April 2010
God's Foreknowledge - Peter, Judas and Christ
Submitted by Godismyjudge on Thu, 04/29/2010 - 7:46amI recently read Greg Boyd’s explanation of Christ’s foretelling Judas’s betrayal and Peter’s denial. The basic issue is that in open theism, a free choice cannot be foreknown. Boyd’s states that at the time of their sins, Judas and Peter were not free (i.e. they couldn’t choose remain faithful to Christ). But since their prior free choices had formed their character, they were still responsible even if not free at that specific moment. (Boyd on Peter, Boyd on Judas)
While I suspect this explanation is unsound for multiple reasons, let’s for the moment grant that it’s true. What about cases were the future is foretold, yet counterfactual ability is asserted?
Is Arminianism a neo-Manichaeanism?
Submitted by WilliamBirch on Wed, 04/28/2010 - 5:39am[THIS HAS BEEN EDITED. ALL REFERENCES TO THE ORIGINAL CALVINIST AUTHOR BEING RESPONDED TO HAVE BEEN REMOVED.]
Bhagwan, Ishvara, Maheshvara, Parameshvara, Paramatman, Para Brahman, Adi Purusha, Vishnu, Krishna, Rama, Ek Onkar, Satnam, Nirankar, Shoghi Effendi, Shangdi, Shen, Apollo, Ceres, Diana, Juno, Jupiter, Minerva, Vesta, Zeus, Hermes, Allah, Ra, Osiris, Isis, Ma'at, Amun, these are just some of the names of thousands of various gods from various religions worshiped throughout history.
Intentionally ommitted from this list is the Christian God, the true and living God (John 17:3; 1 Thessalonians 1:9; 1 John 2:8, 5:20; Rev. 19:11), Yahweh (YHWH, Exodus 3:14, the I Am). One cannot place the one true God in the same categorical list of false gods, who do not truly exist (cf. 1 Cor. 10:19).
Calvinism is the Gospel vs. Jesus is the Gospel
Submitted by WilliamBirch on Tue, 04/27/2010 - 7:08amHeresies are born out of the mindset that one's theology and only one's theology can possibly be the sole orthodox position viable for Christians. When an individual cannot at least acknowledge that he or she could be wrong on some theological points, the cult-mindset has set in. But know this, friends, only God's Word is completely accurate. Our understanding of his Word can be inaccurate. Russell Henry Stafford writes:
- I was brought up in the Arminian tradition, and those early influences confirmed the natural abhorrence which I take it that all who know the living Christ in the living pages of the Gospels must feel for the distinctive dogmas of Calvinism.
The Idiot's Guide to the New Perspective on Paul
Submitted by Kevin Jackson on Mon, 04/26/2010 - 8:05amIt is difficult to find a brief layman's explanation of the "New Perspectives on Paul" (NPP). To rectify the problem I humbly offer "The Idiot's Guide to the New Perspective on Paul"
An analogy:
Imagine a church that has the following rule: EVERYONE WHO ATTENDS THIS CHURCH MUST WEAR A SUIT. The church has the rule to keep out the bums, reasoning that bums can't afford suits.
The people in the church know very well that wearing a suit in and of itself doesn't make one a Christian. They simply have the requirement for the purpose of excluding others who are not like them. They want the church for themselves, and want to keep the bums out.
In this analogy the root problem is that Christians want to exclude others. There is nothing inherently wrong with someone wanting to wear a suit. The problem is that they are using their preference for suits as an arbitrary rule to exclude others.
Friday Files: Benson on Proverbs 16:1
Submitted by Godismyjudge on Fri, 04/23/2010 - 3:17pmBenson’s comments on Proverbs 16:1 are short and sweet so here are his words:
Proverbs 16:1 To man belong the plans of the heart, but from the LORD comes the reply of the tongue.
That is, in short, 1st, Man may purpose; he hath a freedom of thought and of will permitted him; he may form his projects, and lay his schemes as he thinks best; but, after all, 2d, God disposeth ; he easily can, and often does, cross man's purposes, and break his measures: nor can man proceed with success in any undertaking, nor carry into execution any design, without God's assistance and blessing. It was a curse that was prepared in Balaam's heart, but the answer of the tongue was a blessing.
