Separate names with a comma.
Discussion in 'Puritan Literature' started by Rutherglen1794, May 7, 2018.
With young kids I see no prospects of reading. Maybe in a decade I will find the time?
Not 17th Century, but AH Strong ST would be a good summary view concerning Reformed baptist views.
I'll add to the growing chorus. Just finished Gill's Complete Body, 2 volume edition from Baker.
Yes, it cost me, but it was well worth it.
That will be on my list for future possibilities.
Because I can't find anything by Benjamin Keach in true book form, I am pondering whether or not to create my own via lulu.com self publishing. Copy, paste, and edit the text, and upload to lulu, where they print and bind it for you.
This will only work for smaller works of course. It takes time to edit.
For example, copy and paste this:
I have read it repeatedly over the years. Does that make me a Gillite? lol
His sermons use to be online and I read through almost all of them but the sermon on the Sabbath was missing.
After a lot of reading, study and prayer I came to reject Gill's view on the Sabbath and accept the Confessional view now.
Yours in the Lord,
Did you detect any hyper Calvinism in his work?
What was his take on it?
I couldn't find the sermon but in his commentaries he rejects the Sabbath and seems to take a NCT perspective on it. It's odd that he does. His covenant theology is closer to Westminster covenant theology than 1689 federalism.
How about Andrew Fuller - 1754-1815.
One of his most important writings was "The Gospel Worthy of All Acceptation," in which he fought back against the hyper-calvinism of his day.
As a single man I don't know what it's like to manage a household with kids and a wife, work a full time job trying to provide for a family and find time to read. I guess what I can say is I always try to have a book ready to read whenever I have downtime. Even if it's only for 15-30 minutes e.g. waiting at the doctor's office, on lunch break at work etc. Hope that helps, brother.
I'm only 15 months into being a parent (30 if you count it double for twins), but thus far I have found that, generally, there is no longer such a thing as downtime. It's almost 8:00pm right now, and I've been occupied since getting home from work.
I'm still trying to figure it out.
As a side note, I found a physical copy of King James' book against smoking tobacco in a local book store. I see you wrote about it on your blog.
Wow that's super neat! I love finding gems at used book stores. If you ever wanted to let go of it let me know.
As a father of three, the eldest of whom is four years old, I can tell you that training your children to sleep through the night is one of the most important things your wife and you can do to maintain your sanity and reserve time for yourselves and for your marriage. The Baby Wise books are controversial, and we don't follow them as closely as we did when we were new parents; however, the Baby Wise method of teaching children to sleep through the night works. We've done it three times with no issues.
Check it out: https://www.amazon.com/Becoming-Baby-Wise-Giving-Nighttime-ebook/dp/B00CLKEUVM
This book should serve as another reminder of what a vile and reprehensible person he was.
Where is that tongue-in-cheek smiley?
I have read where some use the term Fullerites though, as in the sense some did not consider him Calvinistic enough in Sotierology?
Thanks for the link, looking through that, it would seem that Gill did not state as NCT does there is any reason to have a day of obligation, but more that each Christian has the duty to set aside a day for that, regardless of what day that would be?
Obviously I've yet to read either man, but is it fair to say that:
Did NOT hold to eternal justification
Pro-free offer of the gospel
Not a Sabbatarian
Benjamin Keach at first glance seems to adhere to 1689 theology more than Gill? Is that correct?
I know he had a part to play in the 1689
Yes, you are correct. Gill believed in the free proclamation of the Gospel but denied the Gospel is an offer. Gill held to the idea that belief is an 'evangelical grace' (from the 1689) and therefore he preached openly to all. I linked that above somewhere.
Ella notes that Gill lead outdoor, evangelistic preaching as well.
Yours in the Lord,
PS: Gill distinguished between legal and saving repentance. The former is required from the reprobate. (see his comments on the portion from Acts) The later was given to the elect by God the Father through the Spirit.
Why not just post it! (after thought)
It's all on my blog anyway.
