April 4, 2006

Webcasting around the world from the desert metropolis of Phoenix, Arizona, this is The Dividing Line. The Apostle Peter commanded Christians to be ready to give a defense for the hope that is within us, yet to give that answer with gentleness and reverence.

Our host is Dr. James White, director of Alpha Omega Ministries and an elder at the Phoenix Reformed Baptist Church. This is a live program and we invite your participation. If you'd like to talk with Dr. White, call now at 602 -973 -4602 or toll-free across the United States.

It's 1 -877 -753 -3341. And now with today's topic, here is James White.

Dave Hunt, Calvin, and the Problem of Misused Quotations

Good morning. Welcome to The Dividing Line. It is a Tuesday morning and we are back in our live studios, the padded cell as it's being called, and it seems hopefully everything is working today. I would like to document what happens when you, well, when you don't do your homework.

Does anyone remember this particular little sound clip from a number of years ago?

Well, first of all, James, I'm going to ignore the reformers.

Yes, that was Dave Hunt in our first encounter on KPXQ Radio, where I had just asked him about the irony of the fact that even though we both debate Roman Catholics on the subject of the will and the grace of God, Dave would agree with my Roman Catholic opponents against the reformers, and his initial response was, James, I'm very ignorant of the reformers.

I imagine they've written a lot of stuff. I don't read their materials. Then, scarcely six months later, on his radio program, a few months after that, the first manuscript of What Love Is This began to circulate, and just a few months after that, on his radio program, we heard this.

I think I probably know more about Calvinism than most of the people who call themselves Calvinists.

And so there's Dave's amazing turnaround in a very short period of time. All of a sudden, he has become an expert, even though he had not read any of the reformers during his life. Toward the end of his life, as an elderly man, in a matter of weeks, he becomes an expert on the subject of reformed theology, which just demonstrates that he has no idea what it is, the depth of the subject, and has simply done the, well, let's go look at some books, get some quotes, and now I know everything there is to know.

Well, then he puts the book out, and as all of you know, we have documented error after error after error after error after error in his books, in What Love Is This, on this particular subject, and he keeps putting out new editions and making changes, but you can't exactly fix things when you're unwilling to admit that you are in error in the first place.

And so, as I've been reviewing the Dr. Davis sermon, I, of course, I've already played this before, but let me play it again, just so you have an idea of what the connection here is.

The Calvinist, in his zeal to exalt the sovereignty of God, brings into question the love of God, the justice of God, and in some ways, even the holiness of God. Perhaps the key book on this subject, and a major resource for me as I studied on this subject, is Dave Hunt's book, What Love Is This?

And the book is subtitled, Calvinism's Misrepresentation of God.

Now, there, if I recall correctly on the DVD, it's been a while since I've seen it, he even held up What Love Is This? I don't recall, but, and if I recall correctly, it was the original edition, the white edition that was put out by loyal publishers, which I have in my hand.

Now, as I was listening to the Dr. Davis sermon, I have been creating these cues that make it so much easier to review what someone has said in a sermon or presentation. I'm so thankful I started using these things.

And as I was listening to particular ones, I started realizing, you know, I have a feeling that not only if I were to look these up, would I discover that these are grossly out of context. But I have a feeling these came from Dave Hunt.

These are the two segments that caught my attention specifically yesterday as I was preparing for the program today. The first is in regards to Charles Haddon Spurgeon.

Even Charles Spurgeon, in spite of his claim to having been a staunch Calvinist, could not accept that regeneration came before faith. He said, if I am to preach faith in Christ to a man who is regenerated, then the man being regenerated is saved already.

And it is an unnecessary and ridiculous thing for me to preach Christ to him.

Now, I heard that and I thought, that's interesting. And then, you know, but I sort of chalked it up like, okay, well. And then a little bit later, there's a very close to that, there's another citation.

I started going, you know what, I bet if I dig out the Hunt books.

