Now available here online, John Goodwin’s Redemption Redeemed may be the best defense of Arminianism ever written. Published in 1651 by the Arminian Puritan John Goodwin (1593-1665), it is written in seventeenth century English with…
Hermeneutics
Glen Shellrude, “Calvinism and Problematic Readings of New Testament Texts Or, Why I Am Not a Calvinist”
Dr. Glenn Shellrude is Professor of New Testamen at Alliance Theological Seminary (NYC). He read a version of this paper at the Evangelical Theological Society’s 2010 annual meeting, and has provided us with a version…
Lena-Sofia Tiemeyer, “THE COMPASSIONATE GOD OF TRADITIONAL JEWISH AND CHRISTIAN EXEGESIS”
Click on the attachment at the bottom to view Lena-Sofia Tiemeyer, “THE COMPASSIONATE GOD OF TRADITIONAL JEWISH AND CHRISTIAN EXEGESIS,” Tyndale Bulletin 58.2 (2007) 183-207. The author’s summary of the article follows. Interestingly, the article…
Gordon C. I. Wong, “Make Their Ears Dull: Irony in Isaiah 6:9-10”
This article is posted with the permission of Trinity Theological Journal and the author. Please click on the attachment to view Gordon C. I. Wong, “Make Their Ears Dull: Irony in Isaiah 6:9-10” Trinity Theological Journal 16 (2008) 24-34.
Here is the author’s abstract:
In Isaiah 6:9-10, the prophet appears to be commissioned by God to make the ears of the people dull in order to prevent them from repenting. This article begins by proposing that these verses are better understood as rhetorical irony designed to persuade the people to (and not prevent them from) repentance. An alternative rhetorical interpretation and three literal interpretations are also discussed and rejected in favour of the view that assumes the use of irony.
Calvinism’s Missing Contexts- Part 1
This blog post is written by pastor Christopher Chapman, a member of SEA. Philippians 1:29 “For it has been granted to you that for the sake of Christ you should not only believe in him…
Calvinism’s Missing Contexts-Part 2
This blog post is written by pastor Christopher Chapman, a member of SEA. As we search the scriptures honestly and diligently to find answers to our questions about various issues about living in God’s kingdom…
Gregory Boyd, “How do you respond to Exodus 4:11?”
Note: Although the author of this article is an open theist, a position that SEA rejects as unbiblical, his comments on Exodus 4:11 are helpful. Please click on the link to view Gregory Boyd, “How…
A New Arminian Book on the Doctrine of Salvation: Brenda Colijn, Images of Salvation in the NT
Professor of biblical interpretation and theology at Ashland Theolgical Seminary, Brenda B. Colijn, has recently published Images of Salvation in the New Testament (Downer’s Grove: IVP Academic, 2010), and received some solid endorsements for her…
Brian Abasciano Has a New Article Out Refuting the Use of 1 John 5:1 as a Proof Text for the Calvinist Doctrine that Regeneration Precedes Faith
Brian Abasciano has a new article out refuting the use of 1 John 5:1 as a proof text for the Calvinist doctrine that regeneration precedes faith. Here is the publication information and the author’s abstract…
Origins: What comes from God vs. what comes from man
Regarding origins…in other of whether something comes from God or from man, note what John Calvin said about the *origin* of Paul’s expression of emotion towards his fellow Jews at Romans 9:1-3: John Calvin comments:…
Roger Olson on Judging God’s Morality
This is a brief snippet from Dr. Roger Olson’s post: “About judging God’s morality” Recently, an acquaintance asked me if I am guilty of “judging God’s morality.” He explained that his reason for asking is…
CALVINIST RHETORIC: Prooftexting
Or “Say hello to my little friend!”</ What I mean by Proof-texting There are four different ways to interact with Scripture within a discussion: Exegesis: Carefully breaking down the meaning of a text through grammar,…
Scot McKnight, “Calvinism: My History 2”
Follow the link to view part 2 of distinguished New Testament scholar Scot McKnight’s personal testimony of coming out of Calvinism for a more biblical evangelical view and his discussion of the warning passages in Hebrews: http://www.patheos.com/blogs/jesuscreed/2011/12/07/calvinism-my-history-2/ .
On the Ordo Salutis and Colossians 2:13, As Presented by Brian N. Daniels
The following is taken from a larger essay, exegeting Colossians 2:13, by Brian N. Daniels1, a Ph.D. student at Southeastern Baptist Theological Seminary, and a four-point Calvinist.
“Of the many issues that divide Arminians and Calvinists, one of the more interesting has to be the relationship between regeneration and faith. The question may be put like this: which comes first and grounds the other, new life given by the Spirit or belief in Christ? This question is important because of its connection to many other points of soteriology. One’s answer generally reveals much about what he believes regarding the nature of grace and depravity, as well as the more difficult issue of election and predestination.
The Implication of the Calvinistic Hermeneutic of Total Depravity
The acronym TULIP1, in my opinion, works well as a system and should be taken as a whole and not in parts. If one accepts the doctrine of Unconditional Election — which is a product of the Calvinist’s view of Total Depravity and Total Inability — then I see no reason for rejecting either the doctrines Limited Atonement, Irresistible Grace, or of course Perseverance of the Saints. I think the only consistent form of Calvinism is Supralapsarian TULIP Calvinism, and any deviation from such is inconsistent. For the sake of space, I do not care to explain my reasons why; I just want to make those statements and carry on to the main point of the post.
James White, Roger Olson & 1 Timothy 2:4
In a recent blog post (10/13/2011), James White took issue with Roger Olson’s references to 1 Timothy 2:4 in his new book, Against Calvinism. How does White’s view stand up when further scrutinized?
No Interpretation Needed: Deliverance from a Naive Approach to Biblical Interpretation
We have all, most likely, encountered believers who insist that they neither adhere to this or that theological position: they are, simply, “biblicists” (i.e., what opponents of this theory call naïve realism1). Such believers “don’t follow a man’s teaching,” they “just read their Bible.” On one level, there is an admirable simplicity in such a confession. On another level, however, such an approach to biblical interpretation is not only naïve but is fallacious and self-deceptive because it neglects the fact that we all read Scripture from cultural and personal presuppositions already in place.
Various Interpretations vs. Truth
Is Calvinism biblical? Is Arminianism biblical? Is Pentecostalism biblical? Is Cessationism biblical? Is Exhaustive Determinism biblical? Is Libertarian Free Will biblical? Is Open Theism biblical? Is Trinitarianism biblical? Is Modalism biblical? We can ask this…
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…
How One’s Theology Dishonors the Glory of God
Difficult as it may be to fathom, aiming to attribute all things to the glory and honor of God through Jesus Christ has the potential to lead a person to dishonor Him. For example, should…
