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”.
Election
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).
Paul Washer’s – “Doctrine” of Election: An Arminian Critique
I have been frequently referred to Paul Washer’s video discussion, “Doctrine” of Election. I found the video transcript and decided it would be beneficial to interact with this apparently influential accounting of Calvinist election. The…
John Piper: Are There Two Wills in God? A Response
John Piper’s chapter, “Are There Two Wills in God?”, found on his website Desiring God, and in the book Still Sovereign: Contemporary Perspectives on Election, Foreknowledge, and Grace (Grand Rapids: Baker Books, 2000), seeks to…
Wesley on Acts 13:48
At first, I wasn’t a big fan of Wesley’s interpretation of Acts 13:48, but lately I have come to admire it’s simplicity. Wesley doesn’t get into technical debates about passive vs. middle voice, disputes about translating tasso as ordain vs. dispose or discussions about reflexive meanings with and without the reflexive pronoun. He is just straight and to the point. Here’s the passage and Wesley’s comments:
Recent Posts
Steve Lemke on Irresistible Grace and Jesus’ Lament Over Jerusalem
Mark K. Olson: Famous Sermons of John Wesley 7: Salvation by Faith
How Do You Deal with the Limited Atonement Argument that If Jesus Paid the Penalty for All, Then People Sent to Hell Would Be Paying the Penalty a Second Time?
Roy Ingle, “Preach Perseverance”