John Calvin himself wrote this. For there is scarcely a mind in which the thought does not sometimes rise, whence your salvation but from the election of God. But what proof have you of your election?

When once this thought has taken possession of any individual, it keeps him perpetually miserable, subjects him to dire torment, or throws him into a state of complete stupor. Therefore, as we dread shipwreck, we must avoid this rock, which is fatal to everyone who strikes upon it.

You realize what he was saying there? The only way you can have peace, if you're Calvinist, is to turn your mind off. Because you just, if you start thinking about it, it's really going to bother you.

Now, of course, I remember the first time I heard that while I was writing. And it was almost so distracting that I went off the road. And I'm like, you know, something tells me that if I were to look up the context.

So I looked up the context, and I started digging through my books for Dave Hunt. Now, most of you know that we just moved into new offices. My old office is not even emptied out yet, because I don't have any shelves to put the books on.

So they're still sitting there, and I was pretty certain. But most of the time I'm sitting here going, okay, did I pack that shelf that had that book on it, you know, right now? Which stack is it in? And so I started going through the stacks of books that are here at the new office looking for Dave Hunt.

I was pretty certain that Dave Hunt was here, not the guy, the book. And I had an idea where it was. But, of course, I ended up having to go through all the boxes of books that are already here. And it was the third to last box that I was going to be looking for.

And, of course, it was as far away from where I started as I possibly could. But I found both of my copies of What Love Is This. And so I started looking. Now, it's not necessarily easy to find stuff in Dave Hunt's books.

Even though the new edition, he now has a minor index. For example, you could track down all the Spurgeon. He doesn't bother putting all the Calvin quotes in the back. I'm not sure why. Maybe he just doesn't want to give Calvin, you know, the benefit of the doubt or something.

But I started looking around. And, lo and behold, I found both quotes. Page 102 of the original edition has that exact Spurgeon citation. And then in the same context in regards to Resting in God's Love, page 405, with the exact same set of ellipses because that isn't exactly what Calvin said.

And so what I'd like to do today is I would like to demonstrate what happens. Now, I've mentioned this a number of times before, but we've got a lot of folks who have just recently started listening to The Dividing Line.

Some of you think that I'm really hard on Dave Hunt.

Well, I am.

There's a number of reasons. First of all, we've both spoken at the same conferences. And in those conferences, we've both said that we need to be accurate and truthful and so on and so forth. And so I'm just simply holding him to standards that he himself has enunciated and I think that any Christian should be held to.

And it amazes me that I seem to be the only voice out there pointing out in the counter-cult ministry, maybe that's because I'm one of the few Reformed folks out there, that this man's work in this area is so horrifically bad and demonstrates such a complete and total disregard for truth that it throws everything else he has done into question.

And anyone who is really, really concerned about truth would have a hard time looking at anything Dave Hunt says without a jaundiced eye any longer. But be that as it may, early on, after we had had that radio program, when I heard he was going to be writing this book, I took the time to write to him.

I wrote him not just in an email. I sent him a formal letter on that stuff called paper. You know, it goes through a printer and you fold it and you put stamps on it and you know, through the mail and all that stuff.

Snail mail. And I expressed to Mr. Hunt the fact that in light of his own statements in regards to the radio program, that he's not read the Reformed, he really doesn't know what he's talking about, that to go to print on a subject such as this was simply reprehensible, that it was something that he should not do, that it's something that Christians should not do.

We need to be accurate in what we're doing, et cetera, et cetera. So from the beginning, before he ever published this book, I had told him you need to recognize the importance of being accurate in the work that you do as a Christian writer.

Well, of course, he chose to ignore that exhortation from me and from many other people. And so he's gone to print. And not only did he go to print, but beyond that, he has then insisted upon continuing his campaign when refuted.

He has refused to accept correction. When he has produced documented errors, he refuses to accept the documentation of those errors. And so he puts these books out. What happens? Well, here's Dr. Davis.

