Hyper-Calvinism: Difference between revisions

Browse history interactively ← Previous editContent deleted Content addedVisual WikitextInline

Revision as of 21:24, 10 February 2006 editWilliamo1 (talk \| contribs)61 editsmNo edit summary← Previous edit		Latest revision as of 08:09, 11 December 2024 edit undoInternetArchiveBot (talk \| contribs)Bots, Pending changes reviewers5,387,807 edits Rescuing 2 sources and tagging 0 as dead.) #IABot (v2.0.9.5) (Pancho507 - 22007
(921 intermediate revisions by more than 100 users not shown)
Line 1:		Line 1:
			{{Short description\|Branch of Protestant theology}}
	{{Calvinism}}
			'''Hyper-Calvinism''' is a branch of ] that places strong emphasis on supralapsarianism, or salvation from eternity (God ] from ]), where the atonement of Christ was and is difficult for the non-elect to understand, where man has little to do with his salvation, there being nothing man can do to resist being saved, wherein evangelism was given lower emphasis as compared to traditional Calvinism, and where assurance of salvation was felt within a person, identified by introspection.<ref>{{Cite book \|last=Toon \|first=Peter \|url=https://www.google.com/books/edition/The_Emergence_of_Hyper_Calvinism_in_Engl/269MAwAAQBAJ?hl=en \|title=The Emergence of Hyper-Calvinism in English Nonconformity 1689-1765 \|date= \|publisher=Wipf and Stock Publishers \|year=2011 \|isbn=978-1-60899-688-9 \|pages=144-145 \|language=en}}</ref>
	'''Hyper-Calvinism''' is an eccentric theological position that historically arose from within the ] tradition among the early English ] in the mid ]. It can be seen in the teachings of men like ] (d. ]), ] (d. ]), ] (d. ]), and to some extent in ] (d. ]).

			It is at times regarded as a variation of ], but critics emphasize its differences from traditional Calvinistic beliefs. Hyper-Calvinism distinguishes itself from traditional Calvinism as regards the "sufficiency and efficiency" of Christ's atonement. ] traditionally argues that only the ] are able to understand Christ's atonement, but that the sufficiency of the atonement stretches to all humanity, while Hyper-Calvinism argues the atonement is sufficient only to the elect.
	It is called Hyper-Calvinism by its critics, who maintain that it deviates from the biblical ] by (1) denying that the call of the gospel to repent and believe is universal, i.e. for all alike, and (2) denying that the unregenerate (natural) man has a duty to repent and believe in Christ for salvation.

			The term originated in the 19th century as a sometimes-pejorative descriptor predated by terms such as "false Calvinism" and "High Calvinism". The term can be used vaguely, and its distinction from traditional Calvinism is not always clear; writers such as Jim Ellis have suggested that Hyper-Calvinism as a concept is sometimes applied broadly to denominations more theologically conservative than the speaker's, rather than to a consistent theological stance. Nonetheless, Hyper-Calvinism is distinguished as a distinct theological branch, associated with figures such as the 18th-century theologian ].
	This theological position was labeled Hyper-Calvinism in the mid 1700s as the issue was argued and debated among English Baptists and others. It should be noted that, although Hyper-Calvinism became fairly widespread among the English Particular Baptists of that day, not all Particular Baptists agreed with the extremes of Wayman and Brine.

			==Definitions==
	While this doctrine has always been a minority view, it has not been relegated to the past and may still be found in some small denominations and church communities today.
			] notes that the expression "Hyper-Calvinism" came to be generally used in the 19th century, while the terms "False Calvinism" and "High Calvinism" were used near the end of the 18th century to define the same doctrinal views.<ref>], '' {{webarchive\|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20090226001003/http://www.anglicanbooksrevitalized.us/Peter_Toons_Books_Online/History/hypercal1.htm \|date=2009-02-26 }}''.</ref> "High Calvinism" has sometimes been used as a synonym for Hyper-Calvinism, and at other times as a synonym for the ] of the ] (1619).<ref>{{cite book \|last1=Wallace \|first1=Dewey D. \|title=Historical Dictionary of Stuart England, 1603–1689 \|date=1996 \|isbn=9780313283918 \|page=65 \|chapter=Calvinism \|publisher=Bloomsbury Academic \|access-date=30 August 2015 \|chapter-url=https://books.google.com/books?id=8goko0Lpr5sC&pg=PA65}}</ref><ref>{{cite book\|last1=McMahon\|first1=C. Matthew\|title=Presumptive Regeneration, or, the Baptismal Regeneration of Elect Infants\|chapter=Presumptive Regeneration, High Calvinism and Resting on the Word of God\|date=2014\|page=15\|publisher=Puritan Publications \|isbn=9781626631052\|chapter-url=https://books.google.com/books?id=wUS9BQAAQBAJ&pg=PA15\|access-date=30 August 2015}}</ref><ref>{{cite book\|last1=Shaw\|first1=Ian\|title=Dissent and the Bible in Britain, C.1650-1950\|chapter='The Only Certain Rule of Faith and Practice': The Interpretation of Scripture Among English High Calvinists, c.1780s–1850\|date=2013\|page=133\|publisher=OUP Oxford \|isbn=978-0-19-960841-6\|chapter-url=https://books.google.com/books?id=MSZnAQAAQBAJ&pg=PA133\|access-date=30 August 2015}}</ref> Although the doctrine of ] is taught in the Canons of Dort,<ref name="dort">{{cite web\|url=http://www.spurgeon.org/~phil/creeds/dort.htm \|title=Canons of Dort \|location=SECOND HEAD: ARTICLE 8. \|url-status=dead \|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20120919133747/http://www.spurgeon.org/~phil/creeds/dort.htm \|archive-date=2012-09-19 }}</ref> the term "Hyper-Calvinism" in previous generations has been used to define those who reject the view that the atonement is sufficient for all mankind or that there is a general design in the death of Christ.

	==~~Non-Technical~~ ~~Usage~~ of the ~~Term~~==		===Historic definitions of the term===
			In his publication from 1825, George Croft defined Hyper-Calvinism as holding to a particular design of Christ's death and denying a general design. He also notes that Hyper-Calvinists were generally styled High-Calvinists because they had views above genuine Calvinism: denying that the death of Christ was "in any respect" intended for the salvation of all, not inviting all to believe in Christ for salvation, contending that invitations should only be given to the "willing", and holding to ] doctrines, which tend to discourage holiness.<ref>{{Cite book \|last=Croft \|first=G. \|url=https://books.google.com/books?id=A9gGAAAAQAAJ&dq=hyper+calvinism&pg=PA169 \|title=The Christian Instructor; Containing a Brief But Comprehensive View of the Evidences, Doctrines, Duties, External Economy and Prospects of the Christian Religion. In the Form of Question and Answer \|date=1825 \|publisher=Francis Westley \|pages=169–173 \|language=en}}</ref> In a ''Protestant Dictionary'' from 1904, Charles Neil defined Hyper-Calvinism as a view that maintains the theory of ] and limits the scope of gospel invitations to the elect.<ref>{{Cite book \|last1=Wright \|first1=Charles Henry Hamilton \|url=https://books.google.com/books?id=B4eFbRYVc94C&dq=hyper+calvinism+limited+atonement&pg=PA575 \|title=A Protestant Dictionary: Containing Articles on the History, Doctrines, and Practices of the Christian Church \|last2=Neil \|first2=Charles \|date=1904 \|publisher=Hodder and Stoughton \|at=p. 575, Column 2. \|language=en}}</ref>

			===Modern definitions of the term===
	The prefix "hyper" may be used generically to refer to anything that is considered "extreme" or which goes beyond the accepted norm. There is therefore a sense in which one may refer to Calvinistic views regarded as going beyond normal Calvinism as "hyper." This non-technical use, usually as a pejorative term, has been applied to a variety of theological positions which fall outside mainstream Calvinism. Usually, Hyper Calvinism refers to a doctrine in which the concepts of Calvinism are carried out to logical extremes to the point of being biblically unsound:
			Modern definitions of Hyper-Calvinism usually distinguish it from points of ], such as ] or ].<ref name=Ellis /> There is not, however, unanimity regarding the definition.

			Curt Daniel defines Hyper-Calvinism as "that school of ] ] which so stresses the sovereignty of God by overemphasizing the secret over the revealed will and eternity over time, that it minimizes the responsibility of Man, notably with respect to the denial of the word ‘offer’ in relation to the preaching of the Gospel of a finished and limited atonement, thus undermining the universal duty of sinners to believe savingly with assurance that the Lord Jesus Christ died for them." Daniel goes on to suggest that the real difference between "High" and "Hyper-" Calvinism is the word "offer"<ref>{{Cite book \|last=Daniel \|first=Curt D. \|url=https://books.google.com/books?id=oVuMbwAACAAJ \|title=Hyper-Calvinism and John Gill \|date=1983 \|publisher=University of Edinburgh \|language=en}}</ref>
	* that God is the source of sin and of evil
	* that previous doctrines set forth are more important than general scriptual themes
	* that a sign of election is to be sought prior to repentance
	* that men have no will of their own, and secondary causes are of no effect
	* that the number of the elect at any time may be known by men
	* that it is wrong to ]
	* that God does not command everyone to repent
	* that there is no ], i.e. God cares only for his elect and has nothing but hatred for the non-elect.
	* that only Calvinists are Christians

			] adopts a different approach, putting the emphasis on the denial of a "universal command to repent and believe" and the assertion "that we have only warrant to invite to Christ those who are conscious of a sense of sin and need."<ref>{{Cite book \|last=Murray \|first=Iain H. \|url=https://books.google.com/books?id=jKg9AAAAYAAJ&q=iain+Murray,+The+Forgotten+Spurgeon \|title=The Forgotten Spurgeon \|date=1973 \|publisher=Banner of Truth Trust \|isbn=978-0-85151-156-6 \|pages=47 \|language=en}}</ref>
	==Source Quotations==

			Jim Ellis argues that "adequately defining what constitutes the fundamental error of hyper-Calvinism" is problematic because many definitions "blur the distinction between it and legitimate Calvinism", and most of them include an apparent bias against ].<ref name=Ellis /> Ellis goes on to say that Hyper-Calvinism "consists of two fundamental errors: a denial of duty-faith and a resultant denial of the universal call of the gospel."<ref name=Ellis />
	The archetypal Hyper-Calvinist position may be found explicitly set forth in the confessional articles of the Gospel Standard (Baptist) Churches, specifically: ''Articles of Faith of the Gospel Standard Aid and Poor Relief Societies'', (Leicester, England: Oldham & Manton Ltd., n.d.).

