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, “When Does Debating Theology Become Wrong?”
, SEA, Comment Closed
The Arminian Magazine 44 Issue 2 (Fall 2026)
, SEA, Comment Closed
How Did the Son of God Become Human? (Global Methodist Church Catechism)
, SEA, Comment Closed
Eric Landstrom, “Provisionism: Forgetting What Shouldn’t Be Forgotten, Part II: A Defense of Inward Grace”
, Eric Landstrom, Comment Closed
If Jesus Died for the Sins of All, How Can It Be that Not All Are Saved?
, SEA, Comment Closed
- Roy Ingle, “When Does Debating Theology Become Wrong?”
- The Arminian Magazine 44 Issue 2 (Fall 2026)
- How Did the Son of God Become Human? (Global Methodist Church Catechism)
- Eric Landstrom, “Provisionism: Forgetting What Shouldn’t Be Forgotten, Part II: A Defense of Inward Grace”
- If Jesus Died for the Sins of All, How Can It Be that Not All Are Saved?

Leave a Reply