The Calvinist View of Foreknowledge Makes God the Cause and Author of All Sin and Evil
Submitted by SEA on Thu, 04/22/2010 - 7:27amOne of our members commented concisely and incisively in our private discussion group (slightly revised here):
In Calvinism God cannot see into the future. He only knows what will happen because He will make it all happen. This again leads to the inevitable conclusion that God is the cause and author of all sin and evil in the universe. He makes sin and evil happen just as He makes everything else happen. One cannot appeal to "secondary causes" because God must make them happen as well. God directly controls everything in accordance with His all encompassing eternal decree. Some Calvinists find the Calvinist account of foreknowledge compelling precisely because it explains how God can foreknow the future, while the Arminian account doesn't care so much how God can know the future, satisfied simply to affirm that God is capable of doing such things, just as He can create out of nothing, etc.
Does Atonement for all lead to Universalism?
Submitted by neborg on Wed, 04/21/2010 - 5:08amA common question that Calvinists pose to the Arminian is "If Jesus died for all, then why aren't all saved?" John Owen popularised this argument with his "triple dilemma" or "triple choice" where he said [paraphrased] that "Jesus died for either all sins of all men, all the sins of some men, or some sins of all men."
Don't Be a Jerk
Submitted by SEA on Tue, 04/20/2010 - 7:08amWe would do well to apply the message of the cartoon in the attachment to the Arminian/Calvinist debate (see the attachment). The debate is very important, ultimately having to do with the character of God. But we should remain godly in our demeanor and interactions in the fear of the Lord and love of our brothers and sisters in Christ. As we say in this site's welcome message, "In all of this we desire to conduct ourselves with love and respect for all, including those with whom we disagree."
Review of "Calvinism in the Las Vegas Airport"
Submitted by Richard Coords on Mon, 04/19/2010 - 10:03amThe motivation for this book is an attempt to recognize the way in which Calvinism connects with non-Calvinists, and why those who *are* Calvinists, do not run away in horror, but zealously embrace its theology. Author, Richard Mouw, recognizes that Calvinism does not always come across well, and best observes this in a movie entitled, Hardcore, in which a Calvinist elder, Jake, explains his TULIP theology to a curious lost woman in a Las Vegas airport, Niki, who in response to an explanation of TULIP Calvinism, exclaims: “I thought I was ****ed up.” (p.13)
Mouw writes: “I have been thinking about writing this book ever since I saw the film Hardcore. A movie with a title like that will not strike most folks as an obvious source of inspiration for some reflections on how to be a Calvinist in the twenty-first century, so I had better explain myself.” (p.11)
(The now Atheist director of Hardcore was raised as a Christian and graduated from Calvin College.)
Arminius answers Beckwith
Submitted by Godismyjudge on Thu, 04/15/2010 - 7:55amBeckwith states: Because the list of canonical books is itself not found in Scripture—as one can find the Ten Commandments or the names of Christ's Apostles—any such list, whether Protestant or Catholic, would be an item of extra-Biblical theological knowledge. (link)
Arminius responds:
Another Middle Knowledge Passage
Submitted by Godismyjudge on Wed, 04/14/2010 - 4:40amMiddle knowledge is mostly an implication of the scriptural truths of God's providential governance of the world and man's choices. But there are some passages that do directly teach that God knows what we would do in various circumstances. I came across a passage supporting middle knowledge this week:
In Deuteronomy 28, Moses first tells of all the blessings the people will receive if the follow God's commands: 1 "Now it shall come to pass, if you diligently obey the voice of the LORD your God, to observe carefully all His commandments which I command you today, that the LORD your God will set you high above all nations of the earth."
Do Calvinists Yearn for a Deeper Understanding of Responsibility?
Submitted by Godismyjudge on Tue, 04/13/2010 - 7:52amI recently listened to a lecture by Ronald Nash, where he recounts a conversation he had with J. I. Packer. They are both Calvinists. Nash brings up the subject of Middle Knowledge. Packer says that it is Arminian. Nash says no, that it could be used by Reformers to maintain God's total sovereign control and still preserve responsibility. Packer says that he may have a point there. Here's a link to the clip. (link) The conversation is about 11 minutes in.