Again, The London Baptist Confession of 1689 reads;
“The grace of faith, whereby the elect are enabled to believe to the saving of their souls, is the work of the Spirit of Christ in their hearts,”
“By this faith a Christian believeth to be true whatsoever is revealed in the Word for the authority of God himself”
“and so is enabled to cast his soul upon the truth thus believed”
“This saving repentance is an evangelical grace, whereby a person, being by the Holy Spirit made sensible of the manifold evils of his sin”
John Gill’s comments on Acts 20.21:
Testifying both to the Jews, and also to the Greeks,…. To the Jews first in their synagogue, and then to both Jews and Greeks, or Gentiles, in the school of Tyrannus; opening and explaining to both the nature and use, urging and insisting upon, and proving by undeniable testimonies the necessity,
of repentance toward God and faith toward our Lord Jesus Christ: the former of these is not a legal repentance, but an evangelical one; which flows from a sense of the love of God, and an application of pardoning grace and mercy, and is always attended with hope, at least of interest in it, and as here with faith in Christ Jesus:
it lies in a true sight and sense of sin, as exceeding sinful, being contrary to the nature and law of God, and a deformation of the image of God in man, as well as followed with dreadful and pernicious consequences; and in a godly sorrow for it, as it is committed against a God of infinite purity and holiness, and of love, grace, and mercy; and it shows itself in shame for sin, and blushing at it, and in an ingenious confession of it, and forsaking it: and the latter of these is not an historical faith, or an assent of the mind to whatsoever is true concerning the person, office, and grace of Christ; but is a spiritual act of the soul upon him;
it is a looking and going out to him, a laying hold and leaning on him, and trusting in him, for grace, righteousness, peace, pardon, life, and salvation. Now these two were the sum of the apostle’s ministry; this is a breviary or compendium of it; a form of sound words held fast and published by him: and as these two go together as doctrines in the ministry of the word, they go together as graces in the experience of the saints; where the one is, there the other is; they are wrought in the soul at one and the same time, by one and the same hand;
the one is not before the other in order of time, however it may be in order of working, or as to visible observation; repentance is mentioned before faith, not that it precedes it, though it may be discerned in its outward acts before it; yet faith as to its inward exercise on Christ is full as early, if not earlier; souls first look to Christ by faith, and then they mourn in tears of evangelical repentance, Zec 12:10 though the order of the Gospel ministry is very fitly here expressed, which is first to lay before sinners the evil of sin, and their danger by it, in order to convince of it, and bring to repentance for it; and then to direct and encourage them to faith in Christ Jesus, as in the case of the jailer, Ac 16:29 and this is, generally speaking, the order and method in which the Holy Spirit proceeds;
he is first a spirit of conviction and illumination, he shows to souls the exceeding sinfulness of sin, causes them to loath it and themselves for it, and humbles them under a sense of it; and then he is a spirit of faith, he reveals Christ unto them as God’s way or salvation, and works faith in them to believe in him. Moreover, these two, repentance and faith, were the two parts of Christ’s ministry, Mr 1:15 and are what, he would have published and insisted on, in the preaching of the word, Lu 24:47 so that the ministry of the apostle was very conformable to the mind and will of Christ. [end quote]
Yours in the Lord,
Would appear to be so, as the eternal Justification position of Gil seems to be where some label him as a hyper-Calvinist. He did believe that the Gospel is to be preached to all though, unlike true Hypers.
Yes, exactly. Toplady stated that Gill was infra!! Crazy, eh.
So Gil held to all getting offered the Gospel, but that was only a real offer to the elect then?
Gil eternal justification would be held by those such as Primitive Baptists.
According to Gill, all should hear the Gospel, it has a saving and condemning effect. Only the elect are made 'sensible to sin' or made aware of their need for Christ and enable to repent and believe.
Yes. "Hardshell" Primitives believe a sinner can be saved by the decree of God alone and and 'through faith' as well. A sinner can be saved without the preaching of the Gospel according to "Hardshell" Primitives.
While your post ends with a question mark, no question has been grammatically introduced. Rather an opinion has been proffered...and duly noted.
Gill writes, “…one that is strong in faith, and has a greater degree of the knowledge of the Gospel, and of evangelical liberty, knows that the distinction of days, as well as of meats, is taken away … Christ the true sabbath and rest is come; and therefore, being firmly persuaded there is no more holiness in days than there is in places, has the same regard for one day as another.”
I would say Gill allowed for the local congregation to set aside a day for worship and members would be obliged to attend.
So God can and will regenerate and redeem all of His elect, regardless if they actually hear the good news and place faith in Christ?
So under Christian Liberty principle, so if a Church still wanted to keep Saturday, another Sunday, both would be right and acceptable?
That is what 'some' Primitives believe, yes.
That's my understanding of Gill. It's up to the local congregation to set a day aside and once they do you are obliged as a member to attend.
I'm no expect but have read A LOT of Gill! lol
Yours in the Lord,
I am trying to wade through him now, and do know that many fellow reformed baptists hold in high regard, as if he was our John Calvin.