Recent Articles

John Wesley On the Origins of Evil

, posted by Kevin Jackson

John Wesley On the Origins of Evil

From the Wesleyan Theological Journal
Barry E. Bryant

One of the more important questions ever confronted by Christian theologians has been how to reconcile the idea that God is loving, good, and just with the presence of evil in the world. The Greek Epicurus summarized the issue well when he asked, “What is the cause of evil?” In answering this question he concluded:

God. . . either wished to take away evils, and is unable; or He is able, and is unwilling; or He is neither willing nor able, or He is both willing and able, which alone is suitable to God, from what source then are evils? or why does He not remove them?2

Read Post →

JOHN WESLEY AND JONATHAN EDWARDS ON RELIGIOUS EXPERIENCE: A COMPARATIVE ANALYSIS

, posted by Kevin Jackson

JOHN WESLEY AND JONATHAN EDWARDS ON RELIGIOUS EXPERIENCE:
A COMPARATIVE ANALYSIS

From the Wesleyan Theological Journal
Robert Doyle Smith

Introduction

The tone of the eighteenth-century debate between Arminians and Calvinists finds apt description in John Wesley’s observation that to say, “This man is an Arminian,” was, to some, much the same thing as saying, “This man is a mad dog.”1

Read Post →

JOHN WESLEY: PRACTICAL THEOLOGIAN?

, posted by Kevin Jackson

JOHN WESLEY: PRACTICAL THEOLOGIAN? From the Wesleyan Theological Journal Randy L. Maddox FOR: Dr. J. Kenneth Grider 1 When one reads secondary treatments of Wesley one repeatedly comes across disclaimers of his being a “systematic”…

Read Post →

John Fletcher’s Influence on the Development of Wesleyan Theology in America

, posted by Kevin Jackson

JOHN FLETCHER’S INFLUENCE ON THE DEVELOPMENT OF WESLEYAN THEOLOGY IN AMERICA

From the Wesleyan Theological Journal
By John A. Knight

Introduction

Not until recent years has the significance of John Fletcher’s theology been assessed by interpreters of the history of Christian doctrine. For almost two hundred years his work was eclipsed by the Wesleys and by some in the Calvinistic wing of the 18th century Evangelical Revival in England, except for occasional references by historians and biographers of his contemporaries.

David C. Shipley’s perceptive study, “Methodist Arminianism in the Theology of John Fletcher,” unpublished Ph. D. dissertation, Yale, 1942, was a pioneer work in this country. Particularly in the last two decades others have begun to recognize the importance of Fletcher to the development of Wesleyan theology.1

Read Post →

Hermeneutical Model for the Wesleyan Ordo Salutis

, posted by Kevin Jackson

A HERMENEUTICAL MODEL FOR THE WESLEYAN ORDO SALUTIS

From the Wesleyan Theological Journal
Kenneth Collins

I. Introduction

It comes as a surprise to learn that in this age of ecumenism, John Wesley’s theology has rarely been explored beyond Methodist circles. Indeed, while significant dialogue has occurred among Lutheran, Calvinist and Roman Catholic traditions,1 Wesley’s voice has seldom been heard in such settings. Why has this been so?

Read Post →

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 →