Faith
Arminians are Christians, Barely
Submitted by WilliamBirch on Tue, 08/24/2010 - 7:51amIn the introduction to his book, Willing to Believe: The Controversy over Free Will, R. C. Sproul, Sr., when asked if he thinks Arminians are Christians, answers, "'Yes, barely.' They are Christians by what we call a felicitous inconsistency."1 He agrees with J. I. Packer and O. R. Johnston, who insist that Arminians, because they reject the (unproven and eminently philosophical) theory that regeneration must precede faith, they "thereby deny man's utter helplessness in sin, and affirm that a form of semi-Pelagianism is true after all."2 This is the reason, so the authors are convinced, that "Reformed theology condemned Arminianism as being in principal a return to Rome (because in effect it turned faith into a meritorious work) and a betrayal of the Reformation (because it denied the sovereignty of God in saving sinners . . .).3
Verses All Arminians Should Know
Submitted by bossmanham on Thu, 06/10/2010 - 7:33amThis list was compiled about a year ago by many members of The Society of Evangelical Arminians. I was asked to put it into blog form, and have finally sat down and gotten it done.
I hope for this to be a useful resource for any Arminian needing good scriptural texts that display his or her view. It should be cautioned that proof texting is far too easy for anyone to do, and with any of these verses the context should be considered. Far too often, context is ignored and erroneous interpretations are formed. So, use these verses, but corroborate their contexts. We strove to carefully consider the contexts and, in our minds, these verses and explanations faithfully represent the author's intent, showing Arminianism to have strong Biblical support.
Also, if you see any verses that you think should be added, comment on the post and let me know.
Verses that show election is conditional:
The Idiot's Guide to the New Perspective on Paul
Submitted by Kevin Jackson on Mon, 04/26/2010 - 8:05amIt is difficult to find a brief layman's explanation of the "New Perspectives on Paul" (NPP). To rectify the problem I humbly offer "The Idiot's Guide to the New Perspective on Paul"
An analogy:
Imagine a church that has the following rule: EVERYONE WHO ATTENDS THIS CHURCH MUST WEAR A SUIT. The church has the rule to keep out the bums, reasoning that bums can't afford suits.
The people in the church know very well that wearing a suit in and of itself doesn't make one a Christian. They simply have the requirement for the purpose of excluding others who are not like them. They want the church for themselves, and want to keep the bums out.
In this analogy the root problem is that Christians want to exclude others. There is nothing inherently wrong with someone wanting to wear a suit. The problem is that they are using their preference for suits as an arbitrary rule to exclude others.
Provisional Atonement Part 3: The Integrity and Justice of God in the Gospel Offer
Submitted by Ben Henshaw on Wed, 04/07/2010 - 5:44amIn this post we will defend the premise that only a universal provisional atonement view can maintain the integrity of God in the gospel offer and the universal command to repent. The Bible is clear that God commands all men everywhere to repent (Acts 17:30). But what is the basis for this repentance? Repentance means for us to change our minds and hearts from one direction to another. With regard to spiritual repentance it is a total spiritual reorientation. It is coupled with faith in Scripture because it is essentially the same motion of turning away from sin towards God viewed from two different perspectives. Repentance focuses on the turning from and faith focuses on the turning to, or the end goal of repentance, faith in Christ (Heb. 6:1; Acts 3:19, 26). So when the Bible says that God commands all men everywhere to repent, it is speaking of spiritual repentance which issues in faith towards God in Christ.
Provisional Atonement Part 2: Provision is Consistent With Foreknowledge
Submitted by Ben Henshaw on Tue, 04/06/2010 - 7:08amAs we noted in our last post [Part 1] Arminians see the atonement of Jesus Christ as being provisional in nature. Not only is the atonement provisional but it is more specifically provisional in Christ Jesus. Only those who come to partake of Christ partake also of the atonement available through union with Him. Since we come to be in union with Christ by faith we also come to benefit from the atoning benefits of His blood through faith (Rom. 3:25). The atonement is one of those gracious spiritual blessings that we come to share in when we are united to Christ by faith and is probably foundational to all of the other spiritual blessings in Christ (Eph. 1:3, 7).
