Recent Articles

Daniel Whitby, “Arguments against Irresistible Grace (Part 2)”

, posted by Godismyjudge

By Daniel Whitby – part of Discourses on the 5 Points
Editor Note: Archaic spellings and words have been updated, sentences broken down into shorter sentences, and links to Scripture references inserted. – Godismyjudge

To proceed now to the arguments which evidently seem to confute this doctrine:

II. ARGUMENT ONE – Sufficient Grace

And (1.) this is evident from those expressions of the holy scripture, which intimate that God had done what was sufficient, and all that reasonably could be expected from Him in order to the reformation of those persons who were not reformed; ‘for what could have been done more, (HEBREW, what was there more to do?) for my vineyard, which I have not done in it? Wherefore then when I looked (or, expected,) that it should have brought forth grapes, brought it forth wild grapes? (Isaiah 5:4)

Read Post →

Daniel Whitby, “Refuting Arguments for Irresistible Grace (Part 3)”

, posted by Godismyjudge

By Daniel Whitby – part of Discourses on the 5 Points
Editor Note: Archaic spellings and words have been updated, sentences broken down into shorter sentences and links to scripture references inserted. – Godismyjudge
Answering the arguments produced to prove, First, that man is purely passive in the work of conversion, and that it is done by an irresistible or unfrustrable act of God.

Preliminary Remarks

These arguments, for method-sake, may be reduced to four heads,

First. Arguments taken from the nature of the work itself; as v. g. it being represented by such acts:

Read Post →

Calvinism and Consistency

, posted by WilliamBirch

Admittedly, no systematic theology is perfect. That takes a load of pressure off of every sincere Bible student. Not one of us will ever have all of his or her doctrines correct. C. I. Scofield wrote that there will always exist a measure of false teaching in true, orthodox Christianity, due to our fallen nature and our design as finite creatures.

I was once convinced that Calvinism was right because people showed me a lot of proof texts to propagate this theology. I had read Chosen by God by R. C. Sproul and concluded that he, too, was correct. How could I have missed out on this teaching for so long? I will never forget what affect Sproul’s book had on my heart. How could God have chosen me and not others? Moreover, why would God have chosen me and not others?

Read Post →

The God Who Blinds?

, posted by WilliamBirch

The Bible Tools, “Sabbath-keeping, non-Trinitarian” post I was viewing read, “God Himself has kept Israel from seeing and hearing (understanding and applying) His truth, giving Israel a spirit of slumber to make possible the salvation of the Gentiles. He has determined to call and choose only a limited number from Israel in this age, allowing the rest to remain blinded . . .”

According to this errant view, the only way for God to offer salvation to the Gentiles was to blind Israel from seeing and hearing His truth (which is contradictory to its own thesis, as will be pointed out momentarily). Poor God: He cannot seem to save people without damning others; and His gospel does not seem to contain the life-changing power it boasts (Rom. 1.16) without God first regenerating the sinner.

Read Post →

Ephesians 1:1-2; A Devotional

, posted by Martin Glynn

Paul, and apostle of Jesus Christ through God’s will. To the saints: the residents in Ephesus and the faithful in Christ Jesus: grace to you and peace from God our Father and the Lord Jesus Christ.

Paul uses three terms to denote the recipants of his letter: saints, residents, and faithful. I found it very difficult to determine the exact relationship between these three denotations, and I found that most translations simply skipped the second (residents). But I feel that this misses the relationship between being ‘in Ephesus’ and ‘in Christ Jesus’ which is a bit more obvious in the Greek, and I wanted to tease this out.

Read Post →

Friday Files: Beet’s Commentary on Romans 9

, posted by Godismyjudge

In Joseph Agar Beet’s commentary on Romans 9 (pages 255 -288 in his A Commentary on St. Paul’s Epistle to the Romans) he explains that Paul is teaching that God’s plan was to save through the Gospel not the Law. Beet is a good author – he asks good questions and gets right to the point. I love the way he explains why the word ‘faith’ doesn’t appear in the first part of the text. “Paul puts, not faith, but Him that calls, in contrast to works. For God’s purpose is no more a result of faith than of works.” The objection in verse 14 is that “we are working so hard and God is letting in believers who hadn’t been previously working”. Paul responds by explaining God is being merciful, so merit doesn’t come into play. Beet sees hardening as a punishment for prior sins that makes obedience more difficult, but not impossible.

