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, “But I Want To Sin”
, SEA, Comment Closed
Video: David Pallmann, “A Case For Free Will”
, SEA, Comment Closed
William Burt Pope, “The Moral Attributes of God Part 2: Holiness and Love”
, SEA, Comment Closed
Regarding Eternal Security, How Do You Briefly Respond to Calvinist Appeal to John 6:37-40?
, SEA, Comment Closed
Regarding Eternal Security, How Do You Briefly Respond to Calvinist Appeal to John 5:24?
, SEA, Comment Closed
- Roy Ingle, “But I Want To Sin”
- Video: David Pallmann, “A Case For Free Will”
- William Burt Pope, “The Moral Attributes of God Part 2: Holiness and Love”
- Regarding Eternal Security, How Do You Briefly Respond to Calvinist Appeal to John 6:37-40?
- Regarding Eternal Security, How Do You Briefly Respond to Calvinist Appeal to John 5:24?

Leave a Reply