C.H. Spurgeon on Calvinism

I'll admit I have not studied Calvinism, but I have learned from one who has. Once you come across a worm or two in an apple, you don't have to eat the whole apple to see that it is rotten. Life is too short to spend great amounts of time in studying false doctrine, unless that's your gift and calling. The devil loves to distract us. Why is it that Jesus Himself, in Whom dwells all the treasures of wisdom and knowledge, speaks so clearly and relatively simply, so that the great majority of people can understand Him, but false teachers and false teachings are often very difficult to understand and are not logical? Many false teachings are couched in language that doesn't make much sense, but sounds impressive. Take for example, the Westminster Confession of Faith quoted by josheb. It says that God (in Calvinist doctrine) is not the author of sin and that He does not take away man's free will. No explanation is given, and yet josheb somehow thinks that proves something. The Calvinism that I've learned about doesn't teach either of those things.
How about this? I propose that we set up a live debate. No, I am not volunteering. As I said, I have not studied Calvinism extensively. But Steve Gregg, the man that I learned what I know about Calvinism from, is always open to debate anyone on the topic. Often times he will go to where his challenger lives, and if they will provide a venue, he will gladly debate them. So josheb, papalandshark, and any of the rest of you who are Calvinists, why don't you find your "expert" on Calvinism, or maybe one of you is the expert, and meet Steve in a debate? I can easily contact Steve, if you guys want to step forward, and accept this challenge.

The topic of C.H. Spurgeon's post is a defense of Calvinism. I would assume that, in his mind, any difference in respects to the doctrines of grace would put you in the "Arminian" sphere in one way or another.

I would also agree with this assumption.

Calvinism is monergistic in it's soteriology. I've yet to run into anything "other" that is not in the synergistic camp either directly or by logical conclusion.

That is really the root here. Calvinism and Arminianism are just labels.

The story of Cain and Abel certainly shows how faulty Calvinism is. We know Cain was of the evil one, as 1 John 3:12 tells us. Calvinism teaches us that Cain was not part of the elect, and that God had sovereignly predestined him to kill his brother and to end up in hell. But before he killed Abel, God warns him to change his attitude and control the sinful desire that was in his heart. Genesis 4:6-7. God tells Cain, "If you do well, will not your countenance be lifted up? And if you do not do well, sin is crouching at the door; and it's desire is for you, but you must master it." But how could God expect Cain to master that sinful desire, if God had predestined Cain to be lost forever? Calvinists don't like it when we speakly plainly and bluntly about their doctrine, pointing out the contradictions. According to Calvinism, it's as if God said to Cain, "I have predestined you to be non-elect, to be lost forever, but now I'm going to let you think that you can actually, on your own, without My help, escape that fate. I'm going to let you think that you can actually do well, that you can master sin. I'm going to let you think that you actually have freedom of choice - that you can choose to say 'No' to sin and 'No' to the desire to kill your brother." But the truth is that Calvinists think that NONE of us have free choice, Cain included, and that God was going to send him to hell, whether he repented or not. Calvinists will twist logic and say that they do not believe that we do not have free will. They will further twist the truth and say that just because God did not choose Cain to be part of His elect, that this does not mean that He chose Cain to go to hell and to be lost forever. This is the nonsense of Calvinism. In fact, it is my understanding that, when Calvin himself was presented with many such contradictions, he would not deny the contradictions like Calvinist do today. Rather his standard answer was "It's a mystery." Just because God chose some for heaven, does not mean that He chose all the others for hell - so says the modern Calvinists. John Calvin, on the other hand, was more honest. He admitted that for God to choose some for heaven, He was actually, at the same time, choosing all the others for hell. Modern Calvinists don't even fully follow their "founder" - Calvin. (Although Calvin's doctrine came from Augustine) Apparently, it's too embarrassing for Calvinists to say "It's a mystery." to all their contradictions, so they have come up with long, convoluted, explanations for them. Or they say that they don't follow everything that Calvin said. For example, they have long, convoluted explanations as to how we still have free will, even though God sovereignly does EVERYTHING, and we do nothing.

The Biblical truth is that God, in His sovereignty, has allowed us to have free choices. Just as a loving father doesn't micromanage his children's live, except when they're babies and very young, so our loving Heavenly Father, in His Sovereignty, chooses not to micromanage our lives. This, in no way, takes away His Sovereignty, even though the Calvinists say that it does. With their definition of Sovereignty, God is a tyrannical dictator - He alone does everything. I can hear them object: "He's a loving dictator". Really? How did He display His love by directing Hitler and his men to rape, torture, and kill 6,000,000 Jews? and directing Stalin to kill 60,000,000? Hear we go again with convoluted explanations, which are blaspheming God's character. How did he display His love, when He, not just allowed, but actually directed a man, to secretly imprison his 19 year old daughter in his basement for about 26 (?) years. For most of that time, he would rape her at least five times a day. She had 7 children by him during that time, and he kept them all imprisoned with small amounts of food. He made the younger children watch as he molested the 19 year old girl and repeated raped her. Actually, according to Calvinism, GOD made those younger children watch their father molest and rape their older sister many times each day for over 20 years!!! To say that God did that is blasphemy!!!
Remember God said, when He condemned people burning their children alive to demonic idols, that it NEVER EVEN ENTERED INTO HIS MIND!!! Yet Calvinists would have us believe that God Himself directed those EVIL parents to burn their children alive, and to offer their children's charred remains to Molech.

This is why a deep, intensive, study of Calvinism is not even necessary, except maybe to expose the extreme wickedness behind it. You will know them by their fruits, Jesus said. To accept Calvinism is to accuse God of the most heinous acts in history. To call Calvinism the "gospel of grace" is itself blasphemy, in my opinion. Calvinism DOES make GOD the author of sin, but they will convolute the truth to deny that as well.  Yes, I know there are Christians who accept this doctrine, but they are deceived.