Spurgeon on Prayer

Been reading through Spurgeon’s “Lecture to My Students” and received a stinging rebuke as he discoursed on private prayer. It dawned on me that little faith (if any) is required to talk of belief in God’s sovereignty. Yet true faith in God’s sovereignty manifests itself, not in speech, but ultimately in prayer.

If we cannot prevail with men for God, we will, at least, endeavor to prevail with God for men.
- Charles H. Spurgeon, Lectures to My Students

…on a different note, I laughed out loud while reading this part. He’s giving advice on public prayers. I don’t know if it was supposed to be funny, but I couldn’t help but laugh.

On lengthy prayers:

…never appear to be closing, and then start off again for another five minutes. When friends make up their minds that you are about to conclude, they cannot with a jerk proceed again in a devout spirit. I have known men tantalize us with the hope that they were drawing to a close, and then take a fresh lease two or three times; this is most unwise and unpleasant.

In exhorting his students not to use nonsensical expressions:

We have heard of a good man who, in pleading for his children and grandchildren, was so completely beclouded in the blinding influence of this expression, that he exlaimed, ‘O Lord, save thy dust, and thy dust’s dust, and thy dust’s dust’s dust.’

There is what might be called an unhappy, somewhat grotesque, mingling of Scripture texts. Who is not familiar with the following words addressed to God in prayer, ‘Thou art the high and lofty One that inhabiteth eternity, and the praises thereof‘!… the inhabiting of the praises of eternity, to say the least, is meagre; there were no praises in the past eternity to inhabit.

Then there is an example nothing less than grotesque under this head, and yet one in such frequent use that I suspect it is very generally regarded as having the sanction of Scripture. Here it is, ‘We would put our hand on our mouth, and our mouth in the dust, and cry out, Unclean, unclean; God be merciful to us sinners’… how incongruos a man’s first putting his hand on his mouth, then putting his mouth in the dust, and, last of all crying out, etc.!

The only other example I give is an expression nearly universal among us, and, I suspect, almost universally thought to be in Scripture, ‘In thy favour is life, and thy lovingkindness is better than life.’ The fact is, that this also is just an unhappy combination of two passages in which the term life is used in altogether different, and even incompatible senses…

Old Testament Monergism

Been reading through “Biblical Theology” by Geehardus Vos. As defined by the author Biblical Theology “deals with the process of the self-revelation of God deposited in the Bible.” Basically, going through the Bible historically to see how God reveals Himself. One point that Vos made about Biblical Theology is that it “relieves to some extent the unfortunate situation that even the fundamental doctrines of the faith should seem to depend mainly on the testimony of isolated proof-texts.” Because Biblical Theology seems to better capture the “big picture” it sheds light on key doctrines that come from Scripture showing that they are not “theories” that are upheld only by various verses. With that said I found a nice quote about monergism in the Old Testament:

Abraham was not permitted to do anything through his own strength or resources to realize what the promise set before him… in regard to the [promise] it might have seemed as if he might have contributed something toward the end in view… he attempted to proceed on the principle of synergism in proposing to God that Ishmael should be considered the seed of the promise. But this was not accepted for the reason Ishmael’s being the product of nature, whereas a supernatural product was required. Abraham was kept childless until an age when he was ‘as good as dead’, that the divine omnipotence might be evident as the source of Isaac’s birth… Abraham was not allowed to acquire any possession in the land of promise. Yet he was rich and might easily have done so. But God Himself intended to fulfill this promise also without the co-operation of the patriarch; and Abraham seems to have had some apprehension of this, for he explains his refusal to accept any of the spoils from the king of Sodom by the fear lest the latter should say, ‘I have made Abram rich’.

Controversy between God and soul

What is the reason that controversies hang so long between God and your souls, that it may be despondency of spirit? You will not gird up the loins of your minds, in dealing with God, to put them to a speedy issue in the blood of Christ. You go on and off, begin and cease, try and you scarce see a good day all your lives? Is it not, for the most part, from your sloth and give over; and, for the most part, though your case be extra-ordinary, content yourselves with ordinary and customary applications unto God. This makes you wither, become useless, and pine away in and under your perplexities. David did not so; but after many and many a breach made by sin, yet, through quick, vigorous, restless actings of faith, all was repaired, so that he lived peaceably, and died triumphantly. Up, then, and be doing; let not your ‘wounds corrupt because of your folly.’ Make thorough work of that which lies before you; be it long, or difficult, it is all one, it must be done, and is attended with safety. – John Owen, “An Exposition Upon Psalm CXXX” 

We lack the spirit of the puritans so clearly manifest in such writings. We ought not be content in any sort of rest until it be found in Christ. 

Called and Chosen

Started reading Calvin’s “Sermons on the Beatitudes.” The first sermon, based on Christ’s choosing of the twelve disciples, deals directly with sovereign election. Immediately, the message seems to delve deep into the doctrines of grace. Calvin, preaching on God’s election out of Mark 3:13-19:

How, indeed, can we explain our soul’s salvation except in terms of God’s good pleasure and his free gift of mercy? For if we think that we are better than others whom he has passed over or abandoned, we simply demean God’s unconditional kindness through which we obtain salvation. And this we do every time we seek to gain a measure of importance or esteem in men’s eyes. Every mouth must of necessity be shut. We must learn that God has chosen us, not because he saw something good in us, or found us more amenable than those whom he rejects, but simply that he might reveal the full splendour of his generosity.

Calvin’s ability to exposit scripture is well known and highly regarded even by those who may not hold his view of predestination. Yet it is an odd thing that such exegesis would constantly provide evidence of God’s sovereign choice despite man’s radical corruption. Calvinism is just a name for a doctrine already in scripture and it’s unfortunate that we must use a name other than Biblical for what is so apparent.