Infralapsarian (Moderate) Calvinism's Doctrine of Unconditional Election
Submitted by WilliamBirch on Wed, 03/31/2010 - 8:35amDid God create some souls for hell and others for heaven, as John Calvin1 insisted? Calvinist C. H. Spurgeon, quoted from Kenneth D. Keathley, Professor of Theology and Dean of Graduate Studies at Southeastern Baptist Theological Seminary in Wake Forest, North Carolina, in his book, Salvation and Sovereignty: A Molinist Approach, writes the following: "Do you believe that God created man and arbitrarily, sovereignly -- it is the same thing -- created that man, with no other intention, than that of damning him? Made him, and yet, for no other reason than that of destroying him forever? Well, if you can believe it, I pity you, that is all I can say: you deserve pity, that you should think so meanly of God, whose mercy endureth forever."2
Does the Atonement Actually Save Anyone?
Submitted by WilliamBirch on Thu, 03/25/2010 - 10:18amCalvinist James White insists that the message Christians should give to the lost is that Jesus does not "merely try" to save them but that He "saves them perfectly" (Youtube video link, beginning at 28:15). By "perfectly" White means that God has by a mere decree unconditionally chosen to save (regenerate and bring to faith) certain of the lost and unconditionally damned the rest of mankind. This is not hyper-Calvinism or some form of philosophical-theological, first-century pagan fatalism. This is basic, Classical Calvinism.
Nevermind that the apostle Paul, through the inspiration of the Holy Spirit, instructed a young pastor named Timothy that God our Savior "desires all men to be saved and to come to a knowledge of the truth" (1 Timothy 2:4 NASB). Statements throughout the New Testament such as this one must experience a vast change in prima facie meaning in order to support Calvinism.
Some Further Reflections on the Nature of the Sealing of the Holy Spirit in Eph. 1:13 and 4:30
Submitted by Ben Henshaw on Mon, 03/22/2010 - 6:35amThe quoted material below comes from my post, Perseverance of the Saints Part 12: Examining Passages Commonly Appealed to by the Advocates of Unconditional Eternal Security. The sections in between these quotes are further reflections and exegetical notes on the quoted material.
- In Him, you also, after listening to the message of truth, the gospel of your salvation- having also believed, you were sealed in Him with the Holy Spirit of promise, who is given as a pledge of our inheritance, with a view to the redemption of God’s own possession, to the praise of His glory….Do not grieve the Holy Spirit of God, by whom you were sealed for the day of redemption (Eph. 1:13, 14; 4:30).
Kenneth Keathley and the Doctrine of Overcoming Grace
Submitted by WilliamBirch on Thu, 03/18/2010 - 6:40amKenneth D. Keathley, Professor of Theology and Dean of Graduate Studies at Southeastern Baptist Theological Seminary in Wake Forest, North Carolina, has completed his latest book, Salvation and Sovereignty: A Molinist Approach, published by B&H Academic. Today's post will interact with his chapter on Overcoming Grace (pp. 101-37).
From the back cover of the book, one reads the following: "Salvation and Sovereignty begins with author Kenneth Keathley asking, 'What shall a Christian do who is convinced of certain central tenets of Calvinism but not its corollaries [conclusions]?' Like many, he suspects the usual Calvinist understanding of sovereignty (that God is the cause of all things) is not sustained by the biblical witness as a whole."
Some Excellent and Concise Comments on Free Will, the Bondage of Sin, and Prevenient Grace
Submitted by Ben Henshaw on Wed, 03/17/2010 - 8:20amOverall, the following comments by F. Leroy Forlines are an excellent representation of the Arminian viewpoint:
“Freedom of will is a freedom within a framework of possibilities. It is not absolute freedom. Man cannot be God. He cannot be an angel. The freedom of a human being is in the framework of the possibilities provided by human nature. Also, influences brought to bear on the will have a bearing on the framework of possibilities.