How solid is R.C. Sproul?

[RonJohnSilver]

I know he is 'reformed', although I'm not totally sure what that entails. I'm laying out plans for my autumn home study and Sproul's study on Parables fits all of my parameters regarding length, etc. But main question is this, 'Is he Biblically accurate?' I just don't know how/what that 'reformed' thing is or how it affects his beliefs.

 

[mattfivefour]

He is biblically accurate, except when it comes to Calvinism. He is what I would term a hyperCalvinist. They hate the term and just say they're Calvinist, but I think some famous Calvinists in history would not accept what they actually believe. But if you're able to avoid the TULIP and stick to the Word of God, he's solid.

 

[Andy C]

But if you're able to avoid the TULIP and stick to the Word of God, he's solid.

How can that be? If someone does not understand what salvation is, or how one becomes saved, and all the rest of TULIP - How can they be considered solid?

 

[mattfivefour]

How can that be? If someone does not understand what salvation is, or how one becomes saved, and all the rest of TULIP - How can they be considered solid?

Calvinists believe in salvation the same as we do in terms of how we appropriate it to ourselves-- by faith in Jesus Christ in His finished work on the cross. They believe in all of the cardinal OT doctrines, as well s all of the NT doctrines ... except to me what is the most important-- their terrible error is in believing that only certain people can be saved. Thys they deny the universality of the gospel. But outside of that and the other Calvinist doctrines that buttress that key belief of theirs, you'd find yourself in great agreement with a Calvinist if you were to chat with one. They believe in Once Saved Always Saved, repentance, baptism, in the full humanity and the full deity of Christ, of the need to come to Christ for salvation, of his complete and effective salvorific work on the Cross, that salvation is by faith alone in Christ alone, etc, etc.

The ones I have met love the Lord God with all of their heart and preach the gospel readily to all men, for (as they say) you don't know who's been chosen and who hasn't. So, frankly, they drive me nuts.

They have the truth right there in their Bible and its readily available to them; but they are as wedded to Calvin's view of election as a bee is to his honeycomb. Once in a while I'll get a Calvinist to see the error in some of his doctrines, which starts them heading in the right direction; but not often. At least (as Paul said about those who preached the gospel but in opposition to himself) at least the gospel is being preached.

 

[mattfivefour]

Calvinists believe in salvation the same as we do in terms of how we appropriate it to ourselves-- by faith in Jesus Christ in His finished work on the cross. They believe in all of the cardinal OT doctrines, as well s all of the NT doctrines ... except to me what is the most important-- their terrible error is in believing that only certain people can be saved. Thys they deny the universality of the gospel. But outside of that and the other Calvinist doctrines that buttress that key belief of theirs, you'd find yourself in great agreement with a Calvinist if you were to chat with one. They believe in Once Saved Always Saved, repentance, baptism, in the full humanity and the full deity of Christ, of the need to come to Christ for salvation, of his complete and effective salvorific work on the Cross, that salvation is by faith alone in Christ alone, etc, etc. The ones I have met love the Lord God with all of their heart and preach the gospel readily to all men, for (as they say) you don't know who's been chosen and who hasn't. so frankly, they drive me nuts. They have the truth right there in their Bible and you're in the available to them; but they are as wedded to Calvin's view of election as a bee is to his honeycomb. Once in a while I'll get a Calvinistic to see the error in some of his doctrines, which starts in heading in the right direction; but not often. At least (as Paul said about those who preached the gospel but in opposition to himself at least the gospel is being preached.

 

[Hol]

Calvinists believe in salvation the same as we do in terms of how we appropriate it to ourselves-- by faith in Jesus Christ in His finished work on the cross.

They do not believe that unbelievers have the free will choice of responding to the Gospel.

The “T” of TULIP teaches that everyone is deader than a rock. No one can respond freely to the conviction of the Holy Spirit. They teach that God has willed only the elect to be saved by means of God irresistibly(the “i” in tulip).

One example to show why we have free will that I’ve heard is that TULIP would be like a man wanting to marry a woman who isn’t interested in him—then he secretly gets her to drink a love potion and they marry.

