Calvinist Flyswatter

Bob Ross: Spurgeon Misrepresented by Murray

Below is from Brother Bob Ross.

Charles

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>

SWATTING ANOTHER PEDOBAPTIST-CALVINIST HOUSEFLY--or,

SPURGEON MISREPRESENTED BY MURRAY ON THE "DOWN GRADE CONTROVERSY"

Dear Charles:

[This is one which I thought I sent a day or so ago, but I think I miss-fired].


The following has to do with a "fly" which was actually hatched in the 1800s during Spurgeon final years. He did his best to swat that fly in his day, and some would have thought that he killed it. But lo, this old walleyed and crosseyed fly was somehow given a resurrection by Pedobaptist-Calvinist Iain Murray and the Banner of Truth.

Here is an email I sent to my friend, Erroll Hulse of England, about this obnoxious fly:

>>
Dear Brother Hulse:

I have been reading in your book, An Introduction to the Baptists, and on page 38 you say Spurgeon believed the "doctrines of grace" was the only basis for the adequate union of churches. I must differ with this interpretation of Spurgeon, in the light of what Spurgeon wrote in regard to the Baptist Union and the Down Grade. I thought you might be interested in my refutation of Bro. Iain Murray on his thesis in this regard. -- Bob L. Ross

>
ON THE "DOWN GRADE CONTROVERSY," SPURGEON IS MISREPRESENTED BY IAIN MURRAY'S BOOK [06/17/04]

When Mr. Iain Murray of The Banner of Truth published his book, The Forgotten Spurgeon, we wrote a brief notice in our book review column of The Christian Pilgrim. Concerning the "Down Grade Controversy," we said that Mr. Murray's "strong dedication to the Calvinist system" was the occasion for "an endeavor to relate Calvinism to the Down Grade controversy," and we noted that "Spurgeon emphatically denied this when a similar charge was made during the controversy itself" (May 1968, page 13).

While Mr. Murray acknowledges that Spurgeon denied this charge, nevertheless Murray digs up a lot of the same groundless materials published against Spurgeon in the 1880s by his enemies, publishes them, and expresses his agreement with those who made that unjust allegation.

Murray astonishly wrote, "In this they were right. Spurgeon's theology consistently governed his total outlook."

Instead of giving emphasis to what Spurgeon HIMSELF wrote in refuting this charge, Murray uses his gift of manipulative writing to resurrect the very same allegation and gives credence to the charge.

This was one of the reasons why we put together all of the pertinent materials from Spurgeon on the Down Grade and published the book entitled, The Down Grade Controversy, allowing Spurgeon to speak for himself. With this book in hand, one need not be misled by the craft of Mr. Murray who was evidently attempting to strike a blow for Calvinism as a system.

Since it has been speculated by some that the Down Grade controversy may have had some bearing upon hastening Spurgeon's early demise at age 57, it would cast the enemies of Calvinism in a bad light, as if Spurgeon was somewhat of a "martyr" for Calvinism as system.

Whatever may be produced from sources which were critical of Spurgeon, and regardless of the spin which they put forth in discrediting Spurgeon's motives in the Down Grade, the historical fact remains that Spurgeon himself pointedly DENIED THAT CALVINISM had anything to do with his stand during this time.

In none of the major articles on the Down Grade did Spurgeon involve the matter of Calvinism, but he focused upon the core doctrines of the Bible, the basic fundamentals, which are shared by all theological systems which accept the inspiration and authority of the Scriptures.

Here are excerpts from Spurgeon which demonstrate the facts from his own perspective:

The Sword and the Trowel, April 1887, pages 195, 196:
>
We care far more for the central evangelical truths than we do for Calvinism as a system; but we believe that Calvinism has in it a conservative force which helps to hold men to the vital truth, and therefore we are sorry to see any quitting it who have once accepted it. Those who hold the eternal verities of salvation, and yet do not see all that we believe and embrace, are by no means the objects of our opposition: warfare is with men who are giving up the atoning sacrifice, denying the inspiration of Holy Scripture, and casting slurs upon justification by faith. The present struggle is NOT A DEBATE upon the question of Calvinism or Arminianism, but of the truth of God versus the inventions of men. ALL WHO BELIEVE THE GOSPEL should unite against that "modern thought" which is its deadly enemy.
>