			==Adherents==
	'''Article 26 of the Gospel Standard articles:'''
			The term "Hyper-Calvinist" is sometimes used as a ]; Jim Ellis suggests that "it seems as if anyone to the right of one's own theological position is fair game to be labeled a hyper-Calvinist."<ref name=Ellis>{{cite journal\|last=Ellis\|first=Jim\|title=What is Hyper-Calvinism?\|journal=Reformed Perspectives Magazine\|date=April 2008\|volume=10\|issue=15\|url=http://thirdmill.org/newfiles/jim_ellis/jim_ellis.hyper.html\|access-date=27 January 2013}}</ref> Notwithstanding this, people who have been described as Hyper-Calvinists include John Skepp (d. 1721),<ref>{{cite book\|last=Howson\|first=Barry H.\|title=Erroneous and Schismatical Opinions: The Question of Orthodoxy Regarding the Theology of Hanserd Knollys (c.1599-1691)\|year=2001\|publisher=]\|page=133\|isbn=9004119973\|url=https://books.google.com/books?id=IKBY3VuWAsMC&pg=PA133}}</ref> Lewis Wayman (d. 1764),<ref name=Toon3>], ''The Emergence of Hyper-Calvinism in English Nonconformity''. {{Webarchive\|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20120616165615/http://www.anglicanbooksrevitalized.us/Peter_Toons_Books_Online/History/hypercal2.htm \|date=2012-06-16 }}.</ref> ] (d. 1765),<ref name=Toon3 /> and ] (d. 1771).<ref name=Toon3 /> Additionally, the Gospel Coalition described the ] of ] as a Hyper-Calvinist church.<ref>{{Cite web\|title=9 Things You Should Know About Fred Phelps and Westboro Baptist Church \| url=https://www.thegospelcoalition.org/article/9-things-you-should-know-about-fred-phelps-and-westboro-baptist-church/ \| date=March 19, 2014 \| first=Joe \| last=Carter \| access-date=2023-11-02 \| website=The Gospel Coalition \| language=en-US}}</ref>
	"We deny duty faith and duty repentance — these terms suggesting that it is every man's duty spiritually and savingly to repent and believe. We deny also that there is any capability in man by nature to any spiritual good whatever. So that we reject the doctrine that man in a state of nature should be exhorted to believe in or turn to God."

			David Engelsma notes that his own denomination, the ], has been labelled as "Hyper-Calvinist" for its rejection of the "]".<ref>{{Cite web \|title=Radio \|url=https://hopeprc.org/radio/ \|access-date=2023-04-26 \|website=Hope PRC \|date=8 January 2018 \|language=en-US}}</ref> Engelsma disputes this label, and says that Hyper-Calvinism is instead "the denial that God in the preaching of the gospel calls everyone who hears the preaching to repent and believe... that the church should call everyone in the preaching... that the unregenerated have a duty to repent and believe."<ref name=Ellis />
	'''Article 33 of the Gospel Standard articles:'''
	"Therefore, that for ministers in the present day to address unconverted persons, or indiscriminately all in a mixed congregation, calling upon them to savingly repent, believe, and receive Christ, or perform any other acts dependent upon the new creative power of the Holy Ghost, is, on the one hand, to imply creature power, and on the other, to deny the doctrine of special redemption."

			==Differences from orthodox Calvinism==
	==Example Logic of the Hyper-Calvinist==

			===Hyper-Calvinism doctrine===
	Wayman contends that saving faith was not in the power of man at his best before the fall and therefore makes the following deduction, "What Adam had, we all had in him; and what Adam lost, we all lost in him, and are debtors to God on both accounts; but Adam had not the faith of God's elect before the fall, and did not lose it for his posterity; therefore they are not debtors to God for it while in unregeneracy." Lewis Wayman, ''A Further Enquiry after Truth'', (London: J & J. Marshall, 1738), p. 51.
			The beliefs which have been termed "Hyper-Calvinism" may be seen in historic writings of numerous Calvinistic ministers and in the Gospel Standard Articles of Faith (See Articles 24, 26, 27, 28 and 29).<ref>'' {{Webarchive\|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20141211055054/http://www.gospelstandard.org.uk/gs/media/GS/Articles.pdf \|date=2014-12-11 }}''</ref> The Hyper-Calvinism of these articles arose in part as a reaction to the ] of men like ]. According to ], Baxter "devised an eclectic middle route between Reformed, Arminian, and Roman doctrines of grace: interpreting the ] in terms of contemporary political ideas, he explained Christ's death as an act of universal ] (penal and vicarious, but not substitutionary), in virtue of which God has made a new law offering ] and ] to the ]. ] and faith, being obedience to this law, are the believer's personal saving righteousness."<ref>{{Cite web \|title=Articles Archives \|url=https://banneroftruth.org/us/category/resources/articles/ \|access-date=2023-04-26 \|website=Banner of Truth USA \|pages=9–10 \|language=en-US}}</ref>

	John Brine gives some insight into Wayman's statement. Brine taught that every duty incumbent on Adam in his unfallen state he also had the ability to perform, and this duty extends to all men in their fallen state regardless of their lack of ability. Brine maintained that a lack of ability does not release a man from duty (with which most Calvinists would agree). Yet, somehow he sees salvation in a different category; for "with respect to special faith in Christ, it seems to me," says Brine, "that the powers of man in his perfected state were not fitted and disposed to that act." John Brine, ''A Refutation of Arminian Principles'' (London, 1743), p. 5.

			====The Gospel Standard Articles of Faith and statements by ministers====
	Accordingly, saving faith lay not within the powers of man in his unfallen state, because there was no necessity for it. Since, therefore, it was not part of his powers in his unfallen state, it could not now be required of him in his fallen state. On this basis, duty-faith and duty-repentance are denied by the hyper Calvinist.
			'''Denial of sufficient grace in the atonement for all persons'''<br>Article 28<ref>Gospel Standard Articles of Faith, Article 28, Baxterianism Denied</ref> states a rejection of the general redemption view of ] and a denial that there is a residue of ] in Christ for ] if they will only accept it. The ] minister Daniel Whitaker reasoned against "Baxterianism" and defined it as the teaching that Christ died intentionally for the elect only, but sufficiently for the rest. He believed that the Baxterian view allowed a possible and probable salvation for non-elect persons from the sufficiency of the death of Christ.<ref>Daniel Whitaker, '' {{Webarchive\|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20150507200240/http://www.mountzionpbc.org/Pdf/DANIEL_WHITAKER_GOSPEL_INVITATIONS.pdf \|date=2015-05-07 }}'', (pg. 5.)</ref> John Stevens, also a ] minister, affirmed that the ] is "insufficient" to save those whom Christ never intended to save. He reasoned that Christ has never benefited any person "unintentionally" and that his meritorious worth should not be divided or confounded.<ref>John Stevens, '' {{webarchive\|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20110725182316/http://www.mountzionpbc.org/Duty%20Faith/JS_PARTICULAR%20REDEMPTION.pdf \|date=2011-07-25 }}'', Section 18 (pg. 15)</ref>

			'''Denial of indiscriminate offers of the gospel to all persons'''<br>Article 24<ref>Gospel Standard Articles of Faith, Article 24, Gospel Invitations</ref> states a confession that invitations of the gospel are only for sensible sinners who are made aware of their need for Christ. Article 27<ref>Gospel Standard Articles of Faith, Article 27, The Non-Elect Incapable of Receiving Grace</ref> states a denial that the non-elect are ever enlightened by the Holy Spirit to receive grace. Article 29<ref>Gospel Standard Articles of Faith, Article 29, Indiscriminate Offers of Grace Denied</ref> states a confession that the gospel is to be preached in all the world without indiscriminate offers of the gospel to all. The English ] pastor ] denied that there are universal offers of grace made to any, but that grace and salvation are published and revealed in the gospel.<ref>'' {{Webarchive\|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20100810002523/http://www.pbministries.org/books/gill/Sermons%26Tracts/sermon_07.htm \|date=2010-08-10 }}'' by ].</ref> The English ] pastor ] contended that Jesus only invited the weary and heavy laden. He believed that it is in "direct contradiction to ]" to invite all. He also reasoned that an attempt to offer Christ is "little short of blasphemy" and those who make invitations to allure the carnal world to faith and repentance know not the scriptures nor the power of God.<ref>{{Cite web \|title=Index of ./Robert Hawker/ \|url=https://www.grace-ebooks.com/library/index.php?dir=Robert%20Hawker/ \|access-date=2023-04-26 \|website=www.grace-ebooks.com \|pages=47–53}}</ref>
	==Historic Calvinist position as opposed to Hyper-Calvinism==

			'''Denial of duty-faith'''<br>Article 26 states a confession that the natural man should not be given exhortation or duties to "spiritually and savingly" repent and believe.<ref>Gospel Standard Articles of Faith, Article 26, Duty Faith and Duty Repentance Denied</ref> Article 26 has been a subject of controversy concerning what was intended. In his book "What Gospel Standard Baptists Believe", J.H. Gosden clarifies that this article is not meant to minimize the sin of unbelief. He understood this article to be a denial that man is duty bound to believe "each individual is himself" included in the redemption work of Christ and he affirmed that man is "inexcusable in his unbelief" against God's revealed word and works.<ref>{{Cite book \|last=Gosden \|first=John Hervey \|url=https://books.google.com/books?id=JyHxYdhZM2kC&q=J.H.+Gosden \|title=What Gospel Standard Baptists Believe: A Commentary on the Gospel Standard Articles of Faith \|date=1993 \|publisher=Gospel Standard Publications \|isbn=978-0-9510796-1-4 \|pages=129–130 \|language=en}}</ref> The ] pastor William Styles reasoned that duty-faith blends the ] with the ] and makes faith a work of the law.<ref>William Styles, '' {{Webarchive\|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20110725182436/http://www.mountzionpbc.org/Pdf/William_Styles_Baptist_Manual_Complete_5a.pdf \|date=2011-07-25 }}'', (pg. 230)</ref> W. Kitchen reasoned in a ] magazine that duty-faith would imply a universal design in the atonement by calling on all persons to exercise a faith which grants them to believe Jesus gave himself for them.<ref>{{Cite book \|url=https://books.google.com/books?id=cSgEAAAAQAAJ \|title=The Voice of truth; or, Strict baptists' magazine \|date=1867 \|at=pp. 5–7, continued on p. 27 \|language=en}}</ref>
	Historic Calvinists regard repentance and faith as the means by which the great commandment to love God and love our neighbor finds fulfillment. This duty to love God and neighbor existed before the fall and Adam certainly enjoyed the ability to do so. Man's love of God is therefore still obligatory, and the means through which it is to be realized, namely repentance and faith, are likewise obligatory. Man owes God his love and trust by the very fact that he is God's rational creature. Adam had the ability to love and trust God before the Fall. Man is still responsible to love and trust God even though, because of the Fall and while in an unregenerate state, he has lost the moral ability to do so. Therefore, contrary to hyper-Calvinism, fallen man is indeed duty-bound to repent and believe in Christ for salvation.