Dr. Davis is the pastor of a church. He is big in the homeschooling movement. He speaks at various conferences. And so here he stands before his people. And he utilizes a resource that he feels he can trust, that he feels has credibility behind it.

Now, is Dr. Davis to be rebuked for not checking his sources? Well, of course. Of course. I mean, I'm not saying that this is all Dave Hunt's fault, that everybody who uses, you know, Dave Hunt's materials gets a free pass when Dave Hunt is the one who's misrepresenting somebody.

The point is it's a domino's effect. It is what happens when one person who claims to have a certain level of credibility doesn't exercise that credibility, then other people drawing from other former works where they feel that he did do a decent job, now assume he's done the same level of job here, and so you've got this problem as far as people trusting it and then just passing it on.

And now you've got all the people in that church and all the people who picked up these DVDs repeating these same lies. We've already mentioned, for example, the fact that Davis says that Charles Haddon Spurgeon denied particular redemption when he preached entire sermons in defense of particular redemption.

It's the same error that Hunt had put in his book, and he still refuses to repent of it and admit, okay, I was wrong. That sermon actually promotes particular redemption. I didn't read it. I was utilizing secondary sources, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah.

He won't do any of that. He's personally infallible and never admits error. So now you've got other people going around repeating the same error over and over and over again. This is what happens. And so here we have two citations.

I'm going to start with the Calvin citation, and let's listen again to the citation because it's a pretty amazing one. It's amazing to me. I wonder how many of these folks have ever even read someone like a Warfield or a Machen or an Edwards.

It's like these folks never existed who could actually sit there and say, Calvinists believe you just have to turn your brain off. That's what he says.

John Calvin himself wrote this. For there is scarcely a mind in which the thought does not sometimes rise, whence your salvation but from the election of God. But what proof have you of your election?

When once this thought has taken possession of any individual, it keeps him perpetually miserable, subjects him to dire torment, or throws him into a state of complete stupor. Therefore, as we dread shipwreck, we must avoid this rock, which is fatal to everyone who strikes upon it.

You realize what he was saying there? The only way you can have peace, if you're Calvinist, is to turn your mind off. Because you just, if you start thinking about it, it's really going to bother you.

Now, obviously, as soon as I heard that, I knew that that was not what John Calvin was referring to. This is from his discussion, Defense of Election in the Institutes of the Christian Religion. And unlike Dr. Davis, I'm going to read you the context.

At least I can guarantee you, because the citation's identical in What Love Is This. So he just took it out of What Love Is This. He didn't read. Does he have Calvin in his library? I don't know. I sort of doubt it, personally.

Did he bother to look at the context? I sort of doubt it, personally. But I would be gladly corrected. But if so, then why isn't this context included, which completely changes what he's saying. Here's what Calvin actually says in his Defense of Election.

Two errors are here to be avoided. And it's interesting, by the way, before I start this. Both Calvin and Spurgeon, in these two citations, are addressing almost the exact same issue. And it's interesting that they are.

So even though the application ends up being different as to how Davis works on it. Two errors are here to be avoided. Some make man a fellow worker with God in such a sense that man's suffrage ratifies elections so that, according to them, the will of man is superior to the counsel of God.

Now I stop there. And is that not exactly what Davis and Hunt and all the others do? Any synergist is making man a fellow worker with God so that it's man's will that becomes superior to the counsel of God.

So that is an error that Calvin is addressing. I continue with Calvin. As if Scripture taught that only the power of being able to believe is given us and not rather faith itself. Others, although they do not so much impair the grace of the Holy Spirit, yet induced by what means I know not, make election dependent on faith as if it were doubtful and ineffectual till confirmed by faith.

There can be no doubt, indeed, that in regard to us, it is so confirmed. Moreover, we have already seen that the secret counsel of God, which lay concealed, is thus brought to light, by this nothing more being understood than that which was unknown is proved, and as it were sealed.

