Spurgeon’s Theology
Spurgeon began a sermon titled “Election” with this “disclaimer” sometime in 1860. It can be found in the New Park Street Pulpit set of sermons for the year 1860. I call it Spurgeon’s theology because in it he articulates some problems with wooden applications of theological systems. Here is… Spurgeon’s Theology

“He who preaches the whole truth as it is in Jesus will labor under continual disadvantages; albeit, that the grand advantage of having the presence and blessing of God will more than compensate the greatest loss. It has been my earnest endeavour ever since I have preached the Word, never to keep back a single doctrine which I believe to be taught of God. It is time that we had done with the old and rusty systems that have so long curbed the freeness of religious speech. The Arminian trembles to go an inch beyond Arminius or Wesley, and many a Calvinist refer to John Gill or John Calvin, as any ultimate authority. It is time that the systems were broken up, and that there was sufficient grace in all our hearts to believe everything taught in God’s Word, whether it was taught by either of these men or not. I have frequently found when I have preached what is called high doctrine, because I found it
in my text, that some people have been offended; they could not enjoy it, could not endure it, and went away. They were generally people who were best gone; I have never regretted their absence. On the other hand, when I have taken for my text some sweet invitation, and have preached the freeness of Christ’s Love to man; when I have warned sinners that they are responsible while they hear the gospel, and that if they reject Christ their blood will be upon their own heads, I find another class of doubt- less excellent
individuals who cannot see how these two things agree. And therefore, they also turn aside, and wade into the deceptive miry bogs of Antinomianism. can only say with regard to them, that I had rather also that they should go to their own sort, than that they should remain with my congregation. We seek to hold the truth. We know no difference between high doctrine and low doctrine. If God teaches it, it is enough. If it is not in the Word, away with it! away with it! But if it be in the Word, agreeable or disagreeable,systematic or disorderly, I believe it. It may seem to us as if one truth stood in opposition to another but we are fully convinced that it cannot be so, that it is a mistake in our judgment.That the two things do agree we are quite clear, though where they meet we do not know as yet, but hope to know hereafter. That God has a people whom he has chosen for himself, and who shall shew forth his praise, we do believe to be a doctrine legible in the Word of God to every man who cares to read that Book with an honest and exhortations of the gospel are honest and true invitations—not fictions or myths, not tantalizations and mockeries, but realities and candid judgment. That, at the same time, Christ is freely presented to every creature under heaven, and that the invitations and facts- we do also unfeignedly believe. We subscribe to both truths with our hearty assent and consent.” C.H. Spurgeon 1860

Thanks for your response. Thot I’d offer one explanation – My list of church history facts was to illustrate that men with a Calvinistic background were very instrumental in defining Fundamentalism early on.

A question that further illustrates that point is this:
Where were the “FIVE FUNDAMENTALS,” that short list of key doctrines set down as primary, first codified? -

drum roll

…at the 1910 General Assembly of the Presbyterian Church.

Many church historians have recorded this fact. One such source is David Beale’s book “In Pursuit of Purity” page 149. The minutes of that general assembly are another.

Your points are factually accurate to my knowledge. Thanks for posting them.

@Luke, Jay,

Thanks for the comments.

@Don,

I agree with you that Sweatt no doubt has the good of Fundamentalism as his motivation. But that doesn’t make breaking the ninth commandment ok. That’s pragmatism.

Grace to you.

You’re missing the point. This is not about C v. A. I didn’t even mention that issue in this post. This is about basic honesty and integrity.

Sorry! I am reading so many posts that it is easy to collate the arguments everywhere.

I’ll not carry on the argument here, but will simply say that I think you are reading too much into the sermon and misconstruing its intent and content.

I would urge anyone who is observing to be sure that they listen to the message itself before simply launching into a knee-jerk “this is what’s wrong with fundamentalism” response. If you have a Calvinistic point of view, you will find your view challenged with some bad arguments, but I hope that any one who listens could think about what is going on in the mind of the preacher and why he is making the statements he does.

I think his arguments failed to achieve his goals, but his concerns and motivation are for the good of fundamentalism and the cause of Christ.

FWIW

Maranatha!
Don Johnson
Jer 33.3

Great post, and it captures my thoughts exactly.

Well said and to the point. Thank you for a well balanced response to the issue. Still respecting and honoring the older generation, but not remaining silent while on the issues of the truth.

My comment here is motivated by the need for all of us to have a careful remembrance of our church history. It is ok to argue for your theological stance, but don’t we all need to do so without distorting the facts of history? In light of recent controversy here are a few such facts for those who are young or old or steady or restless, but indeed wish to be informed:

FACT: C. H. Spurgeon,
was a Calvinistic Baptist in the 1800s and the church where he preached, Metropolitan Tabernacle is more than 300 years in existence and remains a conservative evangelical in England. Their motto today is “Still a large congregation proclaiming the Gospel of Christ and the doctrines of grace.”

FACT: William Carey
is called ‘the father of modern missions.” Carey was a Reformed Baptist from England. Hyper-Calvinism may kill evangelism, but hyper-anything has the potential to kill or do damage, even hyper-separationism. Genuine John Calvin Calvinism or Reformed Theology, has historically been at the front end of many evangelistic movements. In all fairness this does not exclude other groups who have contributed greatly to the spread of the Gospel.

In the late 1800s and early 1900s there were several individuals and church groups that were the starting force for the defense of the “fundamentals” as they were called. Here are a few.

FACT: the Niagara Bible Conference
led by James H. Brookes, pastor of a Presbyterian Church in St. Louis, was very instrumental in tilling the ready ground for the “5 Fundamentals” and their later publication. (It is generally assumed that a Presbyterian is also a Calvinist)

FACT: Presbyterian theology-
“Fundamentalism as a movement arose in the United States, starting among conservative Presbyterian academics and theologians at Princeton Theological Seminary in the first decade of the Twentieth Century.” (wikipedia referencing church historians Mark A. Noll and Terry Matthews)

FACT: J. Gresham Machen
in the early 1900s was the tip of the spear for the defense of the inerrancy of Scripture in the Modernist/Fundamentalist controversy. He was a professor at Princeton Seminary. Later he left and formed Westminster Theological Seminary.

FACT: C. I. Scofield,
a favorite among Fundamentalists in the 20th century, was another figure instrumental in its formative stage. Later in life he became the minister of a Southern Presbyterian church.

There are others. Check with your nearest friendly Church Historian.

The bottom line in any era, age or region has always been Christ Alone. May we each give our whole that others, in particular the lost, may see Christ only and may we use words that help others see only Christ.
a concluding thot:

Although I do believe the doctrines of grace I recommend that wherever one stands that it should not be personality driven. These comments are written only to emphasize that ACCURATE FACTS MATTER and accurate facts matter immensely when we speak in any setting, sermon, blog, article or conversation, that effects the cause of the Gospel.

My hope is that we will above all else stay in The Word (John 17:17) and keep the focus on spreading the Gospel (I Cor 15:1-11).