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’. Tom and Keith do a good job pointing out that Baugh assumes the irreconcilability of foreknowledge and free will from the outset (without arguing the point) and also that Baugh’s view is contrary to the teachings of the early church.
Home Author/Scholar Index: Calvinist Baugh. S. M. Friday Files: S. M. BAUGH AND THE MEANING OF FOREKNOWLEDGE: ANOTHER LOOK
Recent Posts
Roy Ingle, “How Easy It Is to Swerve From the Faith”
, SEA, Comment Closed
Video: David Pallmann, “Introduction to Soteriology: Calvinism, Arminianism, and Molinism”
, SEA, Comment Closed
William Burt Pope, “Divine Attributes Related to the Creature Part 2: Omnipotence”
, SEA, Comment Closed
Mark K. Olson, “John Wesley on Calvinism”
, SEA, Comment Closed
If Someone Is Presently Believing and Therefore Being Kept by God’s Power, How Can They Move Toward Unbelief?
, SEA, Comment Closed
- Roy Ingle, “How Easy It Is to Swerve From the Faith”
- Video: David Pallmann, “Introduction to Soteriology: Calvinism, Arminianism, and Molinism”
- William Burt Pope, “Divine Attributes Related to the Creature Part 2: Omnipotence”
- Mark K. Olson, “John Wesley on Calvinism”
- If Someone Is Presently Believing and Therefore Being Kept by God’s Power, How Can They Move Toward Unbelief?

Leave a Reply