Archive: July, 2011
Tigers, Tabbys, and God’s special love for his elect
Who says God has to love everybody equally? (Sentimental Arminians, that’s who.) “Au contraire mon frere” says the Calvinist. There is nothing wrong with God having a general love for all humanity even as he has a special love for his elect. And why shouldn’t it be so? After all, as Linda asks, “Is it [...]
Read more
The day the Arminian Pride Parade came to Geneva
The Genevans were outraged to learn that the mayor had declared April 1 “Arminian Pride Day.” “Political correctness run amok!” the Calvinists growled. “And right here in our fair city. Why can’t those Arminians just go back in the closet?” Rumor even had it that the Home Depot and Disneyland were both sponsoring the Arminian [...]
Read moreThe Apologetics Song
A few months ago I wrote a song which encompasses an entire apologetics education in six verses. (Okay, that may be a bit of a stretch. But at least you get arguments for theism, Christianity, and defeaters of defeaters inside of five minutes.) Ever since, I have been intending to record it and upload the mp3 [...]
Read more“Heresy” and Christian Publishing
This week I heard from a very intelligent and respected senior member of the evangelical community in North America. Let’s call this individual Quentin (not the individual’s real name). Quentin has written a manuscript defending a Christian form of universalism, one that upholds the authority of scripture, the atoning work of Christ and all the other essentials. [...]
Read moreHell we go again
Linda responds to my Calvinist critique as follows: “No matter how you slice it, the Bible is clear that many will go to Hell. Is not the real problem is [sic] that many go to Hell, yet God could of made it where all go to Heaven?” Not according to the traditional Arminian free will response. On [...]
Read moreDo Arminians have the same problem as Calvinists?
Paul Manata offers a response to my article “Calvinism preaches a God of love, and yet…” The response was a tu quoque, an argument form which functions like this: Randal and Paul were walking home from the Barry Manilow concert when Paul was surrounded by a group of growling headbangers who were focused on his [...]
Read moreCan the Bible credibly be called “inspired”?
I’m working my way up through a day’s worth of commentary (kids’ sleepovers have a way of interrupting blog productivity). And along the way I got sidetracked by Jerry Rivard’s comment: “It all falls neatly into place if you consider the hypothesis that the bible was written by mere mortals without divine inspiration and that as [...]
Read moreOne Word in many, many words: A Review of Thom Stark’s “Human Faces” (Part 2)
Thom Stark. The Human Faces of God: What Scripture reveals when it gets God wrong (and Why Inerrancy Tries To Hide It). Eugene, OR: Wipf & Stock, 2011, 248 pp. ISBN: 13:978-1-60899-323-9. For Part 1 of this review click here. In the first chapter, “The Argument: In the Beginning was the words” Stark introduces us [...]
Read moreReading biblical horrors post-Enlightenment
David P writes: My problem is this: a) Prior to the Enlightenment, everyone pretty much read the Abraham/Isaac passage literally (right?). b) After moral reflection on God’s nature and other things, modern thinkers say the passage should be taken metaphorically. Then they proceed to point out features of the text that support their conclusion. Maybe [...]
Read moreCalvinism preaches a God of love, and yet…
The central objection to Calvinism has always been, and will always be, that God’s decision to elect some people to salvation whilst leaving (or electing) others to damnation is inconsistent with the notion of divine love. But Calvinists are not without their rebuttals. One common rejoinder is to argue that our understanding of love is imperfect. It [...]
Read moreSubscription Options:
