Guest post from C. H. Spurgeon. No pity for the damned!

[Alex_Smith]

Robin’s blog

, C. H. Spurgeon"]The righteous in heaven will be quite satisfied with the damnation of the lost.

I used to think that if I could see the lost in hell, surely I must weep for them.

Could I hear their horrid wailings, and see the dreadful contortions of their anguish, surely I must pity them.

But there is no such sentiment as that known in heaven.

The believer shall be there so satisfied with all of God’s will, that he will quite forget the lost, in the idea that God has done
it for the best, that even their loss has been their own fault, and that God is infinitely just in it.

If my parents could see me in hell they would not have a tear to shed for me, though they were in heaven, for they would say, “It is only just, great God; and your justice must be magnified, as well as your mercy;” and moreover, they would feel that God was so much above his creatures that they would be satisfied to see those creatures crushed if it might increase God’s glory.

Oh! in heaven I believe we shall think rightly of “men”. Here “men” seem great things to us; but in heaven they will seem no more than a few creeping insects that are swept away in ploughing a field for harvest.

From heaven’s viewpoint, “men” will appear no more than a tiny handful of dust, or like some nest of wasps that ought to be exterminated for the injury they have done.

“Men” will appear such little things when we sit on high with God, and look down on the nations of the earth as “grasshoppers”, and “count the isles as very little things.”

[davidbo]

There’s a whole list of similar quotes made by doctrinal influencers down through the ages here:

tentmaker.org/articles/spirit-of-church.html

I’ve not checked these quotes so I can’t vouch that they are valid.

I have a friend that likes to study and use a number of these sources as references for sermons, papers etc. So, I sent this list to him to get his opinion and never heard back.

[amy]

My attention was drawn to Spurgeon,not long ago when a friend quoted him on fb, so I looked him up. I remember he’s very Calvinist so what you are sharing doesn’t shock me at all! I find all of that very difficult to swallow.

[Joen]

Spurgeon did his best to explain what he saw in Scripture. Obviously also calvinisms overdone attention to God’s wrath plays in here. The problem with Scripture in this regard is that it isnt an obvious universal love book. It’s a plain fact that many reading it mainly get a lot of wrath and judgment out of it. It has heavy emphasis of election and division of humanity into those that are elect and those who are not and that there will be a future judgment where this seperation will still be upheld. However, it’s also declared that atonement is universal and that God desires to save all. Additional to this we have a few pieces to the puzzle such as 1 Cor 15v22-28. The calvinist them tries to limit the meaning of this unlike the believer in universal salvation who recognises much of calvinist reasoning. There is a calvinist alternative teaching called amyraldianism or hypothetical universalism. That’s their way of getting around such prooftext of universal salvation as 2 Peter 2v1 - “sufficient for all, efficient for the elect”.

[AllanS]

“I find no pleasure in the death of the wicked,” says the Lord.

Men will appear like grasshoppers? Like dust? Wasps to be exterminated? If God himself became Man, Man also has become God. This is our new dignity in Christ. Humanity is not a virus, Agent Smith. Rather, we are children of God and heir to all things.

As for human value, isn’t that determined by the price someone is willing to pay? God sold all that he had to buy us. What does that tell us about our worth in God’s eyes?

[Alex_Smith]

Spurgeon did his best to explain what he saw in Scripture. Obviously also calvinisms overdone attention to God’s wrath plays in here. The problem with Scripture in this regard is that it isnt an obvious universal love book. It’s a plain fact that many reading it mainly get a lot of wrath and judgment out of it. It has heavy emphasis of election and division of humanity into those that are elect and those who are not and that there will be a future judgment where this seperation will still be upheld. However, it’s also declared that atonement is universal and that God desires to save all. Additional to this we have a few pieces to the puzzle such as 1 Cor 15v22-28. The calvinist them tries to limit the meaning of this unlike the believer in universal salvation who recognises much of calvinist reasoning. There is a calvinist alternative teaching called amyraldianism or hypothetical universalism. That’s their way of getting around such prooftext of universal salvation as 2 Peter 2v1 - “sufficient for all, efficient for the elect”.

I think your right Joen, he’s not saying this to be nasty but is genuinely trying to portray God as he sees Him revealed in Scripture. It’s a great shame his passion was wasted I’ve heard the “sufficient for all, efficient for the elect” argument too.

As for human value, isn’t that determined by the price someone is willing to pay? God sold all that he had to buy us. What does that tell us about our worth in God’s eyes?

Excellent point.

[dirtboy]

Man, reading that saddened me.

[Dondi]

If I saw a grasshopper crushed, but still alive, I would at least have the mercy of finishing him off rather than suffer in the throws of whatever pain it might be feeling. Same for any other animal, for that matter.

[Alex_Smith]

If I saw a grasshopper crushed, but still alive, I would at least have the mercy of finishing him off rather than suffer in the throws of whatever pain it might be feeling. Same for any other animal, for that matter.

Yes, it’s a worry when a sinner would be *more *merciful than God Sadly that’s why some (many?) people reject Christianity