Now let me stop there. What he's talking about is the fact that, again, the secret counsel of God election we cannot know. How do we know anything about election? This is important because Davis and Hunt both go after this.

Well, Davis does because Hunt does. But what Calvin is saying is we don't know of our election so we believe our faith in Christ is what demonstrates, because it's a gift of God, that we are of the elect.

This is something that neither Hunt nor Davis can even begin to understand and have not even fairly listened to Calvin. I continue on. But it is false to say that election is then only effectual after we have embraced the gospel and that it then derives its vigor.

It is true that we must look there for its certainty because if we attempt to penetrate the secret ordination of God, we shall be engulfed in that profound abyss. But when the Lord has manifested it to us, we must ascend higher in order that the effect may not bury the cause.

For what can be more absurd and unbecoming than while Scripture teaches that while we are illuminated as God has chosen us, our eyes should be so dazzled with the brightness of this light as to refuse to attend to election.

Meanwhile, I deny not that in order to be assured of our salvation, we must begin with the word and that our confidence ought to go no farther than the word when we invoke God the Father. For some, to obtain more certainty of the counsel of God, which is nigh into our mouth and in our heart, Deuteronomy 30, 14, absurdly desire to fly above the clouds.

We must, therefore, curb that temerity by the soberness of faith and be satisfied to have God as the witness of his hidden grace in the external word, provided always that the channel in which the water flows and out of which we may freely drink does not prevent us from paying due honor to the fountain.

Therefore, as those are in error who make the power of election dependent on the faith by which we perceive that we are elected, so we shall follow the best order if in seeking the certainty of our election, we cleave to those posterior signs which assure attestations to it.

Let me stop right there. What's he saying? We can't see into eternity. We cannot go where God has not designed us to go. And so just as 1 John says, what's the teaching of 1 John? This is an area where, again, Davis just has this human tradition that's utterly without any external foundation, as does Hunt.

1 John tells us, by these things you may know you have eternal life. What things? All of 1 John. You love your brother. You keep God's commandments. These are the things you look at in your life that demonstrate that you have believed in Jesus Christ, that you have a true and abiding faith.

Well, what he's saying is that's what we look to. We look to that faith that we have in Christ. We don't try to dive into the eternal counsels of God because we weren't made to be able to gain that kind of access.

So I continue again with Calvin. Among the temptations with which Satan assaults believers, none is greater or more perilous than when disquieting them with doubts as to their election, he at the same time stimulates them with a depraved desire of inquiring after it out of the proper way.

By inquiring out of the proper way, I mean when puny man endeavors to penetrate to the hidden recesses of the divine wisdom and goes back even to the remotest eternity in order that he may understand what final determination God has made with regard to him.

And this way he plunges headlong into an immense abyss, involves himself in innumerable, inextricable snares, and buries himself in the thickest darkness. For it is right that the stupidity of the human mind should be punished with fearful destruction whenever it attempts to rise in its own strength to the height of divine wisdom.

And this temptation is the more fatal than it is the temptation to which all of others, almost all of us, are most prone. Now let me stop right there. What's he saying? Is not the context clear? The context is very clear.

He's saying we cannot find as the basis and foundation of our election some means of penetrating into the eternal decrees of God to attempt to do so is to go the wrong direction. It's not the direction the word of God has provided to us.

All right? Now, that is the exact context up to the very beginning of the citation provided by Dave Hunt. In the middle of a paragraph, in the middle of an extended discussion, here now is the paragraph, is the section that Hunt cites with an ellipsis.

For there is scarcely a mind in which the thought does not sometimes arise whence your salvation but from the election of God. But what proof have you of your election? Whence once this thought has taken possession of any individual it keeps him perpetually miserable and subjects him to dire torment or throws him into a state of complete stupor.

I cannot wish a stronger proof of the depraved ideas which men of this description form of predestination than experience itself furnishes since the mind cannot be infected by a more pestilential error than that which disturbs the conscience and deprives it of peace and tranquility in regard to God.