Read Post →

Arminian Perspectives on the Providence of God

, posted by WilliamBirch

Arminius wrote, “Not only does the very nature of God and of things themselves, but likewise the Scriptures and experience do evidently show that Providence belongs to God. But Providence denotes some property of God, not a quality, or . . . a capability, or a habit; but it is an act which is not ad intra nor internal, but which is ad extra and external; and which is about an object . . . different from God, and that is not united to Him from all eternity in His understanding, but as separate and really existing.”1

Read Post →

The Arminian and Calvinist Ordo Salutis: A Brief Comparative Study

, posted by Ben Henshaw

The ordo salutis is the “order of salvation.” It focuses on the process of salvation and the logical order of that process. The main difference between the Arminian and Calvinist ordo concerns faith and regeneration. Strictly speaking, faith is not part of salvation in the Arminian ordo since it is the condition that is met prior to God’s act of saving. All that follows faith is salvation in the Arminian ordo while in the Calvinist ordo faith is the result of salvation in some sense. What follows is how I see the Arminian ordo compared to the Calvinist ordo along with why I find the Calvinist ordo theologically problematic.

Arminian ordo salutis:

Prevenient grace

Faith

[Union with Christ]

Justification

Regeneration

Sanctification

Glorification

Notes on Arminian ordo:

Read Post →

Ephesians: Devotional Overview and Introduction

, posted by Martin Glynn

Since we are now finished with I John, it is time to start a new book for this devotional series. I gave the matter some thought. Eventually I settled on the book of Ephesians, not because of its place within the A/C debate, but because I love its ecclesiology. In my mind, I’ve nicknamed Ephesians “the epistle of unity”, much as I think of Philippians as “the epistle of joy” or I Corinthians as “the epistle of discipline”.

Read Post →

Friday Files: Godet on Romans 9

, posted by Godismyjudge

In Frederic Louis Godet takes a “National Election” approach in his commentary on Romans 9. He summarizes the flow of Romans 9-11 as follows: “1. That of God’s absolute liberty in regard to every alleged required right, upon Him, on man’s part; this is the subject of chap. ix. 2. That of the legitimacy of the use which God has made of His liberty in the case in question; such is the subject of chap, x., where Paul shows that Israel by their want of understanding drew upon themselves the lot which has overtaken them. 3. That of the utility of this so unexpected measure: this forms the subject of chap, xi., where the beneficent consequences of Israel’s rejection down to their glory one final result are unfolded.” Godet explains the chapter verse by verse and along the way he picks apart the grammatical details to draw out Paul’s point.

Read Post →

Free Will and the Why of Creation

, posted by Bob Anderson

Free Will and the Why of Creation

I am not a big fan of arguing for free will. In general, I think it is a given for the moral character of humanity. Even Calvinists postulate some degree of freedom through the concept of secondary agency to present some kind of intelligible concept of morality. So generally, we are debating what everyone seems to really accept when we look at it rationally. But a conversation prompted me to post the following.

An acquaintance was listening to a Youtube presentation by a popular Calvinist concerning God’s knowledge of the future and its relationship to sin and free will. The Calvinist posed the common question posed by many Calvinists, which I have paraphrased below.

    If, as Arminians believe, God infallibly knew exactly what was going to happen when he created, and knew that sin would occur as a result of his creation, then why did he create in the first place?

Read Post →

Stuff Young Calvinists Like (Satire)

, posted by Kevin Jackson

The following is an attempt at satire about stuff young Calvinists like. The idea came from this blog (which is funny but crass). Hopefully you will find this in good taste. :)

In most cases there is an obvious Arminian corollary. These are listed in italics.

