Tom McCall and Keith Stanglin’s article S. M. BAUGH AND THE MEANING OF FOREKNOWLEDGE: ANOTHER LOOK reviews Baugh’s arguments that the meaning of foreknowledge in the NT renders “impossible” the “Arminian notion of ‘foreseen faith’.…
Free Will
Monergism, Synergism, and Arminianism
It is often charged by Calvinists that Arminians believe that man must work with God to procure their salvation. Man must make a move toward God and then God will make a move toward them.…
Arminius (and Arminians) on Monergism vs. Synergism
Arminius’s comments are presented here in the first person, as though he were addressing you personally.
On the issue of Free Will, Grace, and Synergism, let me ask, “What liberty does the will have in a sinful state?” I distinguished between five kinds of liberty as applied to the will: freedom from control of one who commands, freedom from the government of a superior, freedom from necessity, freedom from sin and its dominion, and freedom from misery. The first two apply only to God; the last, to man, but only before the fall. As for freedom from necessity, it is the very essence of the will. Without it, the will would not be the will.
Let this be distinguished from Pelagianism. I say that the will which is free from necessity may not be free from sin. That is the point in question. Is there within man a freedom of will from sin and its dominion, and how far does it extend? Or rather, what are the powers of the whole man to understand, to will, and to do that which is good? The question must be further restricted to spiritual good. The question, then, is briefly: What is the power of free will in fallen man to perform spiritual good?
Paul Copan, “Taking Calvinism Too Far: R.C. Sproul Jr.
In his book Almighty Over All (Baker, 1999), R.C. Sproul Jr. makes some controversial statements—ones that appear to be sub-biblical. What tipped me off to this was hearing a paper presentation at a conference in April in…
Friday Files: Benson on John 6
Benson’s comments on the ‘giving’ and ‘drawing’ in John 6 (Volume 4 pages 563-565) are reasonably simple. First, Benson notes the passage teaches man’s depravity; no man can believe in Christ to the saving of…
The Fallacies of Calvinist Apologetics – Fallacy #4: “Free Will is the Power to Do Anything!!”
By J.C. Thibodaux Related Fallacies: Oversimplification Strawman False Dilemma One of the most telling signs of the fallacious nature of Calvinist apologetics in general is its heavy reliance upon caricatures and misrepresentation of the beliefs…
The Fallacies of Calvinist Apologetics – Fallacy #3: We Choose by ‘Chance?’
Related Fallacies:
Begging the Question
Special Pleading [given that God has power of contrary choice]
False Dichotomy
If all men are neutral in prevenient grace was it by chance that one believed and not another? – [A Prayer That a Synergist Won’t Pray (An Open Challenge to All Synergists) – yet another winner by John Hendryx]
The Fallacies of Calvinist Apologetics – Fallacy #2: Arminianism Entails Salvation by “Inherent Ability”
Related Fallacies: Strawman “Bait and Switch” “Why are you a Christian and your friends aren’t? … Is it because you are smarter than your friend?” (The Pelagian Captivity of the Church, R.C. Sproul) …I believe…
The Failure of God?
The following post is comprised of comments submitted to our website by [email protected], slightly revised with the author’s permission. Insofar as such infamous “failed God” arguments clearly assume the doctrine of irresistible grace (grace=force/deterministic salvation)…
A.W. Tozer on the Sovereignty of God
Here is a great quote by A.W. Tozer on the sovereignty of God:
“God sovereignly decreed that man should be free to exercise moral choice, and man from the beginning has fulfilled that decree by making his choice between good and evil. When he chooses to do evil, he does not thereby countervail the sovereign will of God but fulfills it, inasmuch as the eternal decree decided not which choice the man should make but that he should be free to make it. If in His absolute freedom God has willed to give man limited freedom, who is there to stay His hand or say, “What doest thou?” Man’s will is free because God is sovereign. A God less than sovereign could not bestow moral freedom upon His creatures. He would be afraid to do so.”
A.W. Tozer, The Knowledge of the Holy, chapter 22 “The Sovereignty of God”
Book can be found online here:
http://www.geocities.com/johncw7000/tozerknowledgeoftheholy.html
Brennon Hartshorn, “Proof-texting without Context: A closer Look at 2 Timothy 2:25”
Some well-meaning Christians make the mistake of using proof texts to prove a theological point without considering the context of the larger passage that the proof text comes from. It is important to keep in…
The Freedom & Bondage of the Will
The dichotomy of the freedom and the bondage of the will is both a theological and a practical verity. We know from Scripture that the will of individuals is free to choose from two or…
The Reality of Choice and the Testimony of Scripture
What is Free Will? It may seem strange to some that there even is a debate as to what constitutes free will. The average person believes that he has free will. Whenever he is confronted…
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?
A Word or Two to Consider
Gen 1:26 And God said, Let us make man in our image, after our likeness: and let them have dominion over the fish of the sea, and over the fowl of the air, and over…
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…
Dennis McCallum, Exegesis of Romans 9 and Romans 9-11
Lead pastor of Xenos Fellowship [Update on 2/19/2025: Now Dwell Community Church] Dennis McCallum has presented what many consider a fascinating and very well done exegesis of Romans 9. You can find his material on…
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…
Essays on Predestination by John Plaifere, Christopher Potter, Laurence Womock, Thomas Goad, and Louis Chéron
Plaifere & Goad take a Middle Knowledge approach to predestination. Christopher Potter defends his sermons on prevenient grace and coversion. Laurence Womock (or Womack) defends Daniel Tinelus, a critic of the Synod of Dort and…