			===Orthodox Calvinistic doctrine===
	==Misuse Of The Term Hyper-Calvinism==
			While "Hyper Calvinism" reasons that the sufficiency of the atonement extends no further than its efficiency, "Orthodox Calvinism" reasons that Christ suffered sufficiently for the whole world, but efficiently only for the elect.
	According to Rev. William Oosterman many today misuse these terms. Having debated these doctrines in various circles and taught historic Calvinism in many countries, he has personally observed the misuse and misunderstanding surrounding these historic terms. Some Christians have been taught to label anyone who believes in the historic Calvinist position a hyper-calvinist. In many evangelical circles today, if you believe in the final preservation of the saints, the fifth of the five points of calvinist theology, you are a true Calvinist. If you believe any of the other four points you are automatically denounced as a hyper-calvinist. This is a serious misrepresentation, at times by those who should know better, of the historic usage of these terms. Brandan Kraft in Confession of a Hyper-Calvinist http://www.pristinegrace.org/media.php?id=400 describes how he has been mislabelled and accused falsely on many occasions. Such well known preachers as J. R. Rice are an example of this. Rice wrote “So any person who is not Armenian in faith but rather believes in eternal security of the believer is likely to describe himself as a Calvinist.” You see he is saying that if you believe the last of the five points, the Preservation Of The Saints, you will describe yourself as a Calvinist. Rice goes on to say “Or where Calvinism has not been carried to its more unscriptural, unevangelistic, arrogant extreme, one might probably call himself a "moderate" Calvinist. Most of those who might be called Calvinists do not believe in a limited atonement, for example, nor do they believe that some are foreordained by unconditioned election to go to Hell and so could not be saved, that salvation was never provided for nor offered for them.” Again Rice claims the name “Calvinist” for those who, like himself, reject four fo the five points. He labels as hyper-Calvinist all those who truly believe the doctrines Calvin taught. He even say MOST of those who might be called Calvinists do not believe in limited atonement, point three. Many more examples of such misuse could be cited. According to Rev. Wm. Oosterman, the explanation is that historically Arminianism was a kind of negative or dirty word in many circles, while the term Calvinism had a certain respect. Today many evangelicals like to take the label Calvinism as their own, while refusing to accept the historic five points that go along with it.

			====John Calvin====
	As stated on this web site: http://www.spurgeon.org/~phil/articles/hypercal.htm Some critics unthinkingly slap the label "hyper" on any variety of Calvinism that is higher than the view they hold to. Arminians like to equate all five-point Calvinism with hyper-Calvinism (as Calvary-Chapel author George Bryson does in his horrible little book, The Five Points of Calvinism: "Weighed and Found Wanting" ). That approach lacks integrity and only serves to confuse people. For a more thorough study of this crucial area of theology visit the Sound Of Grace web site. or http://www.apuritansmind.com/PuritanWorship/McMahonABriefCritiqueOfHyper-Calvinism.htm
			] denied that the sins of the ] have been expiated, but he maintained that Christ died sufficiently for the whole world and only efficiently for the ].<ref>{{Cite web \|title=John Calvin: Commentaries on the Catholic Epistles – Christian Classics Ethereal Library \|url=https://www.ccel.org/ccel/calvin/calcom45.v.iii.i.html \|access-date=2023-04-26 \|website=www.ccel.org}}</ref> He affirmed that Jesus makes his favor "common to all" and offered "indiscriminately to all", though not "extended to all"; for all do not receive him.<ref>{{Cite web \|title=John Calvin: Commentary on Romans – Christian Classics Ethereal Library \|url=https://www.ccel.org/ccel/calvin/calcom38.ix.x.html \|access-date=2023-04-26 \|website=www.ccel.org \|at=Romans 5:18}}</ref> He also stated that it is their unbelief which prevents anyone from receiving benefit from the death of Christ.<ref>{{Cite web \|title=John Calvin: Commentary on Hebrews – Christian Classics Ethereal Library \|url=https://www.ccel.org/ccel/calvin/calcom44.xv.v.html \|access-date=2023-04-26 \|website=www.ccel.org \|at=Hebrews 9:28}}</ref> With reference to God's desire concerning the reprobate wicked, Calvin condemns the view of Georgius the Sicilian that "God Would have all men to be saved" and continues by saying "It follows, therefore, according to his understanding of that passage, either that God is disappointed in His wishes, or that all men without exception must be saved … why, if such be the case, God did not command the Gospel to be preached to all men indiscriminately from the beginning of the world? why He so many generations of men to wander for so many ages in all the darkness of death?"<ref>"A Treatise on the Doctrine of Predestination," in Calvin’s Calvinism (RFPA: Grand Rapids, USA, 1987), p. 166</ref>
	To quote Rice again "Those whom we call hyper-Calvinists usually outline their doctrinal position as represented by the letters TULIP:

			====Confessions and catechisms====
	T for Total Depravity of the sinner
			The ] affirm an abundant sufficiency in the death of Christ of "infinite worth and value" for the whole world.<ref>Canons of Dort, Second Head: Article 3</ref> The word ''offer'' or ''free offer'' was used in the ]<ref>'' {{Webarchive\|url=https://www.webcitation.org/6Dvj3BM3m?url=http://www.greenwellstreet.org/Westminster_Confession_of_Faith.pdf \|date=2013-01-25 }}'' VII/III; '' {{Webarchive\|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20140924042418/https://puritanseminary.org/wp-content/uploads/2013/09/Larger_Catechism.pdf \|date=2014-09-24 }}'', Ans. 32, 63, 68; '' {{Webarchive\|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20140924042431/https://puritanseminary.org/wp-content/uploads/2013/09/Shorter_Catechism.pdf \|date=2014-09-24 }}'', Ans. 31 and 86.</ref> and the ] leaves no room for doubt that the phrase "grace offered" is used in reference to persons who "never truly come" to Christ.<ref>Larger Catechism, Ans. 68</ref> In his "Question & Answers on the Shorter Catechism", ] addressed and answered questions concerning ]; he reasoned that God commands every person that hears the gospel to "take his gift Christ out of his hand", that Christ offers himself "Fully, freely, earnestly, and indefinitely" to all persons that hear the gospel "without exception", that this offer is for every person's case "as if he was named in it" and that to embrace the offer of Christ is to be persuaded that "Christ in the promise is mine."<ref>{{Cite book \|last=Brown \|first=John \|url=https://books.google.com/books?id=wigPAAAAIAAJ&q=shorter+catechism+john+brown \|title=An Essay Towards an Easy, Plain, Practical, and Extensive Explication of the Assembly's Shorter Catechism \|date=1818 \|publisher=Henry Frick \|pages=142–143 \|language=en}}</ref>
	U for Unconditional Election
	L for Limited Atonement
	I for Irresistible Grace
	P for Perseverance of the saints

			==Opposition to the doctrine==
			Both Calvinistic and non-Calvinistic ministers have expounded on several Bible passages as contradicting the doctrines which are considered to be Hyper-Calvinism. Verification that such scripture citations were a matter of doctrinal controversy may be seen in ]' ''A Manual of Faith and Practice'',<ref name="auto4">{{Cite web \|date=2011-07-25 \|title= \|url=http://www.mountzionpbc.org/Pdf/William_Styles_Baptist_Manual_Complete_5a.pdf \|access-date=2023-04-26 \|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20110725182436/http://www.mountzionpbc.org/Pdf/William_Styles_Baptist_Manual_Complete_5a.pdf \|archive-date=2011-07-25 }}</ref> ] ''The Gospel Worthy of All Acceptation'',<ref name="auto">{{Cite book \|last=Andrew Fuller \|url=http://archive.org/details/gospelworthyall02fullgoog \|title=The Gospel worthy of all acceptation: or, The duty of sinners to believe in ... \|publisher=American Doctrinal Tract Society, 1837 \|others=Harvard University \|language=English}}</ref> ] ''The Cause of God and Truth'',<ref name="auto1">John Gill, ""</ref> ] ''Universal Redemption'',<ref name="auto2">{{Cite web \|date=2017-03-22 \|title= \|url=http://quintapress.macmate.me/PDF_Books/Universal_Redemption.pdf \|access-date=2023-04-26 \|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20170322103206/http://quintapress.macmate.me/PDF_Books/Universal_Redemption.pdf \|archive-date=2017-03-22 }}</ref> ] ''A Discourse Concerning Election and Reprobation'' <ref name="auto3">{{Cite book \|last=Whitby \|first=Daniel \|url=https://books.google.com/books?id=D809AAAAIAAJ \|title=A Discourse Concerning I. The True Import of the Words Election and Reprobation, and the Things Signified by Them in the Holy Scripture. II. The Extent of Christ's Redemption. III. The Grace of God ... IV. The Liberty of the Will in a State of Trial and Probation. V. The Perseverance Or Defectibility of the Saints ...: To which is Added a Postscript, in Answer to Some of Doctor Edwards's Remarks \|date=1816 \|publisher=F.C. and J. Rivington \|language=en}}</ref> and William Button's ''The Nature of Special Faith in Christ Considered''.<ref>{{Cite web \|date=2011-07-25 \|title= \|url=http://www.mountzionpbc.org/Duty%20Faith/button-_Book.pdf \|access-date=2023-04-26 \|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20110725182135/http://www.mountzionpbc.org/Duty%20Faith/button-_Book.pdf \|archive-date=2011-07-25 }}</ref> ] wrote an article arguing for the doctrine of faith as the bounden duty of every person who hears the gospel.<ref>{{Cite web \|title=A. W. Pink on Duty-Faith \|url=http://www.romans45.org/articles/dutyfth.htm \|access-date=2023-04-26 \|website=www.romans45.org}}</ref>

