Monthly Archives For October 2010

What is Orthodox in One Mind is Heterodox to Most

, posted by A.M. Mallett

My recent discussions of heterodoxy vs. orthodoxy and the schisms inherent in any such discussion surfaced a common pattern I have observed among our Calvinist brethren. They seem to exhibit a narrow, almost myopic opinion regarding orthodoxy, defining it most often as entirely within the realm of Calvinist thought and creed.

Arminians, Baptists, Anglicans and others who refuse the dogma of John Calvin and Theodore Beza’s religious philosophy are deemed heterodox among the moderate sectarians — outright heretics in the minds of its polemical advocates. This is not a new phenomenon in the church. Franciscus Gomarus metaphorically burned down the church in his day and several of Calvinism’s leading lights have followed suit. Modern medievials have chased us with absurd slogans of “barely saved,” not realizing that such is the proclamation of the Apostle with regard to each and every one of us.

Read Post →

The Biblical Doctrine of Grace for Everybody Else

, posted by A.M. Mallett

I have for years found the Calvinist use of the phrase “Doctrines of Grace” to be offensive to the Christian body. Perhaps it is because of the lack of any real set of doctrines derived out of scripture regarding grace that align with the caustic acronym TULIP. It could be that I just find Calvinist sectarians offensive when they start a sentence with the phrase and immediately launch into a diatribe against the greater body of Christ, especially when most Calvinist polemics reveal an astonishing lack of theological knowledge of nearly everything they oppose.

Read Post →

Dr. Brian Abasciano Responds To Dr. Dan Wallace On The Issue Of Corporate Election

, posted by Martin Glynn

Dr. Dan Wallace’s comments against the corporate election model have been referenced many times on the internet by various Calvinists as an authoritative critique of the view. Because of this we have asked our very own Dr. Brian Abasciano to take some time in his very busy schedule to write a reply. Dr. Abasciano, being one of the leading proponents of the model and thus an expert on the issue, agreed. Due to the informality of the original comments, Dr. Abasciano has attempted to reply in a similar fashion, but, in this writer’s opinion, he remained absolutely thorough in his critique and correction of many of Dr. Wallace’s comments. Here is his reply:
___________________________________________________________________________

Read Post →

Calvin Refutes Calvinist Regeneration

, posted by A.M. Mallett

Over the past several years, I cannot begin to number the times I have responded or interacted with the Calvinist argument that the new creation in Christ was made through a secret regeneration that preceded faith, repentance and the baptism into Christ accompanied by that rising as a new creation to walk in newness of life. The scriptures cry out for a rebuttal of the Calvinist error. The Gospel intended for a lost and hurting world demands it. Yet, the insistence on the part of Calvinists continues with its purely aberrant doctrine.

Read Post →

Friday Files: How Calvinists Blindside A Text

, posted by Martin Glynn

Scripture is a major part of the whole question of Arminianism and Calvinism. Which sides better represents Scripture? I think many of us can agree that that is the major question. That is the actual key for determining who is right and wrong. It’s not logic, it’s not passion: it is compliance to God’s self-disclosure.

Here is an excellent article about how many Calvinists will often misconstrue a text for the sake of their system. It is important to note that we do not say this in condemnation, but a recognition of the authority that Scripture has in this whole debate. So please enjoy:

Matt 1:21: How Calvinists Can Blind Side A Text

Read Post →