A Letter from a Young Christian Reader of Against Calvinism written by Roger E Olson, PhD I recently received this e-mail letter. It’s the best recommendation of Against Calvinism I’ve read yet. I hope you,…
Arminianism
What Arminians Find Offensive About the “Doctrines of Grace”
What Arminians Find Offensive About the “Doctrines of Grace” written by SEA member Roy Ingle Very often I read or hear Calvinism referred to as “the doctrines of grace.” I am not sure when or…
William Brennan, “John Wesley’s Experimental Religion and Evangelism in a Postmodern Age”
John Wesley’s Experimental Religion and Evangelism in a Postmodern Age
written by William Brennan (PhD cand)
EVANGELISM AND THE POSTMODERN CONDITION
That postmodernity is a hazy concept, ill-defined and worse-employed, is by now a sad truism, only worsened by its many variants and broad influence over multiple areas of contemporary life and thought. It must be acknowledged, though, with however much reserve, that there is such a thing as postmodernity which is not only pervasive within the philosophy, ethics, and aesthetics of our day, but which also has deep roots at the popular, cultural level. And though the Church need never capitulate to predominant cultural models, she must ever ask: how will we preach the Gospel of Jesus Christ to this generation? When this question is asked with reference to this present generation, the phenomena of cultural postmodernity—however it is to be more precisely defined—cannot be ignored.
Calvinism and the God-as-Author Analogy
Calvinism and the God-as-author analogy written by Roger E Olson, PhD One of my faithful visitors here pointed me to the following recent essay posted to the Desiring God blog by one Joe Rigney (professor…
John M. Wiley, “Distinguishing Classical Arminianism from Semi-Pelagianism: An Attempt to Liberate Jacobus Arminius from Fallacious Claims and Popular Misconceptions about His Theology”
Please click on the attachment to view: John M. Wiley, “Distinguishing Classical Arminianism from Semi-Pelagianism: An Attempt to Liberate Jacobus Arminius from Fallacious Claims and Popular Misconceptions about His Theology.” This is a graduate paper…
Dr. Vic Reasoner, “Golden Chain or Iron Padlock”
Click on the attachment: Golden Chain or Iron Padlock (Reasoner)
John Wesley, “The Question, ‘What Is an Arminian?’ Answered by a Lover of Free Grace”
(Taken from http://new.gbgm-umc.org/umhistory/wesley/arminian/) The Question, “What Is an Arminian?” Answered by a Lover of Free Grace by John Wesley 1. To say, “This man is an Arminian,” has the same effect on many hearers, as…
Robert E. Picirilli, “Foreknowledge, Freedom, and the Future”
Robert E. Picirilli, “Foreknowledge, Freedom, and the Future”, Journal of the Evangelical Theological Society 43/2 (June 2000) 259–271.
Roger Olson, “Don’t Hate Me Because I’m Arminian”
Roger Olson, “Don’t Hate Me Because I’m Arminian” “Don’t Hate Me Because I’m Arminian” by Roger Olson (published in Christianity Today [September 6, 1999])
The Problem with Deterministic Arguments
Some time ago, I had a conversation with a brother named Stephen over at SBC Tomorrow, in which we discussed philosophical determinism and the role it plays in discussions of divine election. I had been…
Contradiction Alert: Calvinist Scholar John Feinberg on Ethics
One of our members, named Robert, recently made some comments in our private discussion group about an interview that Justin Taylor did with Calvinist scholar John Feinberg, pointing out how they contradict Calvinist doctrine and draw on Arminian doctrine when they talk about ethics. His comments have been edited a little and pasted in below:
I listened to Justin Taylor’s recently posted interview with John Feinberg and heard some real contradictions between Feinberg’s views in the area of ethics and his views on compatibilism/soft determinism.
To set the stage, John Feinberg is a Calvinist who calls himself a
soft determinist/compatibilist and he presented the Calvinist view in
the famous PREDESTINATION & FREE WILL: FOUR VIEWS OF DIVINE
SOVEREIGNTY & HUMAN FREEDOM (other contributors included Pinnock,
Some Good News: New Barna Study Reveals that There Is No Significant Growth in Numbers Towards Calvinism among Church Leaders
For the past decade, the well known polling organization, the Barna Group, has been tracking the numbers of pastors who identify their churches as “Calvinist or Reformed” vs. “Wesleyan or Arminian”. The report of their…
Why I Am an Arminian, Part 2 of 2
This is the second half of a paper, the first half of which attempted to make a positive case for Arminianism. This second half deals with objections that Calvinists have traditionally made to Arminianism, and offers answers to those objections from the Arminian point of view.
Objections from Reformed Theology
The above outline [in part 1] of the Arminian position purposely makes its case without reference to the Calvinistic objections that have been made to the various points. A summary of these follows. (It should go without saying that this section does not pretend to give an orderly or complete presentation of the Calvinist position. It merely responds point by point to the Arminian position represented above.) Letters in parentheses refer to the acronym TULIP, and thus to the various points of “five point” Calvinism.
Why I Am an Arminian, Part 1 of 2
The following paper is meant to be an overview of what I believe with regard to the doctrine of Divine election. The first half, contained in this post, will explain why Arminianism–the rejection of unconditional divine election of specific individuals to salvation–is so often defended only in reaction to the Calvinist position, and will attempt to make a positive, Biblical case for Arminianism, without specific reference to the Calvinist position. The second half of the paper will discuss the Calvinist critique of Arminianism and attempt to respond to that critique from the Arminian point of view. The paper as a whole is merely intended to be an overview, not an exhaustive examination of the issues that surround divine election; a close exegetical study of the Biblical passages that bear upon divine election is necessary to decide upon one position or another.
The Calvinist View of Foreknowledge Makes God the Cause and Author of All Sin and Evil
One of our members commented concisely and incisively in our private discussion group (slightly revised here): In Calvinism God cannot see into the future. He only knows what will happen because He will make it…
The Arminian vs. Calvinist Recall Notice
One of our members drew attention to a clever comparison of God’s offer in the gospel to a manufacturer issuing a recall notice. It struck me as Arminian in orientation. So, I thought it would…
Holding Firmly, I Am Held (An Arminian Approach to Eternal Security)
Holding Firmly, I Am Held (An Arminian Approach to Eternal Security) written by SEA member, Roy Ingle There are two things we really want to know about being a Christian. First, we want to know…
“Arminians Despise the Sovereignty of God”
written by SEA member, Roy Ingle I saw this posted on Twitter and have received this complaint before. The reasoning is that in Calvinism God is allowed to be sovereign so that all that comes…
Corporate Election Quotes
The following is a series of important excerpts from some of the best scholarly works espousing the corporate view of election. Taken together, these quoted sections give a very detailed description of the fundamental elements…
Steve Witzki, “James Arminius–The Security of the Believer and the Possibility of Apostasy”
James Arminius (The Security of the Believer)_0