			=== Biblical references used in favor of orthodox Calvinism ===
	==Resources==
			* '''Matthew 23:37''' ''"...how often would I have gathered thy children together, even as a hen gathereth her chickens under her wings, and ye would not!"'' ] believed that here it is evident that there were persons whom Jesus "wished to save, and bled to save" who perished because they would not come unto him.<ref>{{Cite web \|title=Matthew 23 – Clarke's Commentary – Bible Commentaries \|url=https://www.studylight.org/commentaries/eng/acc/matthew-23.html \|access-date=2023-04-26 \|website=StudyLight.org \|language=en}}</ref> ] referred to this scripture as teaching that the cause of persons perishing is not "for want of an expiatory Sacrifice", but "for want of Faith" to receive Christ and his benefits.<ref>], '' {{Webarchive\|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20170322103206/http://quintapress.macmate.me/PDF_Books/Universal_Redemption.pdf \|date=2017-03-22 }}'', (pg. 135)</ref> ] reasoned from this scripture that God "calls all men indiscriminately to salvation", that he "wills to gather all to himself" and that this is distinct from his secret purpose to ] whomsoever he wills.<ref>{{Cite web \|title=Matthew 23 – Calvin's Commentary on the Bible – Bible Commentaries \|url=https://www.studylight.org/commentaries/eng/cal/matthew-23.html \|access-date=2023-04-26 \|website=StudyLight.org \|at=Matthew 23:37 \|language=en}}</ref> ] understood that Christ here expresses his "will for their temporal good" that they may be gathered under the ministry of his word and acknowledge him as the Messiah in order to preserve them from the "temporal ruin" threatened upon their city. He concludes that this scripture does not prove men resist the operations of God's grace, but rather reveals the "obstructions and discouragements" that were "thrown in the way" of attendance to the ministry of his word.<ref>{{Cite web \|title=Matthew 23 – Gill's Exposition of the Whole Bible – Bible Commentaries \|url=https://www.studylight.org/commentaries/eng/geb/matthew-23.html \|access-date=2023-04-26 \|website=StudyLight.org \|at=Matthew 23:37 \|language=en}}</ref>
			* '''John 1:7''' ''"...that all men through him might believe."'' ] noted on this scripture that ] and Jesus came that "we may all" trust in Christ for salvation.<ref>{{Cite web \|title=John 1 – Barnes' Notes on the Whole Bible – Bible Commentaries \|url=https://www.studylight.org/commentaries/eng/bnb/john-1.html \|access-date=2023-04-26 \|website=StudyLight.org \|at=John 1:7–8 \|language=en}}</ref> John Calvin commented here that ] came to prepare a church for Christ by "inviting all" to him.<ref>{{Cite web \|title=John 1 – Calvin's Commentary on the Bible – Bible Commentaries \|url=https://www.studylight.org/commentaries/eng/cal/john-1.html \|access-date=2023-04-26 \|website=StudyLight.org \|at=John 1:6–8 \|language=en}}</ref> John Gill reasoned that the faith here required was not to believe Jesus died for them, but to acknowledge him as the Messiah. He also contended that souls who are made sensible of their lost state and "need of a Savior" ought to believe that Jesus died for them and "none but such."<ref>John Gill, '''', (pp. 118–119)</ref>
			* '''John 3:16–17''' ''"...that the world through him might be saved."'' On this scripture, Richard Baxter interpreted the world which Jesus came to save to be divided into believers who will eventually be saved and unbelievers who will eventually be condemned.<ref>Richard Baxter, '' {{Webarchive\|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20170322103206/http://quintapress.macmate.me/PDF_Books/Universal_Redemption.pdf \|date=2017-03-22 }}'', (pg. 304)</ref> John Calvin stated that the word "world" is repeated here so that no man may consider himself "wholly excluded", if he only "keep the road of faith."<ref>{{Cite web \|title=John 3 – Calvin's Commentary on the Bible – Bible Commentaries \|url=https://www.studylight.org/commentaries/eng/cal/john-3.html \|access-date=2023-04-26 \|website=StudyLight.org \|at=John 3:17 \|language=en}}</ref> John Gill commented here that the "world" is referring to the elect in general and in particular God's people among the gentiles.<ref>{{Cite web \|title=Books Available – Gill's Exposition of the Whole Bible – Bible Commentaries \|url=https://www.studylight.org/commentaries/eng/geb.html \|access-date=2023-04-26 \|website=StudyLight.org \|at=John 3:17 \|language=en}}</ref>
			* '''Romans 3:22–23''' ''"...unto all and upon all them that believe: for there is no difference: For all have sinned..."'' Adam Clarke commented here that all human creatures are "equally helpless and guilty" and therefore God's "endless mercy has embraced all."<ref>{{Cite web \|title=Books Available – Clarke's Commentary – Bible Commentaries \|url=https://www.studylight.org/commentaries/eng/acc.html \|access-date=2023-04-26 \|website=StudyLight.org \|at=Romans 3:22–23 \|language=en}}</ref> John Calvin stated here that Christ "is offered to all" and becomes an advantage only to believers. He also commented that the apostle Paul here "urges on all, without exception" concerning the "necessity of seeking righteousness in Christ."<ref>{{Cite web \|title=Books Available – Calvin's Commentary on the Bible – Bible Commentaries \|url=https://www.studylight.org/commentaries/eng/cal.html \|access-date=2023-04-26 \|website=StudyLight.org \|at=Romans 3:22–23 \|language=en}}</ref> John Gill understood these scriptures to refer to "not all men," but to persons who "believe in Christ for salvation" and that there is no room here for any person to "despair of the grace and righteousness of Christ" on account of viewing themselves as the worst of sinners.<ref>{{Cite web \|title=Books Available – Gill's Exposition of the Whole Bible – Bible Commentaries \|url=https://www.studylight.org/commentaries/eng/geb.html \|access-date=2023-04-26 \|website=StudyLight.org \|at=Romans 3:22–23 \|language=en}}</ref>
			* '''Revelation 3:20''' ''"...if any man hear my voice, and open the door..."'' Albert Barnes reasoned that this scripture is "applicable to all persons" and is the method by which Jesus seeks to come into the heart of a sinner.<ref>{{Cite web \|title=Books Available – Barnes' Notes on the Whole Bible – Bible Commentaries \|url=https://www.studylight.org/commentaries/eng/bnb.html \|access-date=2023-04-26 \|website=StudyLight.org \|at=Revelation 3:20 \|language=en}}</ref> William Styles commented that this scripture is not referring to the unconverted, but rather regenerated persons of the church at Laodicea who were in "a low and lukewarm state" showing little regard for Christ. He understood the purpose of this appeal to be "not salvation from the punishment of sin," but of communion with Christ.<ref>William Styles, '' {{Webarchive\|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20110725182436/http://www.mountzionpbc.org/Pdf/William_Styles_Baptist_Manual_Complete_5a.pdf \|date=2011-07-25 }}'', (pg. 111)</ref>

			'''Additional scriptures'''<br>John 5:34 is addressed by William Styles (A Manual of Faith and Practice, pg. 274). John 10:31 is addressed by William Styles (A Manual of Faith and Practice, pg. 245).
	(1) Sinclair Ferguson, et. al., editors, The New Dictionary of Theology (InterVarsity Press, 1988), s.v. ''Hyper-Calvinism''. ISBN 0830814000

			=== Biblical references used in favor of the concept of duty-faith ===
	(2) Peter Toon, ''The Emergence of Hyper-Calvinism in English Non-Conformity, 1689-1765'' (London: The Olive Tree, 1967).
			* '''Psalm 2:12''' ''"Kiss the Son, lest he be angry..."'' ] concluded from this scripture that "unconverted sinners are commanded to believe in Christ for salvation" and that "believing in Christ for salvation is their duty."<ref>{{Cite book \|last=Fuller \|first=Andrew \|url=http://archive.org/details/gospelworthyall02fullgoog \|title=The Gospel worthy of all acceptation: or, The duty of sinners to believe in ... \|publisher=American Doctrinal Tract Society, 1837 \|others=Harvard University \|pages=24–25 \|language=English}}</ref> William Button understood the phrase "Kiss the Son" as a duty to reverence Christ and the phrase "Blessed are they" to be an encouragement to those who are privileged to "believe in him for pardon."<ref>William Button, '' {{webarchive\|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20110725182135/http://www.mountzionpbc.org/Duty%20Faith/button-_Book.pdf\|date=2011-07-25}}'', (pp. 25–26)</ref>
			* '''John 12:36''' ''"While ye have light, believe in the light, that ye may be the children of light..."'' Andrew Fuller stated that the belief which was required of these "unbelievers" would have "issued in their salvation."<ref>{{Cite book \|last=Fuller \|first=Andrew \|url=http://archive.org/details/gospelworthyall02fullgoog \|title=The Gospel worthy of all acceptation: or, The duty of sinners to believe in ... \|publisher=American Doctrinal Tract Society, 1837 \|others=Harvard University \|pages=29 \|language=English}}</ref> William Styles understood "believe in the light” to mean "receive my testimony concerning Myself and My mission" and that the title "children of light" intends "Jews whose minds were informed by the teaching of Jesus" and not "spiritually illuminated persons."<ref>William Styles, '' {{Webarchive\|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20110725182436/http://www.mountzionpbc.org/Pdf/William_Styles_Baptist_Manual_Complete_5a.pdf \|date=2011-07-25 }}'', (pg. 244-245)</ref>
			* '''2 Corinthians 5:17–21''' ''"...we pray you in Christ's stead, be ye reconciled to God."'' Andrew Fuller reasoned that this scripture is spoken to "rebellious subjects" and to not "submit" to this mercy is to maintain "the war."<ref>{{Cite book \|last=Fuller \|first=Andrew \|url=http://archive.org/details/gospelworthyall02fullgoog \|title=The Gospel worthy of all acceptation: or, The duty of sinners to believe in ... \|publisher=American Doctrinal Tract Society, 1837 \|others=Harvard University \|pages=48–49 \|language=English}}</ref> Albert Barnes, on this scripture, stated that "ministers of reconciliation" are to "urge this duty on their fellow-men."<ref>{{Cite web \|title=Books Available – Barnes' Notes on the Whole Bible – Bible Commentaries \|url=https://www.studylight.org/commentaries/eng/bnb.html \|access-date=2023-04-26 \|website=StudyLight.org \|at=2 Corinthians 5:20 \|language=en}}</ref> John Calvin commented here that the phrase "be reconciled" is addressed to believers as a daily embassy "sounded forth in the Church."<ref>{{Cite web \|title=2 Corinthians 5 – Calvin's Commentary on the Bible – Bible Commentaries \|url=https://www.studylight.org/commentaries/eng/cal/2-corinthians-5.html \|access-date=2023-04-26 \|website=StudyLight.org \|at=2 Corinthians 5:20 \|language=en}}</ref> John Gill commented on this scripture as referring to "new creatures" that Christ died for.<ref>{{Cite web \|title=Books Available – Gill's Exposition of the Whole Bible – Bible Commentaries \|url=https://www.studylight.org/commentaries/eng/geb.html \|access-date=2023-04-26 \|website=StudyLight.org \|at=2 Corinthians 5:20 \|language=en}}</ref>
			* '''2 Thessalonians 1:8''' ''"...them that know not God, and that obey not the gospel of our Lord Jesus Christ."''
			* '''1 John 3:23''' ''"...this is his commandment, That we should believe on the name of his Son Jesus Christ..."''

