In the last post, we explored Owen’s admission that there is a distinction between Christ obtaining spiritual blessings and the application of these blessings, which are given on the condition that a person believes. Owen’s solution, used…
Atonement
FWS Podcast: Atonement
In these episodes, Dr. Vic Reasoner will discuss the doctrine of the Atonement. Alternative Link: Atonement (Part 1) Alternative Link: Atonement (Part 2)
Mike Barlotta, “The Death of John Owen’s Argument That a General Atonement Means God Failed to Achieve His Goal (Part 3)”
In part 1, we examined Owen’s contention: Christ’s death does not make salvation possible. It actually and infallibly applies the benefits of the cross to everyone that Christ died for. the [purpose] of our Saviour’s coming, … [was] namely, to “save sinners;”…
Mike Barlotta, “The Death of John Owen’s Argument That A General Atonement Means God Failed to Achieve His Goal” (Part 2)
In part 1 of this series the dilemma that Owen poses to those who reject a limited/particular atonement was explored. According to Dr. Owen the options are: Universalism Accepting that God had no purpose or intention behind the…
Mike Barlotta, “The Death of John Owen’s Argument That a General Atonement Means God Failed to Achieve His Goal (Part 1)”
In the Death of Death in the Death of Christ (1647), Dr. John Owen offers a famous argument for a limited atonement. That was explored in another post. In chapter 1 of Book I there is another challenge presented…
David L. Allen, “Calvin and the Extent of the Atonement: 21st Century Research”
Click the link to view David L. Allen, “Calvin and the Extent of the Atonement: 21st Century Research”, a paper delivered at the Evangelical Theological Society, and made available by the author at his website.
William Lane Craig, The Atonement
Please click on the link to view William Lane Craig, The Atonement (Elements in the Philosophy of Religion; Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2018) (doi:10.1017/9781108558020). Here is an abstract: The Atonement offers in a concise compass an…
Another Failed Wiggle Attempt: A Second Response To Kevin Courter
This blog post is a response to Kevin Courter’s response to my article “5 Biblical Texts That Calvinists Can’t Wiggle Out Of”. Courter responded to that initial article here, and I responded to his response here. Kevin Courter…
All Wiggled Out?: A Second Response To Tony Lee Ross Jr.
Well, as followers of this blog know full well I’ve been in two blog wars with Kevin Courter and Tony Lee Ross Jr. over my blog post “5 Biblical Texts That Calvinists Can’t Wiggle Out Of”. Tony…
Brian Abasciano, “A Response to James Anderson on John 3:16”
A Response to James Anderson on John 3:16 by Brian Abasciano James Anderson has responded to my article debunking the claim made by some Calvinists such as himself and James White concerning the term “whoever”…
William Mounce, “Does John 3:16 Say ‘Whoever’?”
Greek scholar Bill Mounce has weighed in on the question of whether “whoever” is in the text of John 3:16. Please click on the link to view William Mounce, “Does John 3:16 Say ‘Whoever’?” For related…
Rich Davis, “‘Whoever’ (of the Elect) Believes: A Reply to Bignon and Gibson”
Consider 3:16 (a) God so loved the world, that he gave his one and only Son, that (b) whoeverbelieves in him shall not perish but have eternal life. On his Dividing Line podcast of March 27, 2018, James White, Director of Alpha and Omega Ministries,…
Scripture In The Hands Of A Wiggly Calvinist: A Response To Tony Lee Ross Jr.
My recent blog post titled “5 Biblical Texts That Calvinists Can’t Wiggle Out Of” has gotten a lot of attention, and that’s an understatement. The day after I published it, this blog got 3,301 page views in…
Let The Wiggling Commence: A Response To Kevin Courter
My most recent article “5 Biblical Texts That Calvinists Can’t Wiggle Out Of” received a LOT of views (numbering in the thousands per day) as well as a lot of backlash (the latter of which was to…
5 Biblical Texts That Calvinists Can’t Wiggle Out Of
When Calvinists say that Jesus only died for the elect (i.e, those God chose to irresistibly save before the foundations of the world) instead of for every human being, Arminians will frequently counter that teaching…
Brian Abasciano Responds to James White Regarding John 3:16 on the Free Thinking Ministries Podcast
You can access the Free Thinking Ministries podcast of Brian Abasciano responding to James White on John 3:16 at Free Thinking Ministries’ website here.
Brian Abasciano, “Communication Breakdown over John 3:16: A Reply to Guillaume Bignon and James A. Gibson”
“Communication Breakdown over John 3:16: A Reply to Guillaume Bignon and James A. Gibson” by Brian Abasciano I recently responded to the use of an untenable grammatical argument regarding John 3:16 that contends that the…
Brian Abasciano, “Whoever Reads John 3:16 Can Know that ‘Whoever’ Is Really There”
“Whoever Reads John 3:16 Can Know that ‘Whoever’ Is Really There” by Brian Abasciano There is an untenable grammatical argument contending that John 3:16 supports limited atonement that has recently received some attention. James White…
Rich Davis, “James White and John 3:16: Rhetoric and Red Herrings”
In “Calvinism’s Gospel Tautology,” I argued that there are two possible Calvinist renderings of Jesus’ words in John 3:16. The first puts these words in Jesus’ mouth: “whoever (of those who cannot believe) does believe: those…
Ed Jarrett, “Arminianism: Atonement for All”
This post was originally published on A Clay Jar. It is the third in a series on Arminian soteriology. Any comments to this post can be left there at Arminianism: Atonement for All. As expressed in…
