QUESTION: Dr. Cottrell, can you explain the meaning of Acts 13:48? It sounds very much like Calvinism to me. ANSWER: This text summarizes the response of the Gentiles to the powerful preaching of the Apostle…
Election
Calvinist Santa: The Movie
[Humor]
View here for original script
For comments, view here.
Calvinist Santa (Satire)
[Humor]
We enter Santa’s workshop. Over by the desk we see two elves talking. One is Legolass, who has been Santa’s secratary for the past 200 years, and is moving on to new work. The other is Qeebler, who is taking over the secretary resposibilities. As the scene opens, Legolass is pulling out a large scroll from his desk drawer. Let’s listen:
Scot McKnight, “For and Against Calvinism 8”
Follow the link to view part 8 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 8”.
Scot McKnight, “For and Against Calvinism 6”
Follow the link to view part 6 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 6”.
Calvinists on Hell and the Fate of Everyone Who Ever Lives
I don’t know how Calvinists do it. Like many bloggers Justin Taylor posted an obituary of Steve Jobs. Unlike many bloggers, he receives comments. Not three comments in, the post got this one: Justin Taylor…
Does Erwin Lutzer Offer False Hope to Calvinist Parents?
I hope to do a few posts on Erwin Lutzer’s [1] book, The Doctrines That Divide: A Fresh Look at the Historic Doctrines That Separate Christians. One might expect that such a book would look…
Arminius’s Analysis of Romans 9
Dutch Reformed pastor and theologian James Arminius wrote a letter to an ex-priest named Gellius Snecanus regarding the latter’s publication of several commentaries on the subject of Unconditional Election and Reprobation from Romans 9. Arminius’s…
Randal Rauser, “Calvinism and the Arbitrary Camp Director”
Please click on the link to view Randal Rauser, “Calvinism and the Arbitrary Camp Director”. [Please note that Dr. Rauser is not a member of SEA and that SEA does not necessarily endorse all of…
Randal Rauser, “Tigers, Tabbys, and God’s Special Love for His Elect”
Please click on the link to view Randal Rauser, “Tigers, Tabbys, and God’s Special Love for His Elect”. [Please note that Dr. Rauser is not a member of SEA and that SEA does not necessarily…
Randal Rauser, “The Day the Arminian Pride Parade Came to Geneva”
Randal Rauser, “The day the Arminian Pride Parade came to Geneva”
Randal Rauser, “Do Arminians Have the Same Problem as Calvinists?”
Please click on the link to view Randal Rauser, “Do Arminians Have the Same Problem as Calvinists?” [Please note that Dr. Rauser is not a member of SEA and that SEA does not necessarily endorse…
Randal Rauser, “Calvinism Preaches a God of Love, and yet…”
Please click on the link to view Randal Rauser, “Calvinism Preaches a God of Love, and yet…” [Please note that Dr. Rauser is not a member of SEA and that SEA does not necessarily endorse…
Does God Love Those Whom He Has Not Unconditionally Elected to Save?
“In this the love of God was manifested toward us, that God has sent His only begotten Son into the world, that we might live through Him” (1 John 4:9 NKJV). Does God love those…
Where Calvinism Gets Romans 9 Wrong: Who do Jacob and Esau Represent?
After posting my exegesis of Romans 9, I deemed a follow-up series of posts necessary to show why the observations made therein are relevant to the debate on the conditionality of election. Interestingly, I’ve had…
Romans 9 in Context: God’s Just Prerogative in Confounding All Confidence in the Law of Works
Introduction
Romans 9 is one of the most controversial and often-misinterpreted passages of scripture among evangelicals. Controversy, however, should not make us timid when it comes to the things of God. This inspired chapter is valuable for teaching doctrine, and should not be ignored or glossed over. At the same time, it should not be treated as a comprehensive statement of Christian soteriology by itself, for the chapter is not written in isolation, but is strongly rooted in the context of both Testaments, touching on concepts present in the other Pauline epistles and the gospels, and quoting from the Old Testament frequently. The goal of this writing is a sound, objective exegesis of Romans 9 to explain the principles therein, expound upon its themes, and to show where and how its teachings fit into the contexts of the rest of the book of Romans, and scripture as a whole. All quotes are from the NKJV unless otherwise specified.
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…
Where Calvinism Gets Romans 9 Wrong: Prerogative Equals Unconditionality
Continuing with the series on Romans 9, we’ll now address the issue of God’s prerogative in saving who He wishes and how Calvinists often misinterpret its implications. God’s Prerogative Reaffirmed When speaking to zealous Calvinists,…
Cleveland Fans and Corporate Election
For he chose us in him before the creation of the world to be holy and blameless in his sight. (Eph 1:4 – bold mine) There is much rejoicing in Cleveland today. Cav fans provide…
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).
