"Now another text: ‘Him that cometh to Me, (Mark, the promises are nearly always to the coming ones) I will in no wise cast out.’ Every man that comes shall find the door of Christ’s house opened--and the door of His heart too--Every man that comes--I say it in the broadest sense--shall find that Christ has mercy for him. The greatest absurdity in the world is to want to have a wider Gospel than that recorded in Scripture. I preach that every man that believes shall be saved--that every man who comes shall find mercy. People ask me, "But suppose a man should come who was not chosen, would he be saved?’ You go and suppose nonsense, and I am not going to give you an answer. If a man is not chosen, he will never come. When he does come, it is a sure proof that he was chosen. Say one, ’Suppose any one should go to Christ who had not been called of the Spirit.’ Stop, my brother, that is a supposition thou hast no right to make, for such a thing cannot happen. You only say it to entangle me, and you will not do that just yet. I say every man who comes to Christ shall be saved. I can say that as a Calvinist, or as a hyper-Calvinist, as plainly as you can say it. I have no narrower gospel than you have; only my gospel is on a solid foundation, whereas yours is built upon nothing but sand and rottenness. ’Every man that cometh shall be saved, for no man cometh to Me except the Father draw him.’
"’But,’ says one, ’suppose all the world should come, would Christ receive them?’ Certainly, if all came; but then they won’t come. I tell you ALL THAT COME--aye, if they were as bad as devils, Christ would receive them; if they had all sin and filthiness running into their hearts as into a common sewer for the whole world, Christ would receive them.
"Another says, ’I want to know about the rest of the people. May I go out and tell them Jesus Christ died for every one of you?’ No; you may not. You may say--there is life for every man that comes. But if you say there is life for one of those that do not believe, you utter a dangerous lie. If you tell them Jesus Christ was punished for their sins, and yet they will be lost, you tell a willful falsehood. To think that God could punish Christ and then punish them--I wonder at your daring to have the impudence to say so! A good man was once preaching that there were harps and crowns in Heaven for all his congregation; and then he would up in a most solemn manner: ’My dear friends, there are many for whom these things are prepared who will not get there." In fact, he made such a pitiful tale, as indeed he might do; but I tell you who he ought to have wept for--he ought to have wept for the angels of Heaven and all the saints, because that would spoil Heaven thoroughly.
"You know when you meet at Christmas, if you have lost your brother David and his seat is empty, you say: ’Well, we always enjoyed Christmas, but there is a drawback to it now, poor David is dead and buried!’ Think of the angels saying: ‘Ah! This is a beautiful Heaven, but we don’t like to see all those crowns up there with cobwebs on; we cannot endure that uninhabited street: we cannot behold yon empty thrones.’ And then, poor souls, they might begin talking to one another, and say, ’we are none of us safe here, for the promise was--I give unto My sheep eternal life, and there are a lot of them in Hell that God gave eternal life to; there are a number that Christ shed His blood for burning in the pit, and if they may be sent there, so may we. If we cannot trust one promise, we cannot another.’ So Heaven would lose its foundation, and fall. Away with your nonsensical gospel! God gives us a safe and solid one, built on covenant doings and covenant relationships, on eternal purposes and sure fulfillments."
-Charles Haddon Spurgeon-
Taken out of context? See for yourself. You can find it in the NEW PARK STREET PULPIT, Sermon #52, entitled, "Free Will: A Slave," Vol. I, pp. 395-402.
Below is part of a famous debate in history. Which person is maintaining the historic Christian faith? If you figure out that, can you identify the men?
C. --"Before conversion, the will of man is incapeable of doing good; every good work comes entirely and exclusively from God Who gives first the will to do and afterwards the ability to perform."
E. --"I grant that the will has not power to do a good work, but receives it from God.... Every good work comes indeed from God, BUT NOT ENTIRELY. I acknowledge that in conversion the first impulse comes from God, and that the human will is entirely passive."
C. --"I acknowledge that after this first action on the part of God, something must come from man, something which St. Paul calls ’the will’ and which the Fathers designate by ’consent.’
E. --"This consent of man comes partly from our natural will and partly from the grace of God."
C. --"No, this will in man is entirely created by God."
E. "Your doctrine makes man a stone or a block incapeable of any counteraction.... "
C. --"What? Does not the faculty of receiving the powers which God produces in him (a faculty which we admit he possess) sufficiently distinguish him from a stone and a block?"
E. --"But by denying man all natural power, you contradict experience."
C. --"We deny not that man possesses certain powers and has in him a faculty of reflecting, meditating and choosing. We only consider these powers and faculties as mere instruments incapeable of doing anything that is good until the hand of God set them in motion. They are like the saw in the hands of the sawer."
With which man do you agree? Which man is earnestly contending for the faith once delivered unto the saints?
This was the famous Leipzig Debate of 1519. The arguments of "E" are those of Dr. Eck, the defender of Roman Catholic theology. "C" is Carlstadt, the defender of historic Christianity. Martin Luther was to enter this debate days later.
You can read the entire debate in D’Aubigne’s History of the Reformation, Vol. II, pp.26-28.