The Sword and the Trowel, August 1887, pages 397-400:
>
Read those newspapers which represent the Broad School of Dissent, and ask yourself, How much farther could they go? What doctrine remains to be abandoned? What other truth to be the object of contempt? A new religion has been initiated . . . The Atonement is scouted, the inspiration of Scripture is derided, the Holy Spirit is degraded into an influence, the punishment of sin is turned into fiction, and the resurrection into a myth, and yet these enemies of our faith expect us to call them brethren, and maintain a confederacy with them! . . . Too many ministers are toying with the deadly cobra of "another gospel," in the form of "modern thought" . . . The case is mournful. Certain ministers are making infidels. Avowed atheists are not a tenth as dangerous as those preachers who scatter doubt and stab at faith. . . . Germany was made unbelieving by her preachers, and England is following in her track. . . . We fear it is hopeless ever to form a society which can keep out men base enough to profess one thing and believe another; but it might be possible to make an informal alliance among all who hold the Christianity of their fathers.
>

The Sword and the Trowel, December 1887:
>
Certain antagonists have tried to represent the Down Grade controversy as a revival of the old feud between Calvinists and Arminians. IT IS NOTHING OF THE KIND. Many evangelical ARMINIANS are as earnestly ON OUR SIDE as men can be. We do not conceal our own Calvinism in the least; but this conflict is for truths which are common to all believers. This is no battle over words, but it deals with the eternal verities--those foundation truths which belong not exclusively to this party or to that. It is of no use attempting to drag this red herring across our path: we can argue other points and maintain Christian harmony at the same time: but with those who treat the Bible as waste paper, and regard the death of Christ as no substitution, we have no desire for fellowship. We have come out in earnest protest, and feel great content of conscience in having done so.
>>

The Sword and the Trowel, February 1888, page 82:
>
I would like all Christendom to know that all I asked of the Union is that it be formed on a Scriptural basis; and that I never sought to intrude upon it any Calvinistic or other personal creed, but only that form of belief which has been accepted for many years by the Evangelical Alliance, which includes members of well-nigh ALL CHRISTIAN COMMUNITIES.
>

The Sword and the Trowel, October 1888, page 563:
>
We are represented as wishing to force upon the churches a narrow CREED. Nothing was further from our mind. We do not consider that the demand for agreement to vital truths COMMON TO ALL Christians can be looked upon as a piece of sectarian bigotry. Here is a man, who is himself a Calvinist, who does not ask that a Union should draw up a Calvinistic creed, but only begs for one which will let the whole world know that brethren are associated as Christians, and that those who do not agree to the first principles of our faith will be intruders. Is this narrowness?
>

The material we collected on the Down Grade for publication as a small book came from Spurgeon's (1) magazine, (2) his sermons, and (3) his autobiography. In none of these did Spurgeon ever indicate that Calvinism was involved in the Down Grade.

The only involvement of "Calvinism" was in the vain attempt by Spurgeon's ENEMIES to inject it into the controversy as a means of diverting attention from the central truths which were involved, and perhaps as a red herring to create prejudice in evangelical non-Calvinists so as to hinder their giving Spurgeon their encouragement and support.

We regret that Mr. Murray joined hands with the enemies of Spurgeon and picked up their cudgel in attempting to hammer the misrepresentation that the basis of Spurgeon's opposition to the Down Grade in the Baptist Union was Calvinism. -- Bob L. Ross

For all of the information we collected on the Down Grade Controversy, go to the Spurgeon Archive website.

Mr. Hulse did not bother to dispute the facts in my email.

Mr. Murray's zeal to promote Calvinism as a system has often been the occasion for his crafty misrepresentation C. H. Spurgeon. While much of his writing about Spurgeon is worthwhile, he is very much inclined to make Spurgeon into something which he was not. In one case, I even found misinformation in his book on "Spurgeon v. Hyper-Calvinism" (page 128) about the views of the late Dr. John Gill (1697-1771). Of course, I let him know that this was not appreciated. -- Bob L. Ross http://writingsofbobross.tripod.com/1toc1.html

posted by Charles @ 6:14 PM