July 2008

Reasons to Remain a Calvinist

Submitted by Anonymous on Thu, 07/31/2008 - 11:09am

Calvinism

As much as I disagree with Calvinism as an interpretive scheme for understanding soteriology, there are worse errors to fall into. As an olive branch to my brothers and sisters in Christ, I'd like to offer some valid reasons I can think of to remain within the Calvinist camp.

If becoming an Arminian would really be a temptation to boast for you, then please remain a Calvinist.Arminians are typically accused of holding to a view that allows us to boast, because we chose to receive God's gift when others did not. Now, most people are grateful to receive gifts, and thank those who give them to us. But perhaps you're the type who, on Christmas morning, jumps up after unwrapping presents and starts gloating about the great gifts you were smart enough to receive. Maybe you compare yourself to those who scorn gifts, and brag about how much better you are than they are. If this describes you, then I heartily recommend that you hang on to your Calvinism.

Arminianism Today

Submitted by WilliamBirch on Wed, 07/30/2008 - 4:33am

Arminianism

That is a dangerous title. Arminianism Today is not, generally speaking, what Arminius espoused in his day. Yet, there is a growing number of theological Arminians who are trying to correct that problem. That is one reason why I named my blog Classical Arminianism, and also the reason why many modern Arminians call themselves Reformed Arminians; they are doing their best to distance themselves from the practical and theological ideologies which many label as "Arminian," but have little to do with classical, Reformation Arminianism.

So, what's the difference between classical, Reformed Arminianism and what many people hear from "Arminian" pulpits in churches today? I offer the following. Keep in mind that I am only speaking from my point of view. I have been given no authority to speak on behalf of all classical, Reformed Arminians. I am simply offering my opinion.

The New Perspective and Ephesians

Submitted by Anonymous on Tue, 07/29/2008 - 6:12am

Bible Passages

The New Perspective on Paul is generally associated with a reinterpretation of Romans and Galatians, inasmuch as these two books have been most closely associated with the Old Perspective and the traditional Protestant interpretation of justification being derived from these two epistles. However, the traditional (especially Reformed) interpretation of Ephesians 1 and 2 should also be reexamined in light of the New Perspective.

Enjoying Consistent Calvinism

Submitted by Patron on Mon, 07/28/2008 - 1:54pm

The content of this post was authored by Ben Henshaw and is posted on his behalf.

I have recently been accused of being an inconsistent Arminian because I reject Open Theism. I find it interesting that Calvinists are so concerned with consistency seeing as how they both affirm that God causes all things and is yet somehow not the author of sin.

I admit that I love consistency. I reject Calvinism primarily because I find no support for it in the pages of Scripture, and secondarily because it is so internally inconsistent. I admire Calvinists who are not afraid to “take it in the face”, so to speak, and call God the author of sin. “Traditional” Calvinists call these types “hyper” Calvinists, but in the spirit of my recent conversation, I think it is more accurate to just call them “consistent” Calvinists.

I John 3:5-6; A Devotional

Submitted by Martin Glynn on Sat, 07/26/2008 - 8:21am

Devotionals

5 And you know this: that appeared so that those sins may be taken away. And in Him there is no sin: 6everyone who dwells in Him never sins; everyone who sins has not seen Him nor learnt of Him.

The above is my translation. First we here about “that appeared” (the pronoun being ekeinos not autos) which is reminiscent of verse 2, speaking of the future return of Christ, thus identifying Christ as the subject. However what’s interesting is that which was in the future is not being treated as if it were in the past. Both appeared and taken away are in the simple past tense, and even “to see” later in verse 6 which is also reminiscent of verse 2 is in the perfect past tense. So we have this sense that the hope of verse 3 is in some way realized for the believer.

Robert Hamilton, "The Order of Faith and Election in John's Gospel: You Do Not Believe Because You Are Not My Sheep"

Please click on the attachment to view Robert Hamilton, "The Order of Faith and Election in John's Gospel: You Do Not Believe Because You Are Not My Sheep".

1 attachment

Samuel Telloyan, "Did Christ Die For All?"

Atonement

Taken from http://www.biblebelievers.net/Calvinism/kjcalvn2.htm

This article is not written by an Arminian, but from a "moderate Calvinist" perspective. We include it because it argues for unlimited atonement, a doctrine that is so obviously biblical that many who consider themselves Calvinists embrace it.

Did Christ Die For All?
by Samual Telloyan

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Copies available from:
Bible for Today, 900 Park Avenue, Collingswood, NJ 609-854-4452
Ask for #586

Introduction
The question considered in this study of the Bible is, "For whom did Christ die?" Some answer, "For all." Others answer, "Only for the elect." What sayeth the Scriptures?