Therefore, as we dread shipwreck, we must avoid this rock which is fatal to everyone who strikes upon it. And though the discussion of predestination is regarded as a perilous sea, yet in sailing over it the navigation is calm and safe, nay pleasant, provided we do not voluntarily court danger.

For as a fatal abyss engulfs those who, to be assured of their election, pry into the eternal counsel of God without the word, yet those who investigate it rightly and in the order in which it is exhibited in the word reap from it rich fruits of consolation.".

You see what was left out? The immediate context beforehand tells us what we're talking about and it isn't what Dave Hunt applies it to. Then he removes with ellipses this line. I cannot wish a stronger proof of the depraved ideas which men of this description form predestination than experience itself furnishes since the mind cannot be infected by a more pestilential error than that which disturbs the conscience and deprives it of peace and tranquility in regard to God.

Now folks, that sentence demonstrates that, first of all, Calvin's talking about someone other than his audience and other than himself and the people in his church. He's talking about people who have wrong ideas, but by taking that out, Hunt allows people to think that Calvin's talking about Calvinists and people that are following his perspective.

It is dishonest to remove material from citations that directly impact the context and meaning of the citation and allow you to misuse it. That is dishonest and Dave Hunt is dishonest. The Berean call needs to be called on these types of things.

And when we do call them on it, they of course just simply come up with excuses that are as lame as the day is long, but people need to keep doing it. And the word needs to get out. You cannot trust what this man writes.

It is dishonest. But then to stop where he stops and ignore the rest of it. And though the discussion of predestination is regarded as a perilous sea, yet in sailing over it the navigation is calm and safe, nay, pleasant, provided we do not voluntarily court danger.

For as a fatal abyss engulfs those who, to be assured of their election, pry into the eternal counsel of God without the word, yet those who investigate it rightly and in the order in which it is exhibited in the word reap from it rich fruits of consolation.

Remember Hunt is citing this in the chapter where he says that Calvinists can have no assurance because Calvinists believe that the ground of their assurance is knowing their of the elect. And what's Calvin saying?

The exact opposite. He's saying the exact opposite. And so you don't quote the section where Calvin is contradicting what you are demanding Calvin say. What amazing misuse of material. What utter dishonesty.

This is reprehensible. Absolutely reprehensible. Is this going to result in edition number seven of What Love Is This When This Quotation Gets Taken Out without any citation, of course? Without any explanation, of course?

I don't know. I don't know. But then what happens? Total misrepresentation of Calvin put into Hunt's book comes into the possession of people like Dr. W .D. Davis and he stands before his people and what does he do?

Repeats it and then interprets it. Can you believe that? Calvin's actually saying you've got to turn your mind off. You know, maybe I'm so sensitive to this type of thing because I write books too and sometimes when I see how people so completely misinterpret something that I've said it leaves me stunned.

How can people read that? And even when I disagree with people, I try to read their material in such a way as to be fair to them. I mean, I'm always assuming if I were to debate this person, if I were to have to engage this person in debate and I'm going to use this citation, I'm going to use this quotation, I need to make sure that they're not going to be able to come back and say, look, the whole context here is all wrong and you didn't understand what I was saying, blah, blah, blah, blah.

I need to be very careful. And so it is natural for me to use that mindset and to very carefully address what somebody is saying. I don't understand how this citation ended up in Dave Hunt's book. Where did it come from?

Dave Hunt wasn't just sitting there reading along in the Institutes of Christian Religion. I'm sorry, I don't think that was happening. And if it was happening, then he is directly responsible for his gross misrepresentation of it.

Because if he was just reading along and then, oh, this sounds good. If I just take this out, this out, and isolate from its context, I can make this sound like what I think Calvinism is. Well, at that point, the man should just be completely dismissed if that's where it came from.

I doubt that's where it came from. I imagine that someone sent this in, just like the Spurgeon citation about quote-unquote particular redemption, and it's like, oh, it looks good, let's use it. And maybe they pulled a book down off the shelf, made sure the words were there, and said, yep, that's what it says.