			'''Additional scriptures'''<br> Isaiah 55:6–7 is addressed by William Button (The Nature of Special Faith in Christ Considered, pg. 30). Acts 16:30–31 is addressed by John Gill (The Cause of God and Truth, p. 574).
	(3) David J. Engelsma, ''Hyper-Calvinism & the Call of the Gospel'', (Grand Rapids: Reformed Free Publishing Association, 1994). ISBN 0916206505

			==Support for the doctrine==
	(4) Thomas J. Nettles, ''By His Grace and for His Glory: A Historical, Theological, and Practical Study of the Doctrines of Grace in Baptist Life'' (Grand Rapids: Baker Books, 1986). ISBN 0801067421
			Several bible passages are urged as supporting the doctrines which are considered to be Hyper-Calvinism. Verification that such scripture citations were a matter of doctrinal controversy may be seen in ]' ''Baptist Manual Complete'',<ref name="auto4"/> ] ''The Gospel Worthy of All Acceptation'',<ref name="auto"/> ] ''The Cause of God and Truth'',<ref name="auto1"/> ] ''Universal Redemption'',<ref name="auto2"/> ] ''A Discourse Concerning Election and Reprobation'' <ref name="auto3"/> and William Button's ''The Nature of Special Faith in Christ Considered''.<ref>William Button, " {{Webarchive\|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20110725182135/http://www.mountzionpbc.org/Duty%20Faith/button-_Book.pdf \|date=2011-07-25 }}"</ref>

			=== Biblical references used to support the position of gospel invitations going to certain persons only ===
			* '''Isaiah 55:1''' ''"Ho, every one that thirsteth, come ye to the waters..."'' John Gill taught that the persons here under the description of "thirsty" are spiritual persons "thirsting after forgiveness of sin by the blood of Christ" and to such is the gospel invitation given.<ref>{{Cite web \|title=Isaiah 55 – Gill's Exposition of the Whole Bible – Bible Commentaries \|url=https://www.studylight.org/commentaries/eng/geb/isaiah-55.html \|access-date=2023-04-26 \|website=StudyLight.org \|at=Isaiah 55:1 \|language=en}}</ref> ] believed that "thirst" here does not mean "holy desire after spiritual blessings" but rather a "natural desire of happiness" which God places in every bosom.<ref>{{Cite book \|last=Fuller \|first=Andrew \|url=http://archive.org/details/gospelworthyall02fullgoog \|title=The Gospel worthy of all acceptation: or, The duty of sinners to believe in ... \|publisher=American Doctrinal Tract Society, 1837 \|others=Harvard University \|pages=26 \|language=English}}</ref>
			* '''Matthew 11:25–28''' ''"...Come unto me, all ye that labour and are heavy laden..."'' John Gill reasoned from this scripture that the persons invited here are "not all the individuals of mankind," but those who are "burdened with the guilt of sin upon their consciences."<ref>{{Cite web \|title=Books Available – Gill's Exposition of the Whole Bible – Bible Commentaries \|url=https://www.studylight.org/commentaries/eng/geb.html \|access-date=2023-04-26 \|website=StudyLight.org \|at=Matthew 11:28 \|language=en}}</ref> ] commented here that "it would be in vain" for Christ to invite those who are "devoted to the world" or those who are "intoxicated with their own righteousness." On this verse, he also stated that Christ is "ready to reveal the Father to all" though the greater part is careless of coming to him.<ref>{{Cite web \|title=Matthew 11 – Calvin's Commentary on the Bible – Bible Commentaries \|url=https://www.studylight.org/commentaries/eng/cal/matthew-11.html \|access-date=2023-04-26 \|website=StudyLight.org \|at=Matthew 11:28 \|language=en}}</ref>
			* '''Mark 2:15–17''' ''"...I came not to call the righteous, but sinners to repentance."'' John Gill noted here that Christ "attended the one, and not the other." He also stated that this scripture refers to the "usefulness of Christ to one sort, and not another."<ref>{{Cite web \|title=Mark 2 – Gill's Exposition of the Whole Bible – Bible Commentaries \|url=https://www.studylight.org/commentaries/eng/geb/mark-2.html \|access-date=2023-04-26 \|website=StudyLight.org \|at=Mark 2:17 \|language=en}}</ref>
			* '''Luke 4:18''' ''"...he hath anointed me to preach the gospel to the poor; he hath sent me to heal the brokenhearted..."''
			* '''Revelation 22:17''' ''"...let him that is athirst come. And whosoever will, let him take the water of life freely."''

			=== Biblical references used against duty-faith ===
			* '''Romans 4:13''' ''"...the promise, that he should be the heir of the world, was not to Abraham, or to his seed, through the law, but through the righteousness of faith."'' The ] pastor Job Hupton concluded from this scripture that "the eternal inheritance" is not by "the law and its duty," but through "the gospel and its promises."<ref>Job Hupton, '' {{Webarchive\|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20110725182515/http://www.mountzionpbc.org/Toplady/Job_Hupton_Fullerism.pdf \|date=2011-07-25 }}'', (pg. 6)</ref>
			* '''Romans 4:16''' ''"...it is of faith, that it might be by grace; to the end the promise might be sure..."'' William Button made the argument here that "if faith is a duty (and so a work)" the apostle Paul should have rather said "It is of faith that it might be by works." He concluded that there is a "beauty" here in the apostles words because faith is rather a "blessing of the covenant of grace" and a "fruit of electing grace."<ref>{{Cite web \|date=2011-07-25 \|title= \|url=http://www.mountzionpbc.org/Duty%20Faith/button-_Book.pdf \|access-date=2023-04-26 \|pages=22–23\|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20110725182135/http://www.mountzionpbc.org/Duty%20Faith/button-_Book.pdf \|archive-date=2011-07-25 }}</ref>
			* '''Galatians 3:11–12''' ''"...the law is not of faith..."'' The ] minister William Wales Horne asserted from this scripture that because faith is a grace of the Spirit, it is therefore not a duty of the law. He also reasoned that faith is not "a duty which God requires of his people," but rather "a grace which he gives them."<ref>William Wales Horne, '' {{Webarchive\|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20160304033430/http://02a7a62.netsolhost.com/What's%20New/WWH%20-%20The%20Faith%20of%20The%20Gospel%20Vindicated%20-1-14p.pdf \|date=2016-03-04 }}'', (pg. 12)</ref>
			* '''Ephesians 2:8–9''' ''"...by grace are ye saved through faith; and that not of yourselves..."'' The English ] John Foreman made an argument here that their faith was not a "duty produced of themselves" or of a "divine requirement," for God determined that his gift should "not be of works, and so not of duty."<ref>John Foreman, '' {{webarchive\|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20110725182329/http://www.mountzionpbc.org/Pdf/JOHN_FOREMAN_DUTY_FAITH_2007.pdf \|date=2011-07-25 }}'', (pg. 12)</ref>
			* '''2 Timothy 1:9''' ''"...not according to our works, but according to his own purpose and grace..."'' John Foreman reasoned from this scripture that grace is "sovereign and particular only" and that here is the reason why all men are not called and saved by God's purpose and grace given before the world began. In light of this, he contended against the view that persons are "damned for not coming" to Christ for salvation.<ref>John Foreman, '' {{webarchive\|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20110725182329/http://www.mountzionpbc.org/Pdf/JOHN_FOREMAN_DUTY_FAITH_2007.pdf \|date=2011-07-25 }}'', p. 28.</ref>

	==See also==		==See also==
			{{Portal\|Reformed Christianity}}
	*]
			{{columns-list\|colwidth= \|
	*]
			*{{Annotated link \|Amyraldism}}
	*]
			*{{Annotated link \|Calvinism}}
			*{{Annotated link \|Comparative theology}}
			*{{Annotated link \|Free offer of the gospel}}
			*{{Annotated link \|John Gill (theologian)\|John Gill}}
			*{{Annotated link \|Ordo salutis\|''Ordo salutis''}}
			*{{Annotated link \|Predestination}}
			*{{Annotated link \|Protestant Reformed Churches in America}}
			*{{Annotated link \|Reformed Baptists}}
			}}

			==References==
			{{Reflist\|2}}

			==Further reading==
			* by John Skepp (1675–1721)
			* by John Gill (1738)
			* "The Modern Question Concerning Repentance & Faith Examined" by John Brine (1753)
			* Excommunication And The Duty of All Men to Believe, Weighed in The Balance. by William Huntington (1745–1813)
			* by Andrew Fuller (1785)
			* by William Button (1785)
			* by Robert Hawker (1753–1827)
			* (The Atonement of Christ and Andrew Fuller) by William Rushton (1831)
			* by William Tant (1837)
			* by John Steven's (1841)
			* by William Odling (1851)
			* by John Foreman (1860)
			* by G. Rogers, from "The Sword and the Trowel" (1866)
			* On Duty-Faith in Several Relations by W. Kitchen from "The Voice of Truth" (1867)
			* by William Styles (1897)

			==External links==
			* {{Webarchive\|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20140506201822/http://www.metropolitantabernacle.org/NewMT/media/Article-PDFs/The-Necessity-of-Justification.pdf \|date=2014-05-06 }} from The ]
			* – a collection of articles on the subject from Monergism.com
			* – written by ], from a Calvinist perspective.
			* by Peter Toon.
			* by Dr. Curt Daniel.
			* {{Webarchive\|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20141028220838/http://evangelica.de/reviews/history-of-the-english-calvinistic-baptists/ \|date=2014-10-28 }} Review by Historian George Ella
			* by Peter Meney
			* by Stanley C. Phillips

	]		]
	]		]
			]
			]
			]
			]

Latest revision as of 08:09, 11 December 2024

Branch of Protestant theology

Hyper-Calvinism is a branch of Protestant theology that places strong emphasis on supralapsarianism, or salvation from eternity (God elects from before time), where the atonement of Christ was and is difficult for the non-elect to understand, where man has little to do with his salvation, there being nothing man can do to resist being saved, wherein evangelism was given lower emphasis as compared to traditional Calvinism, and where assurance of salvation was felt within a person, identified by introspection.

