The fifth point of Calvinism is Perseverance of the Saints. The Westminster Confession defines Perseverance of the Saints as: They, whom God hath accepted in his Beloved, effectually called, and sanctified by his Spirit, can…
Calvinism
What is Reprehensible about Calvinism
According to The Oxford American College Dictionary, the word reprehensible means “deserving censure or condemnation.” While there are aspects regarding Calvinism which are orthodox, overall I find its analysis of God’s character, and at times…
Chrysostom and Accounting for Differences
Calvinists sometimes argue that the fact that some people are good and others bad is evidence that God predetermines all things. The Calvinist arguments run down two distinct tracts: 1) a forking maneuver and 2)…
Sin & God’s Sovereignty
Here are some edited comments, short but sweet, from a member of our private discussion group:
The following quote is by RC Sproul, SR.
“Every sin is an act of cosmic treason, a futile attempt to dethrone God in His sovereign authority.”
No matter how long I’ve been involved in the A vs. C debate, I absolutely cannot reconcile in my mind how God ISN’T the author of sin if Calvinism is true given Calvinism’s doctrine of exhaustive divine determinism.
In turn, this quote by Sproul would be false if Calvinism is true, since our sins would reinforce God’s sovereignty.
Calvinism and Evangelistic Method
In my Evangelism class at The College at Southeastern, composed of both seminary and college students, the professor had the class form groups of four in order for each group to construct a gospel tract, each group having its own leader (chosen by date of birth). The leader of our group was taking advice from the other members and was very open to suggestions. When he declared that we were nearly finished, except for a few statements which needed to be nuanced, I responded, “Wait, but we have yet to inform the person what to do with this information.” He responded, “Well, I’m against anything like ‘pray this prayer after me.'” I agreed and said, “Is that our only option? We must tell the person to trust in Christ.” He was not fond of that idea.
More On the Authorship of Sin (Part 2)
This is the second of a series on the authorship of sin that came about as a result of discussions and observations on this post. Part 1 and the first section of this post address Calvinist claims that Arminians “also make God the author of sin.”
Conflating Origins
When discussing authorship implying the origination of sin, the argument inevitably arises, “but if sin originates in people, people still originate from God, therefore sin originates from God as well!” Not quite. Beings capable of sin originated from within God, it doesn’t follow that their rebellion itself came from within Him.
More On the Authorship of Sin
[Editor’s note: This post was originally posted at http://arminianperspectives.wordpress.com/, so any time references are no longer applicable.]
A few weeks ago I wrote on a fallacy common to Calvinist apologetics, namely, that they often claim that while they teach exhaustive determinism, they still claim that God isn’t the author of sin. It garnered substantially more responses than I expected. To clarify things and answer some common questions/objections, I’m putting together a synopsis of the relevant arguments (this is part 1).
Moral problems?
The Fallacies of Calvinist Apologetics
Related Fallacies:
Red Herring
Equivocation
“All I have tried to do here is show how clearly, succinctly and simply that Calvinism does NOT charge God with the authorship of sin and so (to employ the somewhat aggressive language of Scripture) to shut the mouths of the gainsayers. If any have a case against Calvinism, then let it be based on truth and not on falsehood and slander.” – Colin Maxwell, Do Calvinists believe and teach that God is the Author of Sin?
Colin Maxwell put up the page linked to above showing various quotes from prominent Calvinist sources indicating that they do not believe or teach that God is the author of sin. His point apparently, judging from the content and page’s title, is to stop non-Calvinists from ‘slandering’ them by claiming they teach such a thing.
Problems with this logic
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
Our Common Enemy
I mentioned recently that Arminians and Calvinists are not enemies (even though there are people in both camps who at times disagree — or at least behave as though they disagree — with this statement).…
The Fallacies of Calvinist Apologetics
Related Fallacies:
Special Pleading (Double Standard)
Equivocation
Straw man
“Of course, this raises the question, why does their God save a person to damn him? Why not simply leave him in his unsaved state?” – Steve Hays, ‘Tender Mercies‘
To get a better view of this fallacy, let’s examine the author’s argument more fully from the analogy he gives:
Calvinist Air Safety
Some theological humor: Calvinist Air Safety
Calvinists Now Appealing to the Early Church as a Historical Witness?
This document looks through some common quotes from the Church fathers that some Calvinists have used to attempt to argue that an embryonic Calvinism existed in their thoughts. Unsurprisingly enough, a little context seems to…
Guard Your Thoughts Against Calvinism with CALVINIX!
For some good theological humor: http://tominthebox.blogspot.com/2007/02/guard-your-thoughts-against-calvinism.html.
John Goodwin Responds to John Owen and Other Calvinist Critics
This 1658 work is a lengthy rejoinder to multiple Calvinist rebuttals written against Goodwin’s Arminian magnum opus, Redemption Redeemed (1651). It includes response to John Owen’s critique. The book runs 515 pages. It has a…
Marc Monte on Limited Atonement
From a sermon delivered at his Church (Faith Baptist Church in Avon, Indiana) from 2004, Pastor Monte points out what he feels are inconsistencies in the Calvinist teaching of Limited Atonement: Update (5/9/18): Please note:…
Did You Catch the Calvinist Contradiction Alert?
Recently, we posted an analysis by one of our members (Robert) of a portion of Justin Taylor’s interview of Calvinist scholar, John Feinberg, about his book Ethics for a Brave New World. In that analysis,…
Roger Olson, Review of Whosoever Will: A Biblical-Theological Critique of Five-Point Calvinism
Orthodox Christian Matthew Gallatin on Eastern vs. Western Thinking
In the following YouTube video Matthew Gallatin, of Ancient Faith Radio, highlights the differences between Eastern and Western perceptions about God.
Jack Cottrell: Election, Calvinism, and the Bible
This was a two part essay posted on facebook by theologian Jack Cottrell. The original posts can be found here: part1,part2. Dr. Cottrell has graciously permitted us to post it here at SEA for our…
Recent Posts
X-Calvinist Corner Files: Testimony # 53
Roy Ingle, “What Scripture Says, God Says”
How Do You Interpret Isaiah 45:7?
Video: David Pallmann, “A Critique of Eternal Security Part 1: The Case For Eternal Security Considered”
