Free Will

William Lane Craig on Romans 9

, , 3 Comments

Here are some excellent comments on Romans 9 from Dr. William Lane Craig. (This is an excerpt from Dr. Craig’s answer to a question from an atheist, taken from http://www.reasonablefaith.org/site/News2?page=NewsArticle&id=6675.)

[L]et’s talk about Paul’s doctrine of election in Romans. I want to share with you a perspective on Paul’s teaching that I think you’ll find very illuminating and encouraging. Typically, as a result of Reformed theology, we have a tendency to read Paul as narrowing down the scope of God’s election to the very select few, and those not so chosen can’t complain if God in His sovereignty overlooks them. I think this is a fundamental misreading of the chapter which makes very little sense in the context of Paul’s letter.

Read Post →

Is Faith a Work?

, , Comment Closed

Is Faith a Work?

This post is written by SEA member, Roy Ingle

In Romans 4:4-5 we read the following:

4 Now to the one who works, his wages are not counted as a gift but as his due. 5 And to the one who does not work but believes in him who justifies the ungodly, his faith is counted as righteousness.

Read Post →

Do Arminians Believe in the Sovereignty of God?

, , No Comment

Do Arminians believe in the sovereignty of God? If one has only ever read Calvinistic books, the answer would seem to be a no-brainer, for according to most Calvinists, an Arminian is by definition someone who denies God’s sovereignty. For example, notable Calvinist exponent Edwin H. Palmer (1922 – 1980) explicitly declared that “the Arminian denies the sovereignty of God”.1

Funny though it may seem, there are even those who reject the tenets of Calvinism, yet try and take a middle road between Calvinism and Arminianism. These so-called ‘non-Calvinists’ are usually known by the maxim, “I am neither a Calvinist nor an Arminian, but simply a Bible-believer.” I should know; I used to be one.

Read Post →

Arminius on The Effects of the Sin of Our First Parents

, , No Comment

Arminius on The Effects of the Sin of Our First Parents

provided by SEA member Roy Ingle

DISPUTATION XXXI

ON THE EFFECTS OF THE SIN OF OUR FIRST PARENTS

I. The first and immediate effect of the sin which Adam and Eve committed in eating of the forbidden fruit, was the offending of the Deity, and guilt — Offense, which arose from the prohibition imposed — Guilt, from the sanction added to it, through the denunciation of punishment, if they neglected the prohibition.

II. From the offending of the Deity, arose his wrath on account of the violated commandment. In this violation, occur three causes of just anger:

(1.) The disparagement of his power or right.

(2.) A denial of that towards which God had an inclination.

(3.) A contempt of the divine will intimated by the command.

Read Post →

Arminius on the Will of God

, , No Comment

Arminius on the will of God

provided by SEA member, Roy Ingle

DISPUTATION XVIII

ON THE WILL OF GOD

I. The will of God is spoken of in three ways: First, the faculty itself of willing. Secondly, the act of willing. Thirdly, the object willed. The first signification is the principal and proper one, the two others are secondary and figurative.

II. It may be thus described: It is the second faculty of the life of God, flowing through the understanding from the life that has an ulterior tendency; by which faculty God is borne towards a known good — towards a good, because this is an adequate object of every will — towards a known good, not only with regard to it as a being, but likewise as a good, whether in reality or only in the act of the divine understanding. Both, however, are shown by the understanding. But the evil which is called that of culpability, God does not simply and absolutely will.

Read Post →

The Toymaker

, , Comment Closed

Though not a member of SEA, Rev DeCrastos gives an interesting illustration regarding God’s desire to have a relationship with His creation. THE TOYMAKER by Rev. DeCrastos It had been a long day, and the…

Read Post →

Seek Me and Live!

, , Comment Closed

This is what the LORD says to the house of Israel: “Seek Me and live” Amos 5:4 This passage comes at the end of an indignant tirade on behalf of God. Amos, up to this…

Read Post →

Refutation of Jonathan Edwards

, , Comment Closed

Following up on Roger Olson’s post about Jonathan Edwards, I would like to draw attention to some resources we have that refute Edwards’ influential Calvinistic views on free will. First, we have a list of…

Read Post →

Gregory Koukl, “A Good Reason for Evil”

, , Comment Closed

Taken from: http://www.str.org/site/News2?page=NewsArticle&id=5093

A Good Reason for Evil

What is evil? Could it have a purpose? Here is a view of evil from an adult rather than a childish perspective.

By: Gregory Koukl

The first step in answering the problem of evil is this: We’ve got to get clear on what this thing “evil” actually is. It does seem to follow that if God created all things, and evil is a thing, then God created evil. This is a valid syllogism. If the premises are true, then the conclusion would be true as well.

The problem with that line of reasoning is that the second premise is not true. Evil is not a thing. The person who probably explained it best was St. Augustine, and then Thomas Aquinas picked up on his solution. Others since them have argued that evil has no ontological status in itself.

Read Post →

James Emery White, “The Joker”

, , Comment Closed

Dr. James Emery White considers God’s relationship to evil in light of the deadly shooting that took place at a showing of The Dark Knight Rises in Aurora, Colorado: http://www.christianity.com/blogs/JWhite/11674264/?utm_source=Christian%20Living%20Connection%20-%20Christianity.com&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=07/24/2012/

Read Post →

Did Jesus Reveal the “Who” in “World” in John 3:14-16?

, , No Comment

Did Jesus Reveal the “Who” in “World” in John 3:14-16?

There is a lot of debate between Arminians and Calvinists about the meaning of the word, “world” in the NT, as it relates to who Christ died for. Calvinists believe that it refers only to the elect among the various people groups in the world. Arminians, on the other hand, believe that it means what it says, that it literally refers to every individual in the world, from Adam to the very last person to be born.

This disagreement has continued for hundreds of years, but I believe we have before us a unifying passage of Scripture that settles the debate. I believe Jesus Himself reveals who He is referring to when He speaks of the world in John 3:16. Before He states the beloved promise in that verse, He takes us back to the Old Testament where He makes a comparison between an incident that took place there, to the cross He would die on:

Read Post →