It is at times regarded as a variation of Calvinism, but critics emphasize its differences from traditional Calvinistic beliefs. Hyper-Calvinism distinguishes itself from traditional Calvinism as regards the "sufficiency and efficiency" of Christ's atonement. Predestination in Calvinism traditionally argues that only the elect are able to understand Christ's atonement, but that the sufficiency of the atonement stretches to all humanity, while Hyper-Calvinism argues the atonement is sufficient only to the elect.

The term originated in the 19th century as a sometimes-pejorative descriptor predated by terms such as "false Calvinism" and "High Calvinism". The term can be used vaguely, and its distinction from traditional Calvinism is not always clear; writers such as Jim Ellis have suggested that Hyper-Calvinism as a concept is sometimes applied broadly to denominations more theologically conservative than the speaker's, rather than to a consistent theological stance. Nonetheless, Hyper-Calvinism is distinguished as a distinct theological branch, associated with figures such as the 18th-century theologian John Gill.

Definitions

Peter Toon notes that the expression "Hyper-Calvinism" came to be generally used in the 19th century, while the terms "False Calvinism" and "High Calvinism" were used near the end of the 18th century to define the same doctrinal views. "High Calvinism" has sometimes been used as a synonym for Hyper-Calvinism, and at other times as a synonym for the Calvinism of the Canons of Dort (1619). Although the doctrine of limited atonement is taught in the Canons of Dort, the term "Hyper-Calvinism" in previous generations has been used to define those who reject the view that the atonement is sufficient for all mankind or that there is a general design in the death of Christ.

Historic definitions of the term

In his publication from 1825, George Croft defined Hyper-Calvinism as holding to a particular design of Christ's death and denying a general design. He also notes that Hyper-Calvinists were generally styled High-Calvinists because they had views above genuine Calvinism: denying that the death of Christ was "in any respect" intended for the salvation of all, not inviting all to believe in Christ for salvation, contending that invitations should only be given to the "willing", and holding to antinomian doctrines, which tend to discourage holiness. In a Protestant Dictionary from 1904, Charles Neil defined Hyper-Calvinism as a view that maintains the theory of limited atonement and limits the scope of gospel invitations to the elect.

Modern definitions of the term

Modern definitions of Hyper-Calvinism usually distinguish it from points of Calvinism, such as limited atonement or supralapsarianism. There is not, however, unanimity regarding the definition.

Curt Daniel defines Hyper-Calvinism as "that school of supralapsarian Five Point Calvinism which so stresses the sovereignty of God by overemphasizing the secret over the revealed will and eternity over time, that it minimizes the responsibility of Man, notably with respect to the denial of the word ‘offer’ in relation to the preaching of the Gospel of a finished and limited atonement, thus undermining the universal duty of sinners to believe savingly with assurance that the Lord Jesus Christ died for them." Daniel goes on to suggest that the real difference between "High" and "Hyper-" Calvinism is the word "offer"

Iain Murray adopts a different approach, putting the emphasis on the denial of a "universal command to repent and believe" and the assertion "that we have only warrant to invite to Christ those who are conscious of a sense of sin and need."

Jim Ellis argues that "adequately defining what constitutes the fundamental error of hyper-Calvinism" is problematic because many definitions "blur the distinction between it and legitimate Calvinism", and most of them include an apparent bias against Five Point Calvinism. Ellis goes on to say that Hyper-Calvinism "consists of two fundamental errors: a denial of duty-faith and a resultant denial of the universal call of the gospel."

Adherents

The term "Hyper-Calvinist" is sometimes used as a pejorative; Jim Ellis suggests that "it seems as if anyone to the right of one's own theological position is fair game to be labeled a hyper-Calvinist." Notwithstanding this, people who have been described as Hyper-Calvinists include John Skepp (d. 1721), Lewis Wayman (d. 1764), John Brine (d. 1765), and John Gill (d. 1771). Additionally, the Gospel Coalition described the Westboro Baptist Church of Fred Phelps as a Hyper-Calvinist church.

David Engelsma notes that his own denomination, the Protestant Reformed Churches in America, has been labelled as "Hyper-Calvinist" for its rejection of the "well-meant offer of the gospel". Engelsma disputes this label, and says that Hyper-Calvinism is instead "the denial that God in the preaching of the gospel calls everyone who hears the preaching to repent and believe... that the church should call everyone in the preaching... that the unregenerated have a duty to repent and believe."

Differences from orthodox Calvinism

Hyper-Calvinism doctrine

The beliefs which have been termed "Hyper-Calvinism" may be seen in historic writings of numerous Calvinistic ministers and in the Gospel Standard Articles of Faith (See Articles 24, 26, 27, 28 and 29). The Hyper-Calvinism of these articles arose in part as a reaction to the Amyraldism of men like Richard Baxter. According to J. I. Packer, Baxter "devised an eclectic middle route between Reformed, Arminian, and Roman doctrines of grace: interpreting the kingdom of God in terms of contemporary political ideas, he explained Christ's death as an act of universal redemption (penal and vicarious, but not substitutionary), in virtue of which God has made a new law offering pardon and amnesty to the penitent. Repentance and faith, being obedience to this law, are the believer's personal saving righteousness."

The Gospel Standard Articles of Faith and statements by ministers

Denial of sufficient grace in the atonement for all persons
Article 28 states a rejection of the general redemption view of Richard Baxter and a denial that there is a residue of grace in Christ for non-elect persons if they will only accept it. The Baptist minister Daniel Whitaker reasoned against "Baxterianism" and defined it as the teaching that Christ died intentionally for the elect only, but sufficiently for the rest. He believed that the Baxterian view allowed a possible and probable salvation for non-elect persons from the sufficiency of the death of Christ. John Stevens, also a Baptist minister, affirmed that the atonement is "insufficient" to save those whom Christ never intended to save. He reasoned that Christ has never benefited any person "unintentionally" and that his meritorious worth should not be divided or confounded.

Denial of indiscriminate offers of the gospel to all persons
Article 24 states a confession that invitations of the gospel are only for sensible sinners who are made aware of their need for Christ. Article 27 states a denial that the non-elect are ever enlightened by the Holy Spirit to receive grace. Article 29 states a confession that the gospel is to be preached in all the world without indiscriminate offers of the gospel to all. The English Baptist pastor John Gill denied that there are universal offers of grace made to any, but that grace and salvation are published and revealed in the gospel. The English Anglican Church pastor Robert Hawker contended that Jesus only invited the weary and heavy laden. He believed that it is in "direct contradiction to scripture" to invite all. He also reasoned that an attempt to offer Christ is "little short of blasphemy" and those who make invitations to allure the carnal world to faith and repentance know not the scriptures nor the power of God.

Denial of duty-faith
Article 26 states a confession that the natural man should not be given exhortation or duties to "spiritually and savingly" repent and believe. Article 26 has been a subject of controversy concerning what was intended. In his book "What Gospel Standard Baptists Believe", J.H. Gosden clarifies that this article is not meant to minimize the sin of unbelief. He understood this article to be a denial that man is duty bound to believe "each individual is himself" included in the redemption work of Christ and he affirmed that man is "inexcusable in his unbelief" against God's revealed word and works. The Baptist pastor William Styles reasoned that duty-faith blends the covenant of works with the covenant of grace and makes faith a work of the law. W. Kitchen reasoned in a Strict Baptists magazine that duty-faith would imply a universal design in the atonement by calling on all persons to exercise a faith which grants them to believe Jesus gave himself for them.

Orthodox Calvinistic doctrine

While "Hyper Calvinism" reasons that the sufficiency of the atonement extends no further than its efficiency, "Orthodox Calvinism" reasons that Christ suffered sufficiently for the whole world, but efficiently only for the elect.

John Calvin

John Calvin denied that the sins of the reprobate have been expiated, but he maintained that Christ died sufficiently for the whole world and only efficiently for the elect. He affirmed that Jesus makes his favor "common to all" and offered "indiscriminately to all", though not "extended to all"; for all do not receive him. He also stated that it is their unbelief which prevents anyone from receiving benefit from the death of Christ. With reference to God's desire concerning the reprobate wicked, Calvin condemns the view of Georgius the Sicilian that "God Would have all men to be saved" and continues by saying "It follows, therefore, according to his understanding of that passage, either that God is disappointed in His wishes, or that all men without exception must be saved … why, if such be the case, God did not command the Gospel to be preached to all men indiscriminately from the beginning of the world? why He so many generations of men to wander for so many ages in all the darkness of death?"

Confessions and catechisms

The Canons of Dort affirm an abundant sufficiency in the death of Christ of "infinite worth and value" for the whole world. The word offer or free offer was used in the Westminster Standards and the Westminster Larger Catechism leaves no room for doubt that the phrase "grace offered" is used in reference to persons who "never truly come" to Christ. In his "Question & Answers on the Shorter Catechism", John Brown addressed and answered questions concerning the free offer of the gospel; he reasoned that God commands every person that hears the gospel to "take his gift Christ out of his hand", that Christ offers himself "Fully, freely, earnestly, and indefinitely" to all persons that hear the gospel "without exception", that this offer is for every person's case "as if he was named in it" and that to embrace the offer of Christ is to be persuaded that "Christ in the promise is mine."

Opposition to the doctrine

Both Calvinistic and non-Calvinistic ministers have expounded on several Bible passages as contradicting the doctrines which are considered to be Hyper-Calvinism. Verification that such scripture citations were a matter of doctrinal controversy may be seen in William Jeyes Styles' A Manual of Faith and Practice, Andrew Fuller's The Gospel Worthy of All Acceptation, John Gill's The Cause of God and Truth, Richard Baxter's Universal Redemption, Daniel Whitby's A Discourse Concerning Election and Reprobation and William Button's The Nature of Special Faith in Christ Considered. Arthur Pink wrote an article arguing for the doctrine of faith as the bounden duty of every person who hears the gospel.