Read Post →

The House Fire

, posted by Kevin Jackson

The House Fire (Arminian version):
Once upon a time there was a house on fire. Inside were three children. The dad was outside, and went in to rescue his children. He helped one child get out, but the other two refused to come. They died in the fire. Afterwords, forensics determined that the fire was lit by the children inside the house. They were playing with matches.

The House Fire (Calvinist version):
Once upon a time there was a house on fire. Inside were three children. The dad was outside, and went in to rescue one child. He took one child out, and left the other two to burn. They died in the fire. Afterwords, forensics determined that the fire was deliberately lit by the dad. The dad admitted that he planned the whole thing because he wanted to be a hero. He also claimed that he started the fire, but not in such a way that it was his fault.

Read Post →

Mystery

, posted by Martin Glynn

The biblical concept of mystery is simple. Mystery is an aspect of God’s plan which has not been revealed to humanity. Indeed, the biblical usage of mystery is always in anticipation of the mystery’s revelation. Therefore, biblically, the concept of mystery is intimately connected to revelation.

But we’re not here to talk about the Bible. We’re here to talk about Calvinism, something completely different.

Read Post →

God

, posted by Godismyjudge

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

Many Calvinists argue that if God wanted to save people through Christ’s death and they don’t end up saved, God failed. But God can’t fail. So Christ’s death was never intended to save all people.

It’s important to distinguish the objects of God’s will. If He wants Himself to do something, His will is always done, for who can stop Him?

Daniel 4:35 And all the inhabitants of the earth are reputed as nothing: and he doeth according to his will in the army of heaven, and among the inhabitants of the earth: and none can stay his hand, or say unto him, What doest thou?

But if He wants us to do something, His will may not be done.

Read Post →

I John 5:21; A Devotional

, posted by Martin Glynn

Little children, guard yourselves from idols. -NAS

I have always thought that this sentence felt out of place in the letter. I mean, Jonah ends on a more satisfying note. It’s seems like the last thing John does is introduce a new topic, and then stop before he develops it at all. It most certainly doesn’t seem like an ending to a letter.

But it is not nearly as out of place as it may seem. I John overall is about Christian living, especially on what marks one as Christian as opposed to one of the world. This final instruction can be seen in that light: obstain from the gods of the world.

It is also important to follow the thoughts starting in verse 18. As a quick review, here again is the flow of John’s final argument:

  1. We know we are protected
  2. We know that the world is dominated by evil
  3. But we also know that Jesus is here now

Read Post →

Reformed

“Reformed”

, posted by Richard Coords

Recently, a very close friend of mine became a Calvinist. It was to be expected though, since he immersed himself with MacArthur and Piper and did absolutely no comparative research…none, nada, zilch. I challenged him to cite just 1 book that he read which cross examines Calvinist theology, and he had nothing to offer but excuses. He then had the nerve to tell me that he has now been “enlightened,” and now embraces the label: “Reformed.” It’s really disappointing and, unfortunately, it’s also how many Christians end up turning to Calvinism, and then have the audacity to say that they “used to be Arminians,” and “know what they teach” because they used to be one. The reality, however, is that they were never Arminians, but just ignorant on the subject entirely and then sucked up the dogmatic teachings of Calvinists like a Hoover vacuum cleaner. They were no match for the well-trained Calvinists and, having done virtually no comparative research, were easy pickings.

Read Post →

The Unevangelized

, posted by Godismyjudge

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

Owen’s Argument 2:

P1: If Christ death is for everyone, and saves those that believe, all should receive the invitation to believe
P2: Scripture teaches many die without having heard the Gospel
C1: Therefore, Christ’s death isn’t for everyone

Scriptures Owen uses to Defend His Argument

“for faith cometh by hearing, and hearing by the word of God,” Romans 10:17

“In Judah was God known, and his name was great in Israel; in Salem was his tabernacle, and his dwelling-place in Zion,” Psalm 76:1-2

Read Post →