Tag Archives: determinism

Grace for All: John Wesley challenges Reformers on Reprobation

Posted on by
1

Just as Pinson examined the theology of Arminius Grace for All, Vic Reasoner explores the theology of John Wesley. Reasoner is the president of Southern Methodist College (link) and an author, having written a Wesleyan commentary on Romans (link).

415xXkjORGLReasoner starts off surveying the various scholars who have studied and interpreted John Wesley over the last 50+ years, highlighting Thomas Oden recently published 4 volume set that is considered “the first systematic exposition” of Wesley’s theology (amazon).

Reasoner, exploring numerous aspects of Wesleyan theology, starts off the affirming God’s sovereignty.

Wesleyan-Arminians affirm God’s sovereignty, but believe that God has the prerogative of not always exercising total sovereignty. Thus we have true libertarian freedom. Yet God never surrenders the consequences of our free choices to us. … God is so sovereign he can allow human rebellion, yet that rebellion does not thwart his ultimate purpose.

Continue reading →

One Does Not Simply Fall Into a Tale: a Reformed Theologian’s take on the Script Analogy

Posted on by
Reply

In his essay on predestination, appearing in Grace for All, I. Howard Marshall compared divine determinism (see this post) to an author writing a script. A concept that was explored in this post using the Star Wars movies (link). At the end of the post, I asked readers, both proponents and opponents of meticulous sovereignty, if they thought Marshall’s analogy is accurate? A member of the Reformed Pub Facebook group affirmed the analogy was useful for understanding the idea, pointing me to a paper by Dr. James N. Anderson. Anderson (blog) is the Associate Professor of Theology and Philosophy (link) at Reformed Theological Seminary.

The article is entitled “Calvinism and the First Sin”, (available for download until it is published) and it explains the Reformed view of divine determinism and its relationship to theodicy (why God permits evil). It also compares it to other views (Molinism, Simple Foreknowledge, and Open Theism), before advocating it as the best option. A conclusion I would not agree with.

LOTR_ScriptHere is how Dr. Anderson describes divine determinism (emphasis added): Continue reading →

Grace for All: Elect in Christ or into Christ, that is the Question

Posted on by
2

“Jacobus Arminius: Reformed and Always Reforming” is the next essay in Grace for All. It is written by J. Matthew Pinson, the President of Welch College and the author of the book Arminian and Baptist (reviewed here). The focus is on presenting Jacob Arminius as a Reformed theologian who held to the Belgic Confession and Heidelberg Catechism.415xXkjORGL

In order to defend Arminus as a Reformed theologian, Pinson examines Arminius’ writings showing where his views either fit or strayed from Reformed confessions.

the primary doctrinal difference between Arminius and his strict Calvinist interlocuters [was] how one comes to be in a state of grace or not, that is the doctrine of predestination.

Since the primary area of disagreement is predestination, and that has been the focus of the last two essays in Grace for All, we will briefly look at that aspect of Arminius’ theology.

The problem, as Arminus describes it in Declaration of Sentiments (link), was that Calvinist views on “predestination are considered, by some of those who advocate them, to be the foundation of Christianity”, yet this doctrine “comprises within it neither the whole nor any part of the Gospel”. Continue reading →