This is the third video in a fantastic series of lectures by Dr. Keith Stanglin and Dr. Thomas McCall on who Jacob Arminius was, and what he believed. McCall and Stranglin wrote the book Jacob…
This is the third video in a fantastic series of lectures by Dr. Keith Stanglin and Dr. Thomas McCall on who Jacob Arminius was, and what he believed. McCall and Stranglin wrote the book Jacob…
This article is posted with permission from the publisher, the scholarly journal Bibliotheca Sacra. Please click on the attachment to view Robert B. Chisholm Jr., “ANATOMY OF AN ANTHROPOMORPHISM: DOES GOD DISCOVER FACTS?” Bibliotheca Sacra…
Please click on the attachment to view Robert E. Picirilli’s response to open theism in his article entitled, “AN ARMINIAN RESPONSE TO JOHN SANDERS’S THE GOD WHO RISKS: A THEOLOGY OF PROVIDENCE“, Journal of the Evangelical Theological Society 44/3 (September 2001) 467–91.
I just read through “Neither Arminians nor Calvinists but Baptists” and am struck by two significant aspects of the article which I think are flawed. [Note: The article in question was a response to Roger…
written by SEA member Roy Ingle Arminius has often been used by open theists to try to teach that he held to a form of open theism. When we read his Works we realize that…
Here are some thoughts of SEA members on the relationship between Arminianism, Calvinism, Open Theism, and Universalism. Sometimes Calvinists accuse Arminianism of being the stepping stone to Open Theism or Universalism, but is this accusation…
by Roger E. Olson Someone asked me why I am not an open theist. I respect open theists for their dedication to biblical exegesis and for their determination to emphasize the personal nature of God.…
Vincent of Lerins (early fifth century Christian writer in southern France) said that orthodoxy is “that which has been believed everywhere, always, by all.”1 What has been the orthodox view of the Church on the…
The following article by James H. Railey gives a brief critique of Open Theism and supports the traditional Arminian position that God foreknows all future events, including the free choices of His creatures.: Railey. Open…
I recently read Greg Boyd’s explanation of Christ’s foretelling Judas’s betrayal and Peter’s denial. The basic issue is that in open theism, a free choice cannot be foreknown. Boyd states that at the time of…
Robert Chisholm’s article “ANATOMY OF AN ANTHROPOMORPHISM: DOES GOD DISCOVER FACTS?” explains OT texts like Genesis 18:20-21 and 22:12, which seem to indicate God does not know everything. Chisholm is not satisfied with saying they…
Open Theists deny God’s foreknowledge because they believe that if the future is known it is determined. Calvinists and Open Theists agree on a principle of foreknowledge. If the future is certain, it is necessary.…
It is argued by proponents of Openness as well as Calvinists that claim Openness is the logical conclusion for Arminianism that in order for people to be free the future must be somehow open. Their argument claims that if God’s knowledge of future unactualized contingencies is perfectly known, then creaturely freedom is a farce and whether we like it or not, our Lord has effectively predestinated all of creation. Countering the argument Arminians point out that simply knowing for sure that a person will freely do something is not enough for God to control or predestinate the world. This is because foreknowledge of an event does not imply direct influence or omnicausality, or absolute determination, but merely knows what other wills are doing. In other words, foreknowledge doesn’t mean absolute determination. Yet a fine point should be sharpened at this time: God not only grasps and understands what actually will happen, but also what could happen under varied possible contingencies.
The subject of God’s knowledge has been a seed bed of debate lately. Modern day Molinists believe that their system offers a middle-ground approach to theology, avoiding both Calvinism and Arminianism. One of my professors…