Taken from http://library.freebaptist.net/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=37&Itemid=25 A DISCOURSE ON THE FREEDOM OF THE WILL By RANSOM DUNN The following discourse was prepared by the request of the Boston Quarterly Meeting, and but for a request for its publication…
After the passing of Kim Jong-Il, Calvinist leader Justin Taylor did a brief post highlighting how diabolical he was: http://thegospelcoalition.org/blogs/justintaylor/2011/12/19/inside-kim-jong-ils-diabolical-world/ It is simply baffling that Calvinists can decry the diabolical, heinous actions of Kim Jong-Il…
Here is an absolutely chilling quote of John Calvin. It is hard to believe any Christian can believe such a thing: John Calvin writes: “Solomon also teaches us that not only was the destruction of…
Introduction: I commented (under the screen name “Arminian”) at Justin Taylor’s blog, taking issue with a cited article by John Piper that presents prayer as a cause of God’s answers to prayer in Calvinism/determinism. I…
As I read Mark Talbot’s chapter on God and suffering in Suffering and the Sovereignty of God (edited by John Piper and Justin Taylor) a thought occurred to me: Since most Calvinists are harshly critical…
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 Movie Illustration of What’s Wrong with Calvinism this post is written by Roger E Olson, PhD Spoiler alert! If you intend to watch “Ruby Sparks” (a 2012 movie now on DVD) and you don’t…
Written by Brian Abasciano A complaint I sometimes hear about my books on Romans 9 is that they are too expensive. That is quite unfortunate. (The price of those books is determined by my publisher…
Michael Brown, “The Newtown Massacre and the Pain of God” — http://townhall.com/columnists/michaelbrown/2012/12/17/the-newtown-massacre-and-the-pain-of-god-n1468169/page/full/
Some time ago, I had a conversation with a brother named Stephen over at SBC Tomorrow, in which we discussed philosophical determinism and the role it plays in discussions of divine election. I had been…
The following comments are quoted from the NET Bible (The Net Bible – Copyright (2004) Biblical Studies Foundation. The home page of the NET Bible is http://www.bible.org/category.php?scid=5&category_id=71&parent_id=0). They are completely consistent with an Arminian understanding of God’s hardening of human hearts.
On Isaiah 6:10
One of our members commented concisely and incisively in our private discussion group (slightly revised here): In Calvinism God cannot see into the future. He only knows what will happen because He will make it…
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.
written by SEA member, Roy Ingle I saw this posted on Twitter and have received this complaint before. The reasoning is that in Calvinism God is allowed to be sovereign so that all that comes…
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.
From Michael Bird (http://www.patheos.com/blogs/euangelion/2012/10/j-i-packer-on-divine-impassibility/):
According to J.I. Packer, we need to re-think the meaning of divine impassibility (note that this was before the “Open Theism” wars). He writes:
Jesus’ Foreknowledge and Causation
written by SEA member Roy Ingle
There are certain events in the ministry of the Lord Jesus that demonstrated that He foreknew them and this shows He was God. For instance, we read that Jesus knew that He would die on the cross (John 12:32) and details about His crucifixion (Mark 10:33-34). Jesus knew that Judas would betray Him (John 13:18-27) and that Peter would deny Him (Mark 14:29-31). He was able to read the thoughts of the Jews in Mark 2:8. Clearly, Jesus was God (John 1:1; Philippians 2:6).
Arminius On the Predestination of Believers
provided by SEA member Roy Ingle
I. As we have hitherto treated on the object of the Christian religion, that is, on Christ and God, and on the formal reasons why religion may be usefully performed to them, and ought to be, among which reasons, the last is the will of God and his command that prescribes religion by the conditions of a covenant; and as it will be necessary now to subjoin to this a discourse on the vocation of men to a participation in that covenant, it will not be improper for us, in this place, to insert one on the Predestination, by which God determined to treat with men according to that prescript, and by which he decreed to administer that vocation, and the means to it. First, concerning the former of these.
I just finished Dr. Olson’s book Against Calvinism (It is really difficult to find time to read when you have a one year old). In appendix 1, Dr. Olson goes over several attempts by Calvinists to protect God’s character despite their theology. One particular argument caught my eye: the use of middle knowledge.
Roger Olson explains:
Molinism… is the belief that God possesses “middle knowledge” — knowledge of what any creature would do freely in any possible set of circumstances. The creature may possess libertarian freedom — freedom not compatible with determinism and able to do other than it does — but God knows what he or she wold do with that ability in an conceivable situation. [Roger Olson, Against Calvinism, (Grand Rapids, Michigan: Zondervan, 2011), 184]