I don’t wish to speak ill of the deceased, but I wouldn’t use his materials for an additional reason. Several years ago his son, who also pastored at his church, had a series of incidents, starting with this “… August 2015, Sproul wrote in his personal blog that he had briefly visited the Ashley Madison website in 2014. As a result, Ligonier Ministries suspended him until July 2016.” He went on to have more trouble with the law, sued his mom & Ligoneir, but got back into pastoring

 

[Cheeky200386]

They believe that we can’t choose to believe in God because we are so totally depraved that we are incapable of seeing our need for Jesus. They believe that God makes people who will be saved and that his grace is so overwhelming that it forces people to accept salvation.

That is not the Gospel.

The deceptive nature of Calvinism comes from the fact that they will say many of the same phrases we use but they mean something completely different. Saying God is in control, for example, to a Calvinist means that God literally is in control of everything, including people committing sin. Calvinism is from the pit of Hell.

They also believe that you must prove you are saved “the elect” by growing in sanctification and sinning less. John Piper and I believe R.C Sproul have made statements that you can’t really be sure you are saved on your death bed. Don’t quote me on that last statement though.

Either way, they do not believe carnal Christians are saved and that anyone can fall into sin and be saved.

One of my dear friends is deceived as a Calvinist and she had the audacity to say that my abortion was part of God’s will. I told her God did not cause me to do it and that the responsibility falls on me, not on God. It was blasphemy. I still love my friend and we can talk about everything else, but Faith is tricky since we disagree on fundamental beliefs.

They also don’t believe in studying future prophecy. It’s a shame Calvinism exists.

 

[Hol]

They will say many of the same phrases we use but they mean something completely different.

They are not holding a high view of God, and a lower view of those they deem not the elect.

Some are really decent Christians, because they do not understand TULIP.

 

[Cheeky200386]

They are not holding a high view of God, and a lower view of those they deem not the elect.

Some are really decent Christians, because they do not understand TULIP.

There is a couple in my church that say they are 3.5 Calvinists and I believe they just don’t really understand it which is probably why they don’t fully embrace it. I have hope for them.

 

[Cheeky200386]

Andy Woods is currently putting out an excellent in-depth study on Calvinism that I highly suggest people watch to come out with a PhD on Calvinism/Reformed Theology, lol.

 

[Hol]

It’s very helpful & I’m really enjoying his series.

 

[Cheeky200386]

I would attach a couple of screenshots of quotes from R.C Sproul 1. denying dispensationalism and claiming the Church replaced Israel and 2. stating infant baptism has merit. I don’t know how to insert an image from my phone.

I would avoid him and find someone who isn’t a mess with Reformed garbage. He will insert these beliefs subtly and it’s not worth the headache and possible confusion.

Same with John MacArthur, John Piper, Arthur Pink, Spurgeon is questionable for me, and Puritans in general. I hear these names and my Calvinist spider senses go off and I run for the hills.

 

[mattfivefour]

All very good points. Thank you both. I've written and preached often over of the years on Calvinism, its error is and the harm it does. Many years ago when he was still alive and active, Sproul used to be on our local Christian radio at a time when I was driving. As he was talking I'd be talking back to the radio pointing out what scripture says ... and at time's yelling at the radio! I certainly wouldn't recommend him. But that said, Ron is a mature Christian and a sound Bible teacher. I think for such a person there is material that Sproul (and other famous Calvinists such as D A. Carson, Jonathan Edwards, Charles Spurgeon, Andrew Murray, Martin Luther, and John Bunyan, to name only a few out of very many) gleaned from Scripture, that --when used judiciously-- could be useful in preparing lessons.

To remove the great expositors and theologians of history from our studies because they espoused Calvinism to one degree or another would be a mistake in my opinion. However I should have given my comments to Ron in a private message. It was not appropriate for me to post my comments publicly on a board where so many people, including visitors, read and might be led to believe that Calvinism is good doctrine. I apologize for that and regret posting publicly. I would delete my initial reply except that it has provoked some good and useful responses.

 

[Cheeky200386]

All very good points. Thank you both. I've written and preached often over of the years on Calvinism, its error is and the harm it does. Many years ago when he was still alive and active, Sproul used to be on our local Christian radio at a time when I was driving. As he was talking I'd be talking back to the radio pointing out what scripture says ... and at time's yelling at the radio! I certainly wouldn't recommend him. But that said, Ron is a mature Christian and a sound Bible teacher. I think for such a person there is material that Sproul (and other famous Calvinists such as D A. Carson, Jonathan Edwards, Charles Spurgeon, Andrew Murray, Martin Luther, and John Bunyan, to name only a few out of very many) gleaned from Scripture, that --when used judiciously-- could be useful in preparing lessons.