Biblical references used in favor of orthodox Calvinism

Matthew 23:37 "...how often would I have gathered thy children together, even as a hen gathereth her chickens under her wings, and ye would not!" Adam Clarke believed that here it is evident that there were persons whom Jesus "wished to save, and bled to save" who perished because they would not come unto him. Richard Baxter referred to this scripture as teaching that the cause of persons perishing is not "for want of an expiatory Sacrifice", but "for want of Faith" to receive Christ and his benefits. John Calvin reasoned from this scripture that God "calls all men indiscriminately to salvation", that he "wills to gather all to himself" and that this is distinct from his secret purpose to efficaciously gather whomsoever he wills. John Gill understood that Christ here expresses his "will for their temporal good" that they may be gathered under the ministry of his word and acknowledge him as the Messiah in order to preserve them from the "temporal ruin" threatened upon their city. He concludes that this scripture does not prove men resist the operations of God's grace, but rather reveals the "obstructions and discouragements" that were "thrown in the way" of attendance to the ministry of his word.
John 1:7 "...that all men through him might believe." Albert Barnes noted on this scripture that John and Jesus came that "we may all" trust in Christ for salvation. John Calvin commented here that John came to prepare a church for Christ by "inviting all" to him. John Gill reasoned that the faith here required was not to believe Jesus died for them, but to acknowledge him as the Messiah. He also contended that souls who are made sensible of their lost state and "need of a Savior" ought to believe that Jesus died for them and "none but such."
John 3:16–17 "...that the world through him might be saved." On this scripture, Richard Baxter interpreted the world which Jesus came to save to be divided into believers who will eventually be saved and unbelievers who will eventually be condemned. John Calvin stated that the word "world" is repeated here so that no man may consider himself "wholly excluded", if he only "keep the road of faith." John Gill commented here that the "world" is referring to the elect in general and in particular God's people among the gentiles.
Romans 3:22–23 "...unto all and upon all them that believe: for there is no difference: For all have sinned..." Adam Clarke commented here that all human creatures are "equally helpless and guilty" and therefore God's "endless mercy has embraced all." John Calvin stated here that Christ "is offered to all" and becomes an advantage only to believers. He also commented that the apostle Paul here "urges on all, without exception" concerning the "necessity of seeking righteousness in Christ." John Gill understood these scriptures to refer to "not all men," but to persons who "believe in Christ for salvation" and that there is no room here for any person to "despair of the grace and righteousness of Christ" on account of viewing themselves as the worst of sinners.
Revelation 3:20 "...if any man hear my voice, and open the door..." Albert Barnes reasoned that this scripture is "applicable to all persons" and is the method by which Jesus seeks to come into the heart of a sinner. William Styles commented that this scripture is not referring to the unconverted, but rather regenerated persons of the church at Laodicea who were in "a low and lukewarm state" showing little regard for Christ. He understood the purpose of this appeal to be "not salvation from the punishment of sin," but of communion with Christ.

Additional scriptures
John 5:34 is addressed by William Styles (A Manual of Faith and Practice, pg. 274). John 10:31 is addressed by William Styles (A Manual of Faith and Practice, pg. 245).

Biblical references used in favor of the concept of duty-faith

Psalm 2:12 "Kiss the Son, lest he be angry..." Andrew Fuller concluded from this scripture that "unconverted sinners are commanded to believe in Christ for salvation" and that "believing in Christ for salvation is their duty." William Button understood the phrase "Kiss the Son" as a duty to reverence Christ and the phrase "Blessed are they" to be an encouragement to those who are privileged to "believe in him for pardon."
John 12:36 "While ye have light, believe in the light, that ye may be the children of light..." Andrew Fuller stated that the belief which was required of these "unbelievers" would have "issued in their salvation." William Styles understood "believe in the light” to mean "receive my testimony concerning Myself and My mission" and that the title "children of light" intends "Jews whose minds were informed by the teaching of Jesus" and not "spiritually illuminated persons."
2 Corinthians 5:17–21 "...we pray you in Christ's stead, be ye reconciled to God." Andrew Fuller reasoned that this scripture is spoken to "rebellious subjects" and to not "submit" to this mercy is to maintain "the war." Albert Barnes, on this scripture, stated that "ministers of reconciliation" are to "urge this duty on their fellow-men." John Calvin commented here that the phrase "be reconciled" is addressed to believers as a daily embassy "sounded forth in the Church." John Gill commented on this scripture as referring to "new creatures" that Christ died for.
2 Thessalonians 1:8 "...them that know not God, and that obey not the gospel of our Lord Jesus Christ."
1 John 3:23 "...this is his commandment, That we should believe on the name of his Son Jesus Christ..."

Additional scriptures
Isaiah 55:6–7 is addressed by William Button (The Nature of Special Faith in Christ Considered, pg. 30). Acts 16:30–31 is addressed by John Gill (The Cause of God and Truth, p. 574).

Support for the doctrine

Several bible passages are urged as supporting the doctrines which are considered to be Hyper-Calvinism. Verification that such scripture citations were a matter of doctrinal controversy may be seen in William Jeyes Styles' Baptist Manual Complete, Andrew Fuller's The Gospel Worthy of All Acceptation, John Gill's The Cause of God and Truth, Richard Baxter's Universal Redemption, Daniel Whitby's A Discourse Concerning Election and Reprobation and William Button's The Nature of Special Faith in Christ Considered.

Biblical references used to support the position of gospel invitations going to certain persons only

Isaiah 55:1 "Ho, every one that thirsteth, come ye to the waters..." John Gill taught that the persons here under the description of "thirsty" are spiritual persons "thirsting after forgiveness of sin by the blood of Christ" and to such is the gospel invitation given. Andrew Fuller believed that "thirst" here does not mean "holy desire after spiritual blessings" but rather a "natural desire of happiness" which God places in every bosom.
Matthew 11:25–28 "...Come unto me, all ye that labour and are heavy laden..." John Gill reasoned from this scripture that the persons invited here are "not all the individuals of mankind," but those who are "burdened with the guilt of sin upon their consciences." John Calvin commented here that "it would be in vain" for Christ to invite those who are "devoted to the world" or those who are "intoxicated with their own righteousness." On this verse, he also stated that Christ is "ready to reveal the Father to all" though the greater part is careless of coming to him.
Mark 2:15–17 "...I came not to call the righteous, but sinners to repentance." John Gill noted here that Christ "attended the one, and not the other." He also stated that this scripture refers to the "usefulness of Christ to one sort, and not another."
Luke 4:18 "...he hath anointed me to preach the gospel to the poor; he hath sent me to heal the brokenhearted..."
Revelation 22:17 "...let him that is athirst come. And whosoever will, let him take the water of life freely."

Biblical references used against duty-faith

Romans 4:13 "...the promise, that he should be the heir of the world, was not to Abraham, or to his seed, through the law, but through the righteousness of faith." The Baptist pastor Job Hupton concluded from this scripture that "the eternal inheritance" is not by "the law and its duty," but through "the gospel and its promises."
Romans 4:16 "...it is of faith, that it might be by grace; to the end the promise might be sure..." William Button made the argument here that "if faith is a duty (and so a work)" the apostle Paul should have rather said "It is of faith that it might be by works." He concluded that there is a "beauty" here in the apostles words because faith is rather a "blessing of the covenant of grace" and a "fruit of electing grace."
Galatians 3:11–12 "...the law is not of faith..." The Baptist minister William Wales Horne asserted from this scripture that because faith is a grace of the Spirit, it is therefore not a duty of the law. He also reasoned that faith is not "a duty which God requires of his people," but rather "a grace which he gives them."
Ephesians 2:8–9 "...by grace are ye saved through faith; and that not of yourselves..." The English Baptist John Foreman made an argument here that their faith was not a "duty produced of themselves" or of a "divine requirement," for God determined that his gift should "not be of works, and so not of duty."
2 Timothy 1:9 "...not according to our works, but according to his own purpose and grace..." John Foreman reasoned from this scripture that grace is "sovereign and particular only" and that here is the reason why all men are not called and saved by God's purpose and grace given before the world began. In light of this, he contended against the view that persons are "damned for not coming" to Christ for salvation.

