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…
Fatalism
Some Basic Thoughts on “Decisional Regeneration” From an Arminian Perspective
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.
Friday Files: Hunt – Why Simple Foreknowledge is Still Useful
In Dave Hunt’s article, Why Simple Foreknowledge is Still Useful, Hunt argues that God uses simple foreknowledge providentially. His primary case is a rock, paper scissors example: The lynchpin of my argument was a counterexample,…
Calvinism’s Exhaustive Determinism and Old Testament Scriptures
“I don’t see how anyone could read the Old Testament and not conclude that Calvinism is right,” was the assessment of one Calvinist professor recently. By “Calvinism” he meant the notion of God’s exhaustive predeterminism…
Refuting Edwards and Calvinist Compatibilism and Arguments against Genuine Free Will
We have recently added a few book length resources that advance the Arminian view of free will and take on Calvinist arguments against genuine free will, especially the view that has become the dominant view…
David P. Hunt, “Contra Hasker: Why Simple Foreknowledge Is Still Useful”
Please click on the link to view David P. Hunt, “Contra Hasker: Why Simple Foreknowledge Is Still Useful”, Journal of the Evangelical Theological Society (Sept 2009) 545-550. This article responds to William Hasker’s critique (“Why Simple…
The Lazy Man’s Guide to Refuting Edwards and Compatibilism
Recently we posted a list of resources that refute Jonathan Edwards and Calvinistic compatibilism and defend genuine free will (http://evangelicalarminians.org/refuting-edwards-and-calvinist-compatibilism-and-arguments-against-genuine-free-will/). Some of them are pretty hefty. So if you would like to get to the…
Outcomes, Foreknowledge, and Free Will
Posted by Robert (submitted to SEA on 10-21-09). I believe that I have come upon an insight that, though very simple to understand, does a great job of unlocking the supposed problem of the compatibility…
The Jealousy of God and Calvinism
Do not worship any other god, for the LORD, whose name is Jealous, is a jealous God. –Exodus 34:14 A disturbing aspect of Calvinism is how it does damage to God’s character. By improperly defining…
Interesting Links 11-01-09
The Spokane Examiner has an article entitled: A Methodist’s Take on Predestination and Free Will. (HT: Wesley Wong) Richard Coords takes a look at a dissertation that explores the potential Gnostic influence on Augustine’s doctrine…
Friday Files: Cottrell “Sovereignty and Free Will”
In Jack Cottrell’s article, Sovereignty and Free Will, he discusses the question: is there a logical incompatibility between the sovereignty of God and the free will of man? He points out that every detail may…
The Funniest Anti-Arminian Post I Have Ever Seen
OK, this post by Triablogue is so absolutely ridiculous that I find it comical and wanted to share it. Here Steve Hays actually tries to claim that Arminianism is a form of Manichaeism . Wow. Just wow. For those not familiar with what Manichaeism is, let me say that this would be akin to Michael Moore calling Republicans Communist. Seriously.
Calvin and Hobbes on Fatalism
The ever insightful Calvin: :
Free Will and the Why of Creation
Free Will and the Why of Creation
I am not a big fan of arguing for free will. In general, I think it is a given for the moral character of humanity. Even Calvinists postulate some degree of freedom through the concept of secondary agency to present some kind of intelligible concept of morality. So generally, we are debating what everyone seems to really accept when we look at it rationally. But a conversation prompted me to post the following.
An acquaintance was listening to a Youtube presentation by a popular Calvinist concerning God’s knowledge of the future and its relationship to sin and free will. The Calvinist posed the common question posed by many Calvinists, which I have paraphrased below.
- If, as Arminians believe, God infallibly knew exactly what was going to happen when he created, and knew that sin would occur as a result of his creation, then why did he create in the first place?
Albert Taylor Bledsoe, *Examination of President Edwards’ Inquiry Into the Freedom of the Will*
Please click on the link to view Albert Taylor Bledsoe, Examination of President Edwards’ Inquiry Into the Freedom of the Will (1845). Bledsoe’s takeout of Edward’s argument seems accurate.
Henry Philip Tappan, *A Review of Edwards’ Inquiry into the Freedom of the Will*
Please click on the link to view Henry Philip Tappan, A Review of Edwards’ Inquiry into the Freedom of the Will (New York: John S. Taylor, 1839). Daniel Whedon uses some of Tappan’s material and Tappan’s takeout…
Daniel D. Whedon, *The Freedom of the Will as a Basis of Human Responsibility and a Divine Government*
Wesleyan-Armininan Daniel Denison Whedon’s response to Jonathan Edwards’ The Freedom of the Will is wonderful; both complete and acurate. (link) [This links to the original book available for free viewing or download.] The book has…
Getting Past Monergism to Helping a Perishing World
For there is no difference between the Jew and the Greek: for the same Lord over all is rich unto all that call upon him. For whosoever shall call upon the name of the Lord…
Causeless Cause or Infinite Regression of Causes
Brief Outline of Edwards’ Arguments in Part II of Freedom of the Will
Edwards attacks LFW in two broad categories: causation and divine foreknowledge. Under causation, Edwards argues that LFW either leads to an infinite regression of causes or is an action without a cause. Edwards then argues that actions without causes are absurd because: 1) they would violate the common sense idea that nothing ever comes to pass without a cause, 2) then we wouldn’t be able to reason from cause to effect, 3) all proof of God’s existence is taken away, and 4) actions produced by a causeless cause would be both random and irrational, and therefore not a basis of moral accountability.
Infinite Regression of Causes or Causeless
Edwards on Responsibility
Outline of Edwards Arguments in part V.I Arminians say if something causally predetermines our choices, we are not responsible. But responsibility is not the cause of choices, it’s in the nature of choices If responsibility…
Recent Posts
Brian Abasciano, “A Brief explanation of the Arminian View of Calling”
Does 1 John 3:7-10 Show That a Believer Cannot Abandon the Faith?
William Burt Pope, “The Motive and the End of the Creation”
The Arminian Magazine Volume 14 Issue 2 (Fall 1996)
