Book Reviews

Friday Files: Arminius on Romans 9

, posted by Godismyjudge

In James Arminius’ commentary on the 9th Chapter of Romans, he argues that the topic at hand is justification by faith. He humbly admits that for some time the chapter was of the “greatest obscurity”,…

Read Post →

Systematic Theology is Like Connect-the-Dots

, posted by Godismyjudge

This post is an excerpt from the book review of Death of Death in the Death of Christ. Systematic Theology is like connect-the-dots. One takes biblical data points and draws relationships between them to form…

Read Post →

Friday Files: Clarke’s commentary on Romans 9

, posted by Godismyjudge

In Adam Clarke’s commentary on Romans 9, he argues for that God choice of Jacob and Esau were primarily national1, rather than the unconditional individual election and reprobation. The idea is that God chose to…

Read Post →

Friday Files: Wesley’s Predestination Calmly Considered

, posted by Godismyjudge

John Wesley had the rare gift of bringing the Calvinist/Arminian debate from the head to the heart. In Predestination Calmly Considered, Wesley first examines the idea of upholding unconditional election while rejecting reprobation and then…

Read Post →

Friday Files: McKnight on the Hebrew Warning Passages

, posted by Godismyjudge

Scot McKnight’s article “The warning passages of Hebrews: A formal analysis and Theological Conclusions” reviews the warnings of apostasy in Hebrews 2:1-4, 3:7-4:13, 5:11-6:12, 10:19-39 and 12:1-29. McKnight identifies four alternative interpretations of the warning…

Read Post →

Friday Files: Klein’s article on Paul’s use of Kalein

, posted by Godismyjudge

William Klein’s article: “Paul’s use of Kalein: A Proposal” challenges us to reconsider the traditional understandings of Paul’s use of kalein, based on linguistic evidence. Kalein typically either means summoning or naming. For Paul, when…

Read Post →

Friday Files: Olson’s Don’t Hate Me Because I’m Arminian

, posted by Godismyjudge

Roger Olson’s article: Don’t Hate Me Because I’m Arminian explains the importance of Arminians and Calvinists accepting each other and working together despite their theological differences. Olson shares several personal anecdotes while explaining why classic…

Read Post →

The Sin-Bearer: Free at Last!

, posted by Godismyjudge

This post is an excerpt from the book review of John Owen’s Death of Death in the Death of Christ. Without question, one of Owen’s favorite themes in the atonement is that of Christ as…

Read Post →

For the Sins of the Whole World

, posted by Godismyjudge

This post is an excerpt from the book review of Death of Death in the Death of Christ.

I plan on 1) presenting the passages that teach Christ died for the world, 2) presenting my argument for unlimited atonement, 3) explaining 1 John 2:1-2, 4) going into some detail on the word “world”, and 5) addressing John Owen’s counter definition.

The Text

The New Testament has 10 passages which teach Christ died for the world. 1 John 2:1-2 is one of them.

1My little children, these things write I unto you, that ye sin not. And if any man sin, we have an advocate with the Father, Jesus Christ the righteous:2And he is the propitiation for our sins: and not for ours only, but also for the sins of the whole world.

Read Post →

All Means All

, posted by Godismyjudge

This post is an excerpt from the book review of John Owen’s Death of Death in the Death of Christ. What else would all mean? Just kidding. While Arminians are aware that all can be…

Read Post →

Critique of Edwards

, posted by Godismyjudge

This article is a brief critique of Jonathan Edwards’ views on the will and freedom. I won’t be presenting the alternative view, LFW, nor will I attempt to demonstrate the logical outcomes of Edwards’ view (i.e. God is the author of sin, God’s offer is insincere…). Instead I will just be looking at the internal consistency of Edwards’ view. I really think that the more people understand Edwards, the less they will agree with him.

Brief Outline of Edwards’ view of Freedom

Read Post →

Causeless Cause or Infinite Regression of Causes

, posted by Godismyjudge

Brief Outline of Edwards’ Arguments in Part II of Freedom of the Will
Edwards attacks LFW in two broad categories: causation and divine foreknowledge. Under causation, Edwards argues that LFW either leads to an infinite regression of causes or is an action without a cause. Edwards then argues that actions without causes are absurd because: 1) they would violate the common sense idea that nothing ever comes to pass without a cause, 2) then we wouldn’t be able to reason from cause to effect, 3) all proof of God’s existence is taken away, and 4) actions produced by a causeless cause would be both random and irrational, and therefore not a basis of moral accountability.

Infinite Regression of Causes or Causeless

Read Post →

Edwards’ Arguments against Libertarian Free Will Based on Divine Foreknowledge

, posted by Godismyjudge

In part 2 section 12, Edwards attempts three demonstrations of the incompatibility of LFW and God’s foreknowledge: 1) based on the connection between foreknowledge and the event, 2) based on the impossibility of knowing things without evidence and 3) based on knowing a contingent event with certainty.

The Connection between Foreknowledge and the Event
Edwards’ Argument:
P1: Things in the past are now necessary
P2: In the past, God infallibly foreknew our future choices
C1: therefore, God’s foreknowledge of our future choices is now necessary
P3: if something necessary is infallibly connected with something else, that something else is also necessary
P4: God’s necessary foreknowledge is infallibly connected with our future choices
C2: therefore, our future choices are necessary

My Response

Read Post →

Commands and Invitations for the Impossible

, posted by Godismyjudge

Outline of Edwards’ Arguments in Part III.IV Commands inconsistent with LFW God commands the acts of the will, not the acts of the body executing the will’s commands. If there’s a sequence of acts of…

Read Post →