Fatalism

St. Justin on Pre-determinism

, , Comment Closed

[This post was taken from http://gloria-deo.blogspot.com/2014/03/st-justin-on-pre-determinism.html ] For me, one great attraction of the theology of the Wesleys (and indeed other Anglicans like C.S. Lewis) is their strong assertion that we humans really are responsible agents,…

Read Post →

4 Questions 4 Calvinists

, , Comment Closed

1. If Calvinism were true, what is the point of the Final Judgment for the unbeliever? It would be like me walking into a courtroom and the judge telling me that I get a life…

Read Post →

Monergism: A Doctrine of Demons?

, , No Comment

Probably not, but this is SO MUCH FUN to say with a straight face. Let’s run with it a while and see how much mileage we get from it.

First, Calvinists claim that monergism is the only view of salvation that really glorifies God. Any non-Calvinist Christian knows this a lie, and since Satan is the Father of Lies …

Second, Calvinists claim that anyone who rejects monergism is a Pelagian at worst or a semi-Pelagian at best. Arminians know this is a false accusation, and since Satan is the Accuser of the Brethren …

Third, “Calvinism makes it difficult to recognize the difference between God and the devil except that the devil wants everyone to go to hell and God wants many to go to Hell.” (Roger Olson) Calvinists might whine they’re being misrepresented here, but Calvin himself said that election necessarily entails reprobation.

“But God isn’t sending people to Hell by withholding grace; he’s merely allowing them to go,” Calvinists might reply.

Read Post →

Book Review: Providence and the Problem of Evil by Richard Swinburne

, , Comment Closed

Please follow the link to view J.W. Wartick’s review of Richard Swinburne’s Providence and the Problem of Evil at the “Apologetics 315” website: http://www.apologetics315.com/2011/11/book-review-providence-and-problem-of.html.

Please note that the comments on the review reveal that the author mistakenly stated that Swinburne rejects the doctrine of original sin, when he actually rejects the doctrine of original guilt. SEA affirms the doctrine of original sin, and allows for differences on the issue of original guilt. For information about Arminian thinking on original sin, see Roger Olson’s post here on SEA entitled, “Arminian Teaching Regarding Original Sin” (http://evangelicalarminians.org/olson.Arminian-Teaching-Regarding-Original-Sin). It is also worth noting that Swinburne is an open theist, a position rejected by SEA.

Read Post →

Sovereignty, not Determinism

, , No Comment

Arminians have a high view of God’s sovereignty, contrary to the caricatures and lies spread of us to the contrary. As a matter of fact, we think Arminians hold to a higher view of God’s sovereignty than do Calvinists, as I was reminded recently from my Arminian brother Johnathan Pritchett. The reason our view is considered “higher” is due to the following. For an omnipotent God, strictly controlling all people is easy and effortless. Like moving chess pieces on a chessboard, the movements are swift and carefree. The pieces move wherever the overseer places them without the slightest challenge whatsoever.

Read Post →

What is Reprehensible about Calvinism

, , No Comment

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…

Read Post →

Church History vs. Calvinism (Part One)

, , No Comment

To say that any semblance of a Calvinistic framework is entirely absent from the teachings of the early Church fathers, as will become evident shortly, is an understatement. Ironically enough, however, John Calvin was not…

Read Post →

Some Basic Thoughts on “Decisional Regeneration” From an Arminian Perspective

, , No Comment

Someone asked a while back in the comments thread to one of my blog posts what I thought of “Decisional Regeneration”. Since this is a rather new label being thrown around mostly by Calvinists in a seeming attempt to mock a view of salvation conditioned by faith, it is important to address. Rather than write a new post I will just quote my initial response to the question below:

    I think “decisional regeneration” is a hard phrase to pin down and is just thrown around as a slander by Calvinists towards those who do not believe that regeneration precedes faith or that regeneration is irresistibly and unconditionally given to the “elect” alone. But there can be much more to it and so I wanted to be clear as to what your specific concern was.

    Read Post →