Monthly Archives For March 2013

Thomas McCall, “I Believe in Divine Sovereignty”

, , 1 Comment

This article critiques a popular Calvinistic view of God’s sovereignty as represented by John Piper and can be applied to the standard view of Calvinism, i.e., exhaustive determinism, which includes God’s unconditional decree of all sin and evil.

Please click on the attachment to view Thomas McCall, “I Believe in Divine Sovereignty”, Trinity Journal 29/2 (Fall 2008) 205-226.

Read Post →

John 6 and Calvinism in Fresh Perspective

, , Comment Closed

The sixth chapter of John’s Gospel is either a monster text in support of Calvinistic predestination, or else a fountain of revelation on some other spiritual truth. Admittedly, exegesis of this chapter by Arminian scholars…

Read Post →

Richard Watson, On Omniscience

, , Comment Closed

Please click on the attachment to view Richard Watson, On Omniscience, which is an excerpt from his Theological Institutes. This treatment of God’s omniscience contains an important discussion of the concepts of necessity, contingency, and…

Read Post →

Irresistible Blondie

, , Comment Closed

Here’s a little theological humor in the form of a cartoon that can be related to the Calvinist doctrine of irresistible grace.

Read Post →

Gordon C. I. Wong, “Make Their Ears Dull: Irony in Isaiah 6:9-10”

, , Comment Closed

This article is posted with the permission of Trinity Theological Journal and the author. Please click on the attachment to view Gordon C. I. Wong, “Make Their Ears Dull: Irony in Isaiah 6:9-10” Trinity Theological Journal 16 (2008) 24-34.

Here is the author’s abstract:

In Isaiah 6:9-10, the prophet appears to be commissioned by God to make the ears of the people dull in order to prevent them from repenting. This article begins by proposing that these verses are better understood as rhetorical irony designed to persuade the people to (and not prevent them from) repentance. An alternative rhetorical interpretation and three literal interpretations are also discussed and rejected in favour of the view that assumes the use of irony.

Read Post →