Go from there. Without any concern whatsoever about the context, what's before it, what's after it. The only problem I have at that point is the quote would have had to have been provided without that center section.

The ellipses would already have to be there. Because if you put the ellipses in, if you take that out, you knew what you were doing. Somebody somewhere along the line knew what they were doing. Somebody was purposely misrepresenting this citation.

They knew it wouldn't work if they kept that material in it and they pulled it out. Somebody is dishonest. Everybody else who's used it is just a scholarly slacker. I looked at this stuff, and did I come running on the air going, oh, I know it's misrepresenting.

Of course, I've got this stuff. I could have looked it up, but I didn't bother looking it up. No, I looked it up in Calvin. I read the context. I looked it up in Spurgeon. I read the context. We'll get to that in a moment.

I dug through all my boxes. I pull out Hunt, and I start digging through it, because he doesn't have a meaningful index, and I've got to spend time and invest time looking this stuff up, making sure that it's right before I bring it to you.

That's what you're supposed to do if you're engaging in this kind of work, and that's what Dave Hunt won't do. That's what Dr. Davis didn't do before he presented this to his people. I would like to think, and I'm going to write to Dr. Davis this afternoon, and I'm going to link to this program, which means we need to get it up right after.

I'm going to link to this program, and I'm going to say, Dr. Davis, I've documented that what you said, and I know you're following Dave Hunt, and I know you may have had great respect for Dave Hunt, but the fact of the matter is that you were misled by Dave Hunt.

You were misled about Spurgeon already, the citations you used where you followed Spurgeon on particular redemption. You need to actually read what he said, and I think you need to go back to your people and say, you know what?

I still don't agree. I'm not saying to Dr. Davis, you need to become a Calvinist and preach this to your people. I'm not saying that. Obviously, I would like to see an openness to dialogue in these things, and I'd love to see Reformation come to that particular church and so on and so forth, but the point is I think there needs to be the level of honesty that comes to that church, and that pastor stands for his people and says, you know what?

I misled you about these things. I misquoted Spurgeon more than once. I misquoted John Calvin. I was following somebody else, but you know what? I should have checked him out. I should have checked him out.

I didn't. I'm sorry. I'm wrong, and that would be wonderful. That would be great. It really would be. We'll see what happens. When we come back from a hopefully somewhat lengthy break, because you know what we've got to do right now?

We've got to open the door and blow air in here because the AC is not working, and it's getting a little bit warm in here, so we're going to take a break and be right back right after this.

The Forgotten Trinity and Other Ministry Resources

The Trinity is a basic teaching of the Christian faith. It defines God's essence and describes how he relates to us. James White's book, The Forgotten Trinity, is a concise, understandable explanation of what the Trinity is and why it matters.

It refutes cultic distortions of God, as well as showing how a grasp of this significant teaching leads to renewed worship and deeper understanding of what it means to be a Christian. And amid today's emphasis on the renewing work of the Holy Spirit, The Forgotten Trinity is a balanced look at all three persons of the Trinity.

Dr. John MacArthur, Senior Pastor of Grace Community Church, says, James White's lucid presentation will help layperson and pastor alike. Highly recommended. You can order The Forgotten Trinity by going to our website at aomin .org.

Roman Catholicism and Evangelical Cooperation

More than any time in the past, Roman Catholics and Evangelicals are working together. They are standing shoulder to shoulder against social evils. They are joining across denominational boundaries in renewal movements.

And many Evangelicals are finding the history, tradition, and grandeur of the Roman Catholic Church appealing. This newfound rapport has caused many Evangelical leaders and laypeople to question the age-old disagreements that have divided Protestants and Catholics.

Aren't we all saying the same thing in a different language? James White's book, The Roman Catholic Controversy, is an absorbing look at current views of tradition in Scripture, the papacy, the mass, purgatory and indulgences, and Marian doctrine.

