Does human choice contribute anything to salvation? Steve Lemke answers:
Sovereignty of God
Calvinist Santa: The Movie
[Humor]
View here for original script
For comments, view here.
Calvinism and the Evil of Kim Jong-Il
After the passing of Kim Jong-Il (our font makes it look like “Jong the Second,” but it is really the capital letter i followed by the lowercase letter L), 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 (and others like him), and yet they hold that God first conceived in his own divine heart every one of the man’s wicked actions, thought them up without any influence outside of himself, and unconditionally and irresistibly decreed them without any influence outside of himself, resulting in the man doing them all without any chance, power, or ability to do anything else. It’s madness I tell you! Madness!!
If Calvinism Were True
I very much appreciate Olson’s book Arminian Theology: Myths and Realities, and I wholeheartedly recommend it to everyone who asks me for a brief defense of Classical Arminian theology.1 Neither this book nor his latest is in any way meant to be an exhaustive, exegetically detailed theology textbook in defense of Classical Arminianism. These are popular books meant for the populace, like many of John Piper’s books. In Dr.
Steve W. Lemke, Agent Causation, or, How to Be a Soft Libertarian
Steve W. Lemke explains and argues for agent causation as both logical and biblical, an Arminian view of free will. Here is the attachment: libertarian agent causation
Scot McKnight, “For and Against Calvinism 3”
Follow the link to view part 3 of distinguished NT scholar Scot McKnight’s review of the books For Calvinism (by Michael Horton) and Against Calvinism (by Roger Olson): “For and Against Calvinism 3”.
Book Review: Providence and the Problem of Evil by Richard Swinburne
Please follow the link to view J.W. Wartick’s review of Richard Swinburne’s Providence and the Problem of Evil at the “Apologetics 315” website: http://www.apologetics315.com/2011/11/book-review-providence-and-problem-of.html.
Please note that the comments on the review reveal that the author mistakenly stated that Swinburne rejects the doctrine of original sin, when he actually rejects the doctrine of original guilt. SEA affirms the doctrine of original sin, and allows for differences on the issue of original guilt. For information about Arminian thinking on original sin, see Roger Olson’s post here on SEA entitled, “Arminian Teaching Regarding Original Sin” (http://evangelicalarminians.org/olson.Arminian-Teaching-Regarding-Original-Sin). It is also worth noting that Swinburne is an open theist, a position rejected by SEA.
Sovereignty, not Determinism
Arminians have a high view of God’s sovereignty, contrary to the caricatures and lies spread of us to the contrary. As a matter of fact, we think Arminians hold to a higher view of God’s sovereignty than do Calvinists, as I was reminded recently from my Arminian brother Johnathan Pritchett. The reason our view is considered “higher” is due to the following. For an omnipotent God, strictly controlling all people is easy and effortless. Like moving chess pieces on a chessboard, the movements are swift and carefree. The pieces move wherever the overseer places them without the slightest challenge whatsoever.
CALVINIST RHETORIC: Idealistic Abstractions
Or “Plato: Imagination Taking Shape”*
What I Mean by Idealistic Abstractions
To be abstract means to be “thought of apart from concrete realities, specific objects, or actual instances.” To put it more simply (at least for our purposes), something which is abstract is something which is not defined by our five senses. For instance, love, peace, faith, grace, sovereignty, etc. As we can see from the examples, abstraction is quite important for Christianity. Indeed, it is quite important for life, since most subjects deal with abstractions, including science, politics, and even sports.
Imago Dei
The concept of being created in the image of God is at the center point of many Christian anthropological positions (anthropology is the study of humanity: what makes humans human). My pastor often says that you should never create a doctrine around a single verse. This is an excellent rule of thumb, and I highly recommend it. But, ironically, when we are talking about being made in the image of God, we have to deal with the fact that this term is actually only used in one passage of all of Scripture: Genesis 1:26-30 (though referenced elsewhere). However, this is a rather important verse. It is specifically the creation of man, and as such gives us what I think is a legitimate exception to the general rule.
