Recent Articles

BIBLICAL CONCEPTS OF SIN

, posted by Kevin Jackson

BIBLICAL CONCEPTS OF SIN From the Wesleyan Theological Journal KENNETH KINGHORN, Ph.D. There is no precise biblical definition of sin. The Bible is concerned more with the remedy for sin than with a definition of…

Read Post →

Academic Orthodoxy and the Arminianizing of American Theology

, posted by Kevin Jackson

ACADEMIC ORTHODOXY AND THE ARMINIANIZING
OF AMERICAN THEOLOGY

From the Wesleyan Theological Journal
James E. Hamilton
Asbury College


During the decades immediately before and after 1800 a massive shift began to take place in American theology. The dominant Calvinistic framework gave way and was succeeded by a prevailing Arminianism. So fundamental were the issues of this intellectual revolution and so profound were their implications that the Protestant Reformation has been called by comparison “a negligible theological performance.” 1

Read Post →

What Can The Dead in Sin Do?

, posted by Ben Henshaw

Calvinists love to point out that we are dead in sin. That we are dead in sin prior to conversion cannot be denied (Eph. 2:1, 5; Col. 2:13); the question has to do with what it means to be dead in sin.

Calvinist are fond of comparing spiritual death to physical death. This gives them the framework with which to press their theological conviction that regeneration precedes faith. If being dead in sin means that we are as helpless as physical corpses then we are told that we certainly can no more “hear” the gospel or “see” our need for Christ than a physical corpse can hear or see. But is there any justification for such a strict parallel between the spiritual and the physical?

Read Post →

Made in the Image of God

, posted by A.M. Mallett

So God created man in his own image, in the image of God created he him; male and female created he them. – Genesis 1:27 AV What does it mean for us to have been…

Read Post →

Consistent Theology on the Sovereignty of God

, posted by

In spite of J. I. Packer’s allegation that John Wesley was a Calvinist,1 albeit an inconsistent one, Packer himself dodges inconsistency by appealing to antinomy regarding the relationship between God’s sovereignty and humanity’s free will….

Read Post →

I John 3:11; A Devotional

, posted by Martin Glynn

11This is the message you have heard from the beginning: We should love one another. I wanted to highlight this verse alone, because although it concludes the former section and sets up the next, it…

Read Post →

Romans 9: Conclusion

, posted by SEA

So, to sum up, according to the Augustinian/Calvinist interpretation, which assumes faith in Christ for salvation and arises in opposition to Pelagianism and later the medieval Catholic church: Paul begins by agonizing over the failure…

Read Post →

Romans 9: The Potter and the Clay

, posted by SEA

Up to this point in this series on Romans 9, I have argued the following points: The passages dealing with election in Romans 9 must be interpreted in the context of Paul’s overall theme in…

Read Post →

Romans 9: Pharaoh

, posted by SEA

Up to this point, I have argued that the passages dealing with election in Romans 9 must be interpreted in the context of Paul’s overall theme in chapters 9-11 of the implications of the Gospel for ethnic Israelites, and that Paul’s use of the examples of Isaac and Jacob refer not to each as an individual and election to salvation, but rather to the nation of Israel that descended from them and election to membership among the covenant people.

Paul buttresses his contention that his doctrine does not in fact imply injustice with God by citing Exodus 33:19, where in reference to Moses, God states

    I will have mercy on whom I have mercy,
    and I will have compassion on whom I have compassion. (Rom. 9:18)

Read Post →

Romans 9: An Arminian/New Perspective Reading

, posted by SEA

Introduction Romans 9 is often cited as one of the clearest examples in Scripture of the Reformed doctrine of individual election: It discusses God’s sovereign choice of Isaac in preference to Ishmael and Jacob rather…

Read Post →

Romans 9: Isaac and Jacob

, posted by SEA

In verse 7 of Romans 9, Paul quotes Genesis 21:12 to explain that, even before Isaac was born, God had determined that Abraham’s offspring would be “reckoned” through Isaac—in other words, that the covenant people would pass through the line of Isaac rather than that of Ishmael. The original context of this passage, incidentally, makes it clear not only that Isaac is to be chosen, but that Ishmael is to be rejected in favor of Isaac. Yet God makes it clear that Ishmael is to be rejected by Abraham, so that the covenant line is clearly through Isaac; nevertheless, He reassures Abraham in the very next verse

Read Post →

Romans 9: Introduction

, posted by SEA

Romans 9 is often cited as one of the clearest examples in Scripture of the Reformed doctrine of individual election: It discusses God’s sovereign choice of Isaac in preference to Ishmael and Jacob rather than…

Read Post →

I John 3:7-10; A Devotional

, posted by Martin Glynn

7Dear children, do not let anyone lead you astray. He who does what is right is righteous, just as he is righteous. 8He who does what is sinful is of the devil, because the devil…

Read Post →

Ron Rhodes, “The Extent of the Atonement” : Limited Atonement Versus Unlimited Atonement

, posted by Martin Glynn

Taken from http://home.earthlink.net/~ronrhodes/Atonement.html

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.

The Extent of the Atonement: Limited Atonement Versus Unlimited Atonement
by Ron Rhodes

Read Post →

Arminians Do Not Believe in Predestination?

, posted by

Roger Olson lists this as one of many myths leveled against Arminianism. He writes, “Few of Arminianism’s theological critics would claim that Arminians do not believe in predestination in any sense; they know that classical…

Read Post →

Reasons to Remain a Calvinist

, posted by SEA

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…

Read Post →

Arminianism Today

, posted by

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…

Read Post →

The New Perspective and Ephesians

, posted by SEA

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…

Read Post →

Enjoying Consistent Calvinism

, posted by Patron

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.

Read Post →