James White points out the crucial differences that remain regarding the Christian life and the heart of the Gospel itself that cannot be ignored. Order your copy of The Roman Catholic Controversy by going to our website at aomin .org.

Calvinism, Geisler, and The Potter's Freedom

What is Dr. Norman Geisler warning the Christian community about in his book, Chosen but Free, A New Cult, Secularism, False Prophecy Scenarios? No, Dr. Geisler is sounding the alarm about a system of beliefs commonly called Calvinism.

He insists that this belief system is theologically inconsistent, philosophically insufficient, and morally repugnant. In his book, The Pottish Freedom, James White replies to Dr. Geisler,. But the Pottish Freedom is much more than just a reply.

It is a defense of the very principles upon which the Protestant Reformation was founded. Indeed, it is a defense of the very Gospel itself. In a style that both scholars and laymen alike can appreciate, James White masterfully counters the evidence against so-called extreme Calvinism, defines what the Reformed faith actually is, and concludes that the Gospel preached by the Reformers is the very one taught in the pages of Scripture.

The Pottish Freedom, a defense of the Reformation and a rebuttal to Norman Geisler's Chosen but Free. You'll find it in the Reformed Theology section of our bookstore at aomin .org.

Continuing the Analysis of Dave Hunt and the Need for Careful Exegesis

And welcome back to Dividing Line. We are documenting today more errors on the part of Dave Hunt. Some of you might get tired of that, but folks, you have to be consistent. And if you're going to document errors in misrepresenting John Calvin on the part of a Roman Catholic or a Muslim or a Mormon, then I think even more so you have to be consistent.

And take the lumps and the slammed doors in your face and hold those who profess to be evangelicals to a higher standard than anyone else. And in the process, hopefully, likewise learning some things, I think what Calvin had to say about the grounding of our assurance is an important thing.

Let's go back to the Spurgeon citation because I want to read what he had to say as well. Let's listen again to Davis following Hunt in his errors.

Even Charles Spurgeon, in spite of his claim to having been a staunch Calvinist, could not accept that regeneration came before faith. He said, If I am to preach faith in Christ to a man who is regenerated, then the man being regenerated is saved already.

And it is an unnecessary and ridiculous thing for me to preach Christ to him.

Now, once again, that's exactly as it is found in Dave Hunt's book. That's, again, in the original edition, is on page 102. And then, let's see, that was also found, all the pagination changed in the hardback edition.

In page 126, you have the same beginning of the citation found there, and there may be others. Once I found it, I just had to mark it and start searching for the Calvin one because, unfortunately, there were no indexes to help me find anything on the Calvin one.

There may be even more than that. I found he utilizes citations repeatedly more than once in his work. Now, what was Spurgeon talking about? Well, this is from a sermon called The Warrant of Belief. The Warrant of Faith, number 531, a sermon delivered on Sunday morning, September 20th, 1863, at the Metropolitan Tabernacle.

And I go down to the second portion of the sermon. The warrant of believing is a point upon which I shall spend my time and strength this morning. According to my text, the warrant for a man to believe is the commandment of God.

This is the commandment that she believe on his son, Jesus Christ. Self-righteousness will always find a lodging somewhere or other. Drive it, my brethren, out of the ground of our confidence. Let the sinner see that he cannot rest on his good works.

Then, as foxes will have holes, this self-righteousness will find a refuge for itself in the warrant of our faith in Christ. It reasons thus, you are not saved by what you do, but by what Christ did.

But then, you have no right to trust in Christ unless there is something good in you which shall entitle you to trust in him. Now, this is legal reasoning I oppose. I believe such teaching to contain in it the essence of popish self-righteousness.

The warrant for a sinner to believe in Christ is not in himself, in any sense, or in any manner, but in the fact that he is commanded there and then to believe on Jesus Christ. Some preachers in the Puritanic times, whose shoelatches I am not worthy to unloose, erred much in this matter.