A. W. Tozer, “The Sovereignty of God”
Chapter 22 of A. W. Tozer, Knowledge Of The Holy (taken from http://www.heavendwellers.com/hdt_chapter_22_koh.htm).
The Sovereignty of God
Who wouldst not fear Thee, O Lord God of Hosts, most high and most terrible? For Thou art Lord alone. Thou has made heaven and the heaven of heavens, the earth and all things that are therein, and in Thy hand is the soul of every living thing, Thou sittest king upon the flood; yea, Thou sittest king forever. Thou art a great king over all the earth. Thou art clothed with strength; honor and majesty are before Thee. Amen.
God’s sovereignty is the attribute by which He rules His entire creation, and to be sovereign God must be all-knowing, all-powerful, and absolutely free. The reasons are these:
Calvinists on Hell and the Fate of Everyone Who Ever Lives
I don’t know how Calvinists do it. Like many bloggers Justin Taylor posted an obituary of Steve Jobs. Unlike many bloggers, he receives comments. Not three comments in, the post got this one: Justin Taylor…
Do Calvinists Seek the Specific Will of God?
This was a comment made by Rebekah Reinagel in regards to the nature of prayer within the Calvinist system. She gave us permission to publish it here.
Calvinists pray, even though they “know” that God has everything decreed in advance. But here’s what I was wondering about: Do Calvinists seek the specific will of God?
And what I mean by that is that Arminians, in addition to following God’s moral law (i.e. Do not murder), also seek God’s will in specific situations in which it isn’t clear which way to go. For example, praying about whether to take a job or not. This presumes that God knows which is the better option, and it is an attempt to seek His will in the matter.
Calvinistic Determinism and the Thoughts of Demons
Pointed questions from one of our members in our private discussion group regarding Calvinism’s doctrine of exhaustive determinism: “What about the thoughts of demons? Did God ordain those too? If, literally, everything is subject to…
Is Faith a Work Created by Man?
Here are some edited comments by one of our members posted in our private discussion group concerning the Calvinist claim that the Arminian view of faith makes faith a work created by man: When they…
Bavinck on God’s Sovereignty
Sovereignty typically means authority or right. Both Calvinists and Arminians agree that God is sovereign in all He does, so He has the authority to do what He does. Period. The End. But wait!!! In…
Arminius on the Repercussions of the Freedom of God
God, being free from necessity to establish the world in which we exist, freely entered into a covenant with the man and woman He created subsequent to their disobedience of the one command which He…
Assigning Responsibility for Sin: Calvinism and the Theory of Secondary Causes
The Reformed Assertion: “God can determine a specific outcome, a person can have no other option but to do the outcome, and that person can be held up to moral judgment while God is blameless.”…
Randal Rauser, “Do Arminians Have the Same Problem as Calvinists?”
Please click on the link to view Randal Rauser, “Do Arminians Have the Same Problem as Calvinists?” [Please note that Dr. Rauser is not a member of SEA and that SEA does not necessarily endorse…
Romans 9 in Context: God’s Just Prerogative in Confounding All Confidence in the Law of Works
Introduction
Romans 9 is one of the most controversial and often-misinterpreted passages of scripture among evangelicals. Controversy, however, should not make us timid when it comes to the things of God. This inspired chapter is valuable for teaching doctrine, and should not be ignored or glossed over. At the same time, it should not be treated as a comprehensive statement of Christian soteriology by itself, for the chapter is not written in isolation, but is strongly rooted in the context of both Testaments, touching on concepts present in the other Pauline epistles and the gospels, and quoting from the Old Testament frequently. The goal of this writing is a sound, objective exegesis of Romans 9 to explain the principles therein, expound upon its themes, and to show where and how its teachings fit into the contexts of the rest of the book of Romans, and scripture as a whole. All quotes are from the NKJV unless otherwise specified.
Recent Posts
Richard Coords, “Sovereignty”
Why Does There Seem to Be So Much More Calvinist Than Arminian Scholarship and Is Evangelism a Problem for Calvinism?
Roy Ingle, “When Do They Become ‘Never Saved To Begin With?'”
Video: “A Wesleyan-Arminian View of Election,” with Dr. Ben Witherington III
