Roger E. Olson, “Is God’s Love Limited to the Elect? Rebutting a Calvinist Challenge to the Gospel” from Enrichment Journal: http://enrichmentjournal.ag.org/201203/201203_044_limited_atonement.cfm.
Atonement
Did Jesus Reveal the “Who” in “World” in John 3:14-16?
Did Jesus Reveal the “Who” in “World” in John 3:14-16?
There is a lot of debate between Arminians and Calvinists about the meaning of the word, “world” in the NT, as it relates to who Christ died for. Calvinists believe that it refers only to the elect among the various people groups in the world. Arminians, on the other hand, believe that it means what it says, that it literally refers to every individual in the world, from Adam to the very last person to be born.
This disagreement has continued for hundreds of years, but I believe we have before us a unifying passage of Scripture that settles the debate. I believe Jesus Himself reveals who He is referring to when He speaks of the world in John 3:16. Before He states the beloved promise in that verse, He takes us back to the Old Testament where He makes a comparison between an incident that took place there, to the cross He would die on:
Defining Arminian Soteriology
The purpose of this post is to define Arminian soteriology. Arminianism in general is the views of James Arminius. Of course, Arminius’ views span more then just salvation. They include the freewill of man, God’s…
Bruce A. Ware, “Extent of the Atonement”
Ware is a 4 point Calvinist who affirms unlimited atonement. This overview of the issue of the extent of the atonement is useful for its arguments against limited atonement (see the attachment). But beware of…
Focus on the Family’s John 3:16 video
In celebration of Good Friday and Easter, we felt it best to review a well known text from some young, insightful exegetes.
1 Corinthians 15 and the Claims of Calvinism
Calvinism as a system claims that God reprobated a large segment of mankind so that they can never be saved. [1] It further claims that the atonement is for this reason limited only to the…
Provisional Atonement Part 1: Dealing With John Owen’s Arminian Dilemma
I lifted this from Jeff Paton’s website. He gives an answer based on his commitment to the “sacrificial” view of the atonement, which allows him to bypass the force of Owen’s argument. As I have…
Quotable Quotes – Richard Baxter, If Christ Died For All, Why Are All Not Saved?
Taken from The Practical Works of Richard Baxter, p. 455 “It is… proved by the sufferings of his Son, that God takes no pleasure in the death of the wicked. Would he have ransomed them…
World Means World: Even a Child Understands This
This is a great commercial that was broadcast recently during an NFL game half-time show. It shows that World means World. Listen to the words of these children as they accurately quote and interpret God’s Word: Focus On The Family, “John 3:16”
Scot McKnight, “For and Against Calvinism 10”
Follow the link to view part 10 of distinguished NT scholar Scot McKnight’s review of the books For Calvinism (by Michael Horton) and Against Calvinism (by Roger Olson): “For and Against Calvinism 10”.
Scot McKnight, “For and Against Calvinism 7”
Follow the link to view part 7 of distinguished NT scholar Scot McKnight’s review of the books For Calvinism (by Michael Horton) and Against Calvinism (by Roger Olson): “For and Against Calvinism 7”.
James White, Roger Olson & 1 Timothy 2:4
In a recent blog post (10/13/2011), James White took issue with Roger Olson’s references to 1 Timothy 2:4 in his new book, Against Calvinism. How does White’s view stand up when further scrutinized?
Calvinism’s Bad Check
or: The 5-Pointer’s Impossibility of a Sincere Gospel Offer to All Men
A Brief Overview of Arminian Theology (A Presentation to the SharperIron Community)
The SharperIron website (SI) recently contacted SEA regarding presenting Arminianism to the SI community. The motivation for this request is quite valid and a point not often made – many people oppose Calvinism without providing…
Q&A on 2 Timothy 2:25, 26
Question: I am wondering if you can provide, or point me to, an Arminian exegesis of 2 Tim. 2.25-6? This scripture is often used by Calvinists as a counter to 1 Tim. 2.3, as well as to advance the idea that God has two wills, one of universal love to mankind, another more narrow in which He controls who will and won’t repent unto salvation (the latter underscored by 2 Tim. 2.25-26). I am looking for a good Arminian analysis here.
Answer: I don’t see anything in these verses that should lead one to the conclusion that the repentance spoken of here is irresistibly “given” or “granted”, nor that this is meant to convey the idea that God arbitrarily decides to cause some to repent while denying repentance to others (which would, as you point out, contradict Paul’s statement in 1 Tim. 2:4 that God desires all to be saved and come to the knowledge of the truth).
The Validity and Urgency of the Altar Call
In recent years, many Calvinists have severely critiqued the altar call, claiming that it is an Arminian innovation designed to manipulate people into making a faith commitment. While many an altar call may indeed be…
Arminianism, Calvinism, Open Theism & Universalism
Here are some thoughts of SEA members on the relationship between Arminianism, Calvinism, Open Theism, and Universalism. Sometimes Calvinists accuse Arminianism of being the stepping stone to Open Theism or Universalism, but is this accusation…
Atonement – Under Attack
[Editor’s note: This review is of the book, Gabriel N. E. Fluhrer (ed.), Atonement (Phillipsburg: P & R Publishing, 2010).] This slim collection of essays is rooted in the proposition that the doctrine of atonement…
A Minor Change to Our Statement of Faith
We have made a minor change to our statement of faith (http://evangelicalarminians.org/sof), which must be affirmed to join the society and which members must continue to affirm to remain in the society. This change has been made to make the statement clearer and smoother, and to underscore our belief in unlimited atonement, which is nonetheless already addressed elsewhere in the statement.
In article 3 of our statement of faith, we have changed this affirmation about Jesus:
- He lived a sinless life, dying on the cross as a substitute and sacrifice for sinners
to this affirmation:
- He lived a sinless life and died on the cross as a substitutionary sacrifice for all sinners
All members of the society must agree with the revised statement of faith to remain in the society.
Praise Jesus for dying as a substitute and sacrifice for all sinners! What love and grace!!
The Fallacies of Calvinist Apologetics
Related Fallacies:
Oversimplification
Non-Sequitur
Slippery Slope
“The choices are not between Calvinism and Arminianism; it’s between Calvinism and universalism. Arminianism is a self-contradictory mess that can never defend itself.” – James White
This is a favorite rhetorical jab of many Calvinists, but is in fact one of the more obvious fallacies they often employ. The logic behind it is simple and can be summed up with the statement:
“If Christ’s death saves, and Christ died for everyone, then everyone would be saved.”
Seems pretty easy, right?
Problems with this logic
Turns out the simplicity of the argument is its weakness, because it masks a hidden difference in underlying assumptions. The critical distinction lies in the first part of the sentence, “…Christ’s death saves….”
The differences in viewpoint on atonement
Recent Posts
Simon Peter Sutherland, “Calvinistic Determinism Refuted”
H. Wayne Johnson, “Disappointed with God’s Sovereignty? You May Need a Dose of Kingdom Eschatology”
Roy Ingle, “But I Want To Sin”
Video: David Pallmann, “A Case For Free Will”
