The Southern Baptist Convention has been perhaps the greatest means by which the Gospel has been presented to the world, at least during the history of the United States. No other Protestant denomination has achieved…
Calvinism
Edwards on Common and Philosophical Necessity
Edwards’ arguments in part V.III and part V.IV Edwards splits necessity into two categories: natural and moral. Natural necessity relates to our actions, moral necessity relates to our wills. If an act is naturally necessary,…
The Biblical Doctrines of Grace (Part Two)
For the Calvinist, the “doctrines of grace” is a synonym for TULIP theology. So, do the Biblical Doctrines of Grace of Arminianism also follow a system, such as TULIP? Arminianism proper has not historically employed an acronym as the one used for nearly four centuries by Calvinists.
Let it be stated, however, that if it had not been for the followers of Arminius (the Remonstrants) presenting their five arguments to the state to be approved as orthodox consent, then the TULIP would have never been constructed. And the original order of the Remonstrants was Conditional Election (to those in Christ), Unlimited Atonement, Total Depravity, Resistible Grace, and Conditional Perseverance.
If the Calvinists had strictly followed the Arminian system, it would have spelled ULTIP, which is a bad acronym, considering Ultip is not a word. Worse off, the Arminian acronym would have been CUTRC. The best sense which we could make out of that construct is TRUCC, also not a word.
The Biblical Doctrines of Grace (Part One)
The word grace, from Genesis 6:8 to Revelation 22:21, is a word meaning “graciousness of manner or act” (literally), or “the divine influence upon the heart, and its reflection in the life” (figuratively).1
Grace is a special favor bestowed upon an undeserving individual. Thus when a Christian minister quotes Paul as saying, “For it is by grace you have been saved” (Eph. 2:8), he or she means that the one saved was saved not by merit but by grace, undeserved favor. This is how to use the word grace biblically. In this we do not go beyond its clear meaning, nor do we fall short of what the Bible teaches.
Christ Died for those who Ultimately Perish – Part 3/3
This post is an excerpt from the book review of Death of Death in the Death of Christ. 2 Peter 2:1 But there were false prophets also among the people, even as there shall be…
Christ died for those who ultimately perish – Part 2/3
This post is an excerpt from the book review of Death of Death in the Death of Christ. This argument is based on Judas and the Lord’s supper. Luke 22: 17And he took the cup,…
Christ died for those who ultimately perish – Part 1/3
This post is an excerpt from the book review of Death of Death in the Death of Christ. There are several passages of the word of God that teach that Christ died for those that…
Necessity of the Divine Will
Everything is about God in one way shape or form. So my biggest problem with Edwards’ arguments regards the nature of God. Outline of Edwards’ Arguments About the Necessity of God’s Will – Part IV.VII…
Arminius’ “Declaration of Sentiments”
The 400th anniversary of Arminius’ “Declaration of Sentiments” occurred last week. We missed the opportunity to mark the anniversary on its exact day here at our site. But it is still worth drawing attention to…
Christ Died
This post is an excerpt from the book review of Death of Death in the Death of Christ. Owen’s Argument 15: P1: The biblical expression “Christ died for us” means Christ’s death substituted for the…
Departure from Calvinism
I grew up in a Southern Baptist church that was focused on the gospel. The issues of Calvinism and Arminianism never came up. I had never even heard that there was a debate until 1998…
Imagine if…
Sometimes theology can make us frustrated, and the Calvinism / Arminian controversy has been making Christians frustrated for centuries. But this can be a good thing if it drives us closer to God in seeking…
Justification by Faith
This post is an excerpt from the book review of Death of Death in the Death of Christ.
The doctrine of justification by faith is the teaching that God pronounces sinners, who are believers, not guilty, based on what Christ has done. God counts our faith as righteousness, based on Christ.
Rom 3:24 Being justified freely by his grace through the redemption that is in Christ Jesus:
Rom 3:25 Whom God hath set forth to be a propitiation through faith in his blood, to declare his righteousness for the remission of sins that are past, through the forbearance of God;
Rom 4:4 Now to him that worketh is the reward not reckoned of grace, but of debt.
Rom 4:5 But to him that worketh not, but believeth on him that justifieth the ungodly, his faith is counted for righteousness.
Calvinist Humility
The Tale of the Great King There once was the Great King who ruled his land with strength and confidence. Throughout all the land, he maintained peace with an iron hand and a calculating mind.…
The Love of God and Calvinism’s Election (Part Two)
On the heels of my recent post, I am still vying for the universality of the love of God for all people. Again, Fritz Guy writes, “If the preeminent characteristic of God is love, and…
The Love of God and Calvinism’s Election (Part One)
The third verse of the hymn The Love of God reads as follows: Could we with ink the ocean fill, And were the skies of parchment made, Were every stalk on earth a quill, And…
Thomas Ralston on Freedom of the Will Part 1: Introducing the Controversy
Thomas Ralston was an early Methodist theologian. The following is taken from his Elements of Divinity (Wesleyan Heritage Collection CD). My comments will be in bold print.
The great question in this controversy is not whether a man can will “as he pleases,” for that is the same as to ask whether he can will as he does will. But the question is, Can a man will, without being constrained to will as he does, by something extrinsic to himself acting efficiently upon him? This is the real question on which depends the freedom of the mind in willing.
Why Would God Become Angry At What He Ordained?
I asked this question on a discussion board when a Calvinist rightly pointed out that the LORD gets angry at the sinful actions of fallen men. There is no doubt that sin angers the LORD. The anger of the LORD is expressed in numerous passages yet this truth causes me to ask the Calvinist “why”? How is it that an omniscient God could possibly get angry at what He supposedly (in the Calvinist tradition) causes or ordains? If God issues a commandment that He has purposefully ordained to be broken, is it not an expression of hypocrisy to become angry at what is His very design? I do not think the Calvinist can address this inquiry in an honest manner. In fact I know from my experiences with a few that the response is to engage in an ad hominem fallacy and accuse me of presenting a straw man albeit unidentified. Contrary to the diversions, the question I pose is valid and crucial to understanding the religious philosophy of Calvinism.
Romans 3.10-18: A Midrash
What did Paul mean when he made the statements that there is “none who seeks after God,” or that man’s “throat is an open tomb”? (Rom. 3.10-18) The majority of Calvinists are convinced that Paul…
The Sovereignty, Providence, and Will of God
The subject of the Will of God was a topic of interest for James Arminius. Many have wondered if he was a Molinist. Richard Muller acknowledges that Arminius read from Molina,1 but Arminius never claimed to be a Molinist.
However, Arminius left in his writings the notion that perhaps he was at least influenced by Molina’s pattern of thought on what God knows and what God has willed according to that knowledge. Muller noted
- The divine knowledge of possibility, since it is knowledge of what things can come into existence, is also a knowledge of the way in which all possibles could exist ideally or perfectly, without defect and a knowledge of impossibility as well. Arminius even argues an order in the divine knowledge of possibles. Thus God knows, first, ‘what things can exist by his own primary act.’