“A DEFENSE OF CALVINISM” From C. H. Spurgeon’s Autobiography, Volume One
Some persons love the doctrine of universal atonement because they say, “It is so beautiful. It is a lovely idea that Christ should have died for all men. It commends itself,” they say, “to the instincts of humanity. There is something in it full of joy and beauty.” I admit there is, but beauty may be often associated with falsehood. There is much which I might admire in the theory of universal redemption but I will just show what the supposition necessarily involves. If Christ on His Cross intended to save every man, then He intended to save those who were lost before He died. If the doctrine is true—that He died for all men—then He died for some who were in Hell before He came into this world—for doubtless there were even then myriads there who had been cast away because of their sins.
Once again—if it were Christ’s intention to save all men, how deplorably has He been disappointed, for we have His own testimony that there is a lake which burns with fire and brimstone and into that pit of woe have been cast some of the very persons who, according to the theory of universal redemption, were bought with His blood. That seems to me a conception a thousand times more repulsive than any of those consequences which are said to be associated with the Calvinistic and Christian doctrine of special and particular redemption. To think that my Savior died for men who were or are in Hell seems a supposition too horrible for me to entertain. To imagine for a moment that He was the Substitute for all the sons of men and that God, having first punished the Substitute, afterwards punished the sinners themselves seems to conflict with all my ideas of Divine justice.
That Christ should offer an atonement and satisfaction for the sins of all men and that afterwards some of those very men should be punished for the sins for which Christ had already atoned appears to me to be the most monstrous iniquity that could ever have been imputed to Saturn, to Janus, to the goddess of the Thugs, or to the most diabolical heathen deities. God forbid that we should ever think thus of Jehovah, the Just and Wise and Good!
There is no soul living who holds more firmly to the doctrines of Grace than I do and if any man asks me whether I am ashamed to be called a Calvinist, I answer—I wish to be called nothing but a Christian. But if you ask me, do I hold the doctrinal views which were held by John Calvin? I reply I do in the main hold them and rejoice to avow it. But far be it from me even to imagine that Zion contains none but Calvinistic Christians within her walls, or that there are none saved who do not hold our views. Most atrocious things have been spoken about the character and spiritual condition of John Wesley, the modem prince of Arminians.
I can only say concerning him that while I detest many of the doctrines which he preached, yet for the man himself I have a reverence second to no Wesleyan. And if there were wanted two Apostles to be added to the number of the twelve, I do not believe that there could be found two men more fit to be so added than George Whitefield and John Wesley. The character of John Wesley stands beyond all imputation for self-sacrifice, zeal, holiness and communion with God. He lived far above the ordinary level of common Christians and was one “of whom the world was not worthy.” I believe there are multitudes of men who cannot see these truths of Calvinism, or, at least, cannot see them in the way in which we put them, who nevertheless have received Christ as their Savior and are as dear to the heart of the God of Grace as the most sound Calvinist in or out of Heaven.