References

Toon, Peter (2011). The Emergence of Hyper-Calvinism in English Nonconformity 1689-1765. Wipf and Stock Publishers. pp. 144–145. ISBN 978-1-60899-688-9.
Peter Toon, The Emergence of Hyper-Calvinism in English Nonconformity Archived 2009-02-26 at the Wayback Machine.
Wallace, Dewey D. (1996). "Calvinism". Historical Dictionary of Stuart England, 1603–1689. Bloomsbury Academic. p. 65. ISBN 9780313283918. Retrieved 30 August 2015.
McMahon, C. Matthew (2014). "Presumptive Regeneration, High Calvinism and Resting on the Word of God". Presumptive Regeneration, or, the Baptismal Regeneration of Elect Infants. Puritan Publications. p. 15. ISBN 9781626631052. Retrieved 30 August 2015.
Shaw, Ian (2013). "'The Only Certain Rule of Faith and Practice': The Interpretation of Scripture Among English High Calvinists, c.1780s–1850". Dissent and the Bible in Britain, C.1650-1950. OUP Oxford. p. 133. ISBN 978-0-19-960841-6. Retrieved 30 August 2015.
"Canons of Dort". SECOND HEAD: ARTICLE 8. Archived from the original on 2012-09-19.{{cite web}}: CS1 maint: location (link)
Croft, G. (1825). The Christian Instructor; Containing a Brief But Comprehensive View of the Evidences, Doctrines, Duties, External Economy and Prospects of the Christian Religion. In the Form of Question and Answer. Francis Westley. pp. 169–173.
Wright, Charles Henry Hamilton; Neil, Charles (1904). A Protestant Dictionary: Containing Articles on the History, Doctrines, and Practices of the Christian Church. Hodder and Stoughton. p. 575, Column 2.
^ Ellis, Jim (April 2008). "What is Hyper-Calvinism?". Reformed Perspectives Magazine. 10 (15). Retrieved 27 January 2013.
Daniel, Curt D. (1983). Hyper-Calvinism and John Gill. University of Edinburgh.
Murray, Iain H. (1973). The Forgotten Spurgeon. Banner of Truth Trust. p. 47. ISBN 978-0-85151-156-6.
Howson, Barry H. (2001). Erroneous and Schismatical Opinions: The Question of Orthodoxy Regarding the Theology of Hanserd Knollys (c.1599-1691). Brill. p. 133. ISBN 9004119973.
^ Peter Toon, The Emergence of Hyper-Calvinism in English Nonconformity. Part Three: The Propagation of Hyper-Calvinism Archived 2012-06-16 at the Wayback Machine.
Carter, Joe (March 19, 2014). "9 Things You Should Know About Fred Phelps and Westboro Baptist Church". The Gospel Coalition. Retrieved 2023-11-02.
"Radio". Hope PRC. 8 January 2018. Retrieved 2023-04-26.
The Gospel Standard Articles of Faith and Rules Archived 2014-12-11 at the Wayback Machine
"Articles Archives". Banner of Truth USA. pp. 9–10. Retrieved 2023-04-26.
Gospel Standard Articles of Faith, Article 28, Baxterianism Denied
Daniel Whitaker, The Nature and Design of Gospel Invitations Archived 2015-05-07 at the Wayback Machine, (pg. 5.)
John Stevens, Help for the True Disciples of Immanuel Archived 2011-07-25 at the Wayback Machine, Section 18 (pg. 15)
Gospel Standard Articles of Faith, Article 24, Gospel Invitations
Gospel Standard Articles of Faith, Article 27, The Non-Elect Incapable of Receiving Grace
Gospel Standard Articles of Faith, Article 29, Indiscriminate Offers of Grace Denied
Sermon 7: The Doctrine of Predestination Stated, and Set in the Scripture Light Archived 2010-08-10 at the Wayback Machine by John Gill.
"Index of ./Robert Hawker/". www.grace-ebooks.com. pp. 47–53. Retrieved 2023-04-26.
Gospel Standard Articles of Faith, Article 26, Duty Faith and Duty Repentance Denied
Gosden, John Hervey (1993). What Gospel Standard Baptists Believe: A Commentary on the Gospel Standard Articles of Faith. Gospel Standard Publications. pp. 129–130. ISBN 978-0-9510796-1-4.
William Styles, A Manual of Faith and Practice Archived 2011-07-25 at the Wayback Machine, (pg. 230)
The Voice of truth; or, Strict baptists' magazine. 1867. pp. 5–7, continued on p. 27.
"John Calvin: Commentaries on the Catholic Epistles – Christian Classics Ethereal Library". www.ccel.org. Retrieved 2023-04-26.
"John Calvin: Commentary on Romans – Christian Classics Ethereal Library". www.ccel.org. Romans 5:18. Retrieved 2023-04-26.
"John Calvin: Commentary on Hebrews – Christian Classics Ethereal Library". www.ccel.org. Hebrews 9:28. Retrieved 2023-04-26.
"A Treatise on the Doctrine of Predestination," in Calvin’s Calvinism (RFPA: Grand Rapids, USA, 1987), p. 166
Canons of Dort, Second Head: Article 3
Westminster Confession of Faith Archived 2013-01-25 at WebCite VII/III; Larger Catechism Archived 2014-09-24 at the Wayback Machine, Ans. 32, 63, 68; Shorter Catechism Archived 2014-09-24 at the Wayback Machine, Ans. 31 and 86.
Larger Catechism, Ans. 68
Brown, John (1818). An Essay Towards an Easy, Plain, Practical, and Extensive Explication of the Assembly's Shorter Catechism. Henry Frick. pp. 142–143.
^ . 2011-07-25 https://web.archive.org/web/20110725182436/http://www.mountzionpbc.org/Pdf/William_Styles_Baptist_Manual_Complete_5a.pdf. Archived from the original (PDF) on 2011-07-25. Retrieved 2023-04-26. {{cite web}}: Missing or empty |title= (help)
^ Andrew Fuller. The Gospel worthy of all acceptation: or, The duty of sinners to believe in ... Harvard University. American Doctrinal Tract Society, 1837.
^ John Gill, "The Cause of God and Truth"
^ . 2017-03-22 https://web.archive.org/web/20170322103206/http://quintapress.macmate.me/PDF_Books/Universal_Redemption.pdf. Archived from the original (PDF) on 2017-03-22. Retrieved 2023-04-26. {{cite web}}: Missing or empty |title= (help)
^ Whitby, Daniel (1816). A Discourse Concerning I. The True Import of the Words Election and Reprobation, and the Things Signified by Them in the Holy Scripture. II. The Extent of Christ's Redemption. III. The Grace of God ... IV. The Liberty of the Will in a State of Trial and Probation. V. The Perseverance Or Defectibility of the Saints ...: To which is Added a Postscript, in Answer to Some of Doctor Edwards's Remarks. F.C. and J. Rivington.
. 2011-07-25 https://web.archive.org/web/20110725182135/http://www.mountzionpbc.org/Duty%20Faith/button-_Book.pdf. Archived from the original (PDF) on 2011-07-25. Retrieved 2023-04-26. {{cite web}}: Missing or empty |title= (help)
"A. W. Pink on Duty-Faith". www.romans45.org. Retrieved 2023-04-26.
"Matthew 23 – Clarke's Commentary – Bible Commentaries". StudyLight.org. Retrieved 2023-04-26.
Richard Baxter, Universal Redemption Archived 2017-03-22 at the Wayback Machine, (pg. 135)
"Matthew 23 – Calvin's Commentary on the Bible – Bible Commentaries". StudyLight.org. Matthew 23:37. Retrieved 2023-04-26.
"Matthew 23 – Gill's Exposition of the Whole Bible – Bible Commentaries". StudyLight.org. Matthew 23:37. Retrieved 2023-04-26.
"John 1 – Barnes' Notes on the Whole Bible – Bible Commentaries". StudyLight.org. John 1:7–8. Retrieved 2023-04-26.
"John 1 – Calvin's Commentary on the Bible – Bible Commentaries". StudyLight.org. John 1:6–8. Retrieved 2023-04-26.
John Gill, The Cause of God and Truth, (pp. 118–119)
Richard Baxter, Universal Redemption Archived 2017-03-22 at the Wayback Machine, (pg. 304)
"John 3 – Calvin's Commentary on the Bible – Bible Commentaries". StudyLight.org. John 3:17. Retrieved 2023-04-26.
"Books Available – Gill's Exposition of the Whole Bible – Bible Commentaries". StudyLight.org. John 3:17. Retrieved 2023-04-26.
"Books Available – Clarke's Commentary – Bible Commentaries". StudyLight.org. Romans 3:22–23. Retrieved 2023-04-26.
"Books Available – Calvin's Commentary on the Bible – Bible Commentaries". StudyLight.org. Romans 3:22–23. Retrieved 2023-04-26.
"Books Available – Gill's Exposition of the Whole Bible – Bible Commentaries". StudyLight.org. Romans 3:22–23. Retrieved 2023-04-26.
"Books Available – Barnes' Notes on the Whole Bible – Bible Commentaries". StudyLight.org. Revelation 3:20. Retrieved 2023-04-26.
William Styles, A Manual of Faith and Practice Archived 2011-07-25 at the Wayback Machine, (pg. 111)
Fuller, Andrew. The Gospel worthy of all acceptation: or, The duty of sinners to believe in ... Harvard University. American Doctrinal Tract Society, 1837. pp. 24–25.
William Button, The Nature of Special Faith in Christ Considered Archived 2011-07-25 at the Wayback Machine, (pp. 25–26)
Fuller, Andrew. The Gospel worthy of all acceptation: or, The duty of sinners to believe in ... Harvard University. American Doctrinal Tract Society, 1837. p. 29.
William Styles, A Manual of Faith and Practice Archived 2011-07-25 at the Wayback Machine, (pg. 244-245)
Fuller, Andrew. The Gospel worthy of all acceptation: or, The duty of sinners to believe in ... Harvard University. American Doctrinal Tract Society, 1837. pp. 48–49.
"Books Available – Barnes' Notes on the Whole Bible – Bible Commentaries". StudyLight.org. 2 Corinthians 5:20. Retrieved 2023-04-26.
"2 Corinthians 5 – Calvin's Commentary on the Bible – Bible Commentaries". StudyLight.org. 2 Corinthians 5:20. Retrieved 2023-04-26.
"Books Available – Gill's Exposition of the Whole Bible – Bible Commentaries". StudyLight.org. 2 Corinthians 5:20. Retrieved 2023-04-26.
William Button, "The Nature of Special Faith in Christ Considered Archived 2011-07-25 at the Wayback Machine"
"Isaiah 55 – Gill's Exposition of the Whole Bible – Bible Commentaries". StudyLight.org. Isaiah 55:1. Retrieved 2023-04-26.
Fuller, Andrew. The Gospel worthy of all acceptation: or, The duty of sinners to believe in ... Harvard University. American Doctrinal Tract Society, 1837. p. 26.
"Books Available – Gill's Exposition of the Whole Bible – Bible Commentaries". StudyLight.org. Matthew 11:28. Retrieved 2023-04-26.
"Matthew 11 – Calvin's Commentary on the Bible – Bible Commentaries". StudyLight.org. Matthew 11:28. Retrieved 2023-04-26.
"Mark 2 – Gill's Exposition of the Whole Bible – Bible Commentaries". StudyLight.org. Mark 2:17. Retrieved 2023-04-26.
Job Hupton, A Blow Struck at the Root of Fullerism Archived 2011-07-25 at the Wayback Machine, (pg. 6)
. 2011-07-25. pp. 22–23 https://web.archive.org/web/20110725182135/http://www.mountzionpbc.org/Duty%20Faith/button-_Book.pdf. Archived from the original (PDF) on 2011-07-25. Retrieved 2023-04-26. {{cite web}}: Missing or empty |title= (help)
William Wales Horne, The Faith of the Gospel Vindicated Archived 2016-03-04 at the Wayback Machine, (pg. 12)
John Foreman, Duty Faith Archived 2011-07-25 at the Wayback Machine, (pg. 12)
John Foreman, Duty Faith Archived 2011-07-25 at the Wayback Machine, p. 28.

External links

The Necessity and Justification for the Free Offer of the Gospel Archived 2014-05-06 at the Wayback Machine from The Metropolitan Tabernacle
Monergism: Hyper Calvinism – a collection of articles on the subject from Monergism.com
A primer on Hyper-Calvinism – written by Phillip R. Johnson, from a Calvinist perspective.
The Emergence of Hyper-Calvinism in English Nonconformity, 1689–1765 by Peter Toon.
The History and Theology of Calvinism by Dr. Curt Daniel.
History of the English Calvinistic Baptists 1771–1892: from John Gill to C. H. Spurgeon Archived 2014-10-28 at the Wayback Machine Review by Historian George Ella
Ten Arguments Against Duty Faith by Peter Meney
Hyper-Calvinism Is it True? by Stanley C. Phillips

Categories: