1Albert Barnes, The Church Advocate , 8.10.1854, p. 119.

2“Faith and Regeneration,” Metropolitan Tabernacle, 17:133-144.

3Ibid., p. 139.

4“The Open Fountain,” Metropolitan Tabernacle, 17:45. If one examines the language of Spurgeon carefully and sets it in the context of the hyper-Calvinist conflict of the 18th and 19th centuries, from which he himself received an abundance of criticism, Spurgeon’s threat to push a theologian into the fountain makes perfect sense. Spurgeon appears to have in mind the kind of representation of the doctrines espoused by Lewis Wayman in 1738:

And last of all, only suppose the thing to be, that all who hear the Gospel should believe in Christ for life and salvation, according to what this author [Matthias Maurice] tells us is their duty; would there not, probably, be millions in the world believing in Christ for life and salvation, to whom God hath not given eternal life in Christ, and who shall never obtain salvation by him? (A Further Enquiry After Truth, p. 19).

In this context both the freeness of salvation and the unity of all aspects of the doctrines of grace become most relevant.

5“For Whom Did Christ Die?” Metropolitan Tabernacle 20:493.

6“The Open Fountain,” Metropolitan Tabernacle 17:39.

7“Jesus, the Substitute for His People,” Metropolitan Tabernacle, 21:159.

8“The Living Care of the Dying Christ,” and “Christ’s Plea for Ignorant Sinners,” P & D pp. 170, 477; Also “Particular Redemption,” New Park Street, 4:136.

9Spurgeon’s Expository Encyclopedia, 1:348.

10“Particular Redemption,” New Park Street, 4:135, 136.

11Spurgeon describes the Arminian position this way:

“The Arminian holds that Christ, when he died, did not die with an intent to save any particular person; and they teach that Christ’s death does not in itself secure, beyond doubt, the salvation of any one man living. They believe that Christ died to make the salvation of all men possible, or that by the doing of something else, any man who pleases may attain unto eternal life; consequently, they are obliged to hold that if man’s will would not give way and voluntarily surrender to grace, then Christ’s atonement would be unavailing. They hold that there was no particularity and speciality in the death of Christ.” “Particular Redemption,” New Park Street Pulpit, 4:130.


13“Jesus the Substitute for his People,” Metropolitan Tabernacle, 21:160.

14Ibid., p. 134.

15“The Determination of Christ to Suffer for his People,” P & D., p. 467.

16Autobiography, 2 vols. (Edinburgh: Banner of Truth Trust, 1962) 1:172.

17“The Blood Shed For Many,” P & D, p. 43.