospel. IMHO, it is an explanation of the dynamics, limitations, and the process of who gets saved.
People are radically sinful a.k.a. Total Depravity. Those who get saved are unconditionally elected. Which, of course, is God's sovereign choice. The atonement is Limited to the chosen sheep, not the goats. Irresistible grace is the power of God for salvation of His sheep, those who believe. That grace is what preserves the believer.

The Gospel is summarized in 1 Corinthians:

3 For I handed down to you as of first importance what I also received, that Christ died for our sins according to the Scriptures, 4 and that He was buried, and that He was raised on the third day according to the Scriptures, 5 and that He appeared
 
Back
Top