To remove the great expositors and theologians of history from our studies because they espoused Calvinism to one degree or another would be a mistake in my opinion. However I should have given my comments to Ron in a private message. It was not appropriate for me to post my comments publicly on a board where so many people, including visitors, read and might be led to believe that Calvinism is good doctrine. I apologize for that and regret posting publicly. I would delete my initial reply except that it has provoked some good and useful responses.

You’re right Pastor. For anyone interested, even Andy Woods gives Calvin praise for what he did contribute to America’s history while condemning the errors he brought. I do agree with you that there can much to be gleaned by these men when one has strong discernment. Pilgrim’s Progress and works from others you mentioned are famous and have good lessons in them regardless of the errors they also believed in. I plan to read Pilgrim’s Progress with my kids and use Calvinistic materials to teach my Children how to compare error with Scripture in our Homeschool. I want them to know that someone calling themselves a Christian doesn’t make them free from error.

I know for me personally, I haven’t needed to turn to Calvinists for personal Bible Study but I have no idea what Pastoral preparation entails and if Pastors, for example, need their material or if there aren’t enough non reformed expositors to turn to. I didn’t realize Ron was a Bible teacher.

 

[RonJohnSilver]

You’re right Pastor. For anyone interested, even Andy Woods gives Calvin praise for what he did contribute to America’s history while condemning the errors he brought. I do agree with you that there can much to be gleaned by these men when one has strong discernment. Pilgrim’s Progress and works from others you mentioned are famous and have good lessons in them regardless of the errors they also believed in. I plan to read Pilgrim’s Progress with my kids and use Calvinistic materials to teach my Children how to compare error with Scripture in our Homeschool. I want them to know that someone calling themselves a Christian doesn’t make them free from error.

I know for me personally, I haven’t needed to turn to Calvinists for personal Bible Study but I have no idea what Pastoral preparation entails and if Pastors, for example, need their material or if there aren’t enough non reformed expositors to turn to. I didn’t realize Ron was a Bible teacher.

As a fyi...I teach Sunday School as a backup in my adult class and monthly lessons for those coming to our food pantry plus a weekly home Bible study. Each requires different preparation, SS is the most challenging. I use multiple sources to make sure that I'm not teaching bad doctrine. I do have John MacArthur, AW Pink and other Calvinist preacher/writers among my sources but not exclusively.

 

[Matthew6:33]

Isn't R.C. Sproul a preterist too?

 

[1LoverofGod]

He disagreed with Dispensationalism, and Premillennialism, and Pre-Tribulation. This is an excerpt of a quote from RC Proul


What Sproul lays out in his lectures are the various positions Christians hold with regard to the end times.

What the public may be most familiar with, following Camping's Judgment Day proclamation, is what is called dispensational premillennialism.

Adherents of this theological view expect the rapture to take place, where the church will be caught up to meet Jesus in the air, right before a period of great tribulation. Afterward, Jesus will return again with the saints for his final manifestation and reign for a thousand years.

"This scheme has two returns of Jesus at the end of the times: one ... just for his saints and then his final return after the tribulation," Sproul summed up.

Disagreeing with this view, Sproul pointed to the imagery that the Apostle Paul used in his account of the rapture in the New Testament book of 1 Thessalonians.

Theologian Clarifies Rapture, Last Days Beliefs

Now that Harold Camping has been proven false again with the coming and going of May 21 and no signs of any judgment or rapture, the world is left to wonder what Christians really do believe about

www.christianpost.com

 

[mattfivefour]

Isn't R.C. Sproul a preterist too?

No; not in the sense of full preterism which states that ALL prophecies were fulfilled in 70 AD. In fact he wrote that full preterism was wrong. A statement to that effect is in the post immediately above, from Rose. However, he was a partial preterist; but then so are many of us, for it is in accord with Scripture. Partial preterists believe that some prophecies were fulfilled in 70 AD (as history demonstrates) but that all of the prophecies regarding the end times, the rapture, the return of Christ, the millennial kingdom, etc, etc, are yet to be fulfilled.