This Week in Calvinism - February 25, 2011

• C. Michael Patton, Tim Kimberley, and Sam Storms present part 5 of their series "An Invitation to Calvinism."
  
  
• God is not an egotistical maniac. As C. Michael Patton writes, "God's purpose in creating us was to give to us life, love, and joy. His purpose in creating us was for us to share in his glory. He calls on us to worship, serve, and adore him precisely because he wants us to be fulfilled. His glory is reality. Our glorifying him is merely a recognition of that reality."
  
  
• God's love is the cause and result of ours.
  
  
• Register now for the Ligonier Ministries 2011 National Conference.

This Week in Calvinism - February 18, 2011

• Q & A: African Americans in the Reformed tradition.
  
  
• 10 questions with John MacArthur, one of which deals with Reformed Charismatics.
  
  
• "Biblical" ways of doing church: a grace-killer?
  
  
• Phil Johnson reminds us of the truth that God justifies the ungodly.

This Week in Calvinism - February 11, 2011

• OK, you're not an Arminian or a Calvinist; you're a biblicist. But what kind of biblicist are you, a monergist or synergist?
  
  
• Richard Beck writes, "I reject Calvinism because I find the doctrine of election to be loathsome." The nice thing about being a universalist is that, other than selecting a few verses in the Bible that talk about God's love, you don't really have to worry about having a biblical foundation for your beliefs.
  
  
• Joel Madasu believes the doctrine of limited atonement "limits the power of the Gospel and the faith necessary for Salvation. How can one witness, knowing that the love of God, His Word, the work of the Holy Spirit is only limited and viewed as strictly to the elect? [Dave] Hunt states that no true Calvinist, who believes in limited atonement, can look into the eye of an unsaved person and say that Jesus Christ died for you." First of all, no one knows who the elect are. We are called to "go into all the world and proclaim the gospel to the whole creation" (Mark 16:15). Secondly, what's wrong with simply calling on others, as Jesus did, to "repent and believe in the gospel" (Mark 1:14-15)?
  
  
• *Sigh* Here we go again: "It was at just about this time 2-years ago that I began to read Calvin's Institutes of the Christian Religion, a guided tour through the mind of a sociopath and, doubtless, the engine of huge amounts of human misery; if it could all be totted-up, Calvin would surely rank near the top of the list of history's monsters."
  
  
• John Piper speaks with Tim Keller and D.A. Carson about the role of gospel-centered theology in fighting the temptations of pornography.

This Week in Calvinism - February 4, 2011

• Does Hebrews 6 teach, as many Arminians believe, that one can lose his salvation? No.
  
  
• One way around the predestination dilemma in scripture is to conclude that the way that leads to death is just as predestined as the way that leads to life: "Both paths are made available. Both paths lead to real and legitimate finish lines. Both paths are predestined. But we must choose which path we take."
  
  
• The controversial Covenant of Grace.
  
  
• William Birch believes we Calvinists should be opposed, but he doesn't think we're heretics.
  
  
• Austin Brown presents an Arminian conundrum.

Calvin the Impaler

You would think that a couple of educated gentlemen might actually do a little research before lashing out against Calvinists. In a short ebook entitled Calvinism!: A Strange Doctrine Among The Brethren, Dr. Saneesh Cherian and Dr. Johnson C. Philip manage to condemn Calvinism without quoting a single Bible verse or citing a single source to back up their accusations. In essence, the authors have slapped together a venomous diatribe that paints John Calvin and his followers as bloodthirsty maniacs.

Consider these excerpts:

"Anyone who opposed [Calvin's] stand on infant baptism was fined, punished, or tortured."

"[Calvin] emphasized that the bread and cup were not symbols, and anyone who dared to suggest that these were only symbolic of the flesh and blood of Christ stood the danger of getting fined, punished, or tortured."

"Since man had no freedom, God was the author of every sin committed by mankind, but mankind was responsible for undergoing the punishment for it. Humans were not supposed to question this arbitrariness of God. Anyone who dared to question this stood the danger of getting fined, punished, or tortured."

"[Calvin] believed that other than him nobody had freedom to think about Bible, doctrine, and theology. He also believed that it was his moral duty and obligation to punish, torture, and kill anyone and everyone who opposed his theology and even his whims and fancies."

If you think you can stomach it, you can read all nine pages of this nonsense here.

This Week in Calvinism - January 28, 2011

• According to Dr. Jack Cottrell, "election" can mean just about anything -- except, of course, the unconditional election of an individual for salvation. Consider what he says about Ephesians 1:1-14, for instance:

  [Paul's] main point is not the predestination of individuals to salvation, but the predestination of all the Jews as a nation, and then the predestination of all the Gentiles also, to be a part of his chosen people. However, he is not here speaking of every individual Jew nor of every individual Gentile as the object of predestination to salvation, but of God's choice to make salvation available to both groups and to unite both groups into one body, the church.

  I guess that means when Ephesians 1:5 says we have been predestined "for adoption as sons through Jesus Christ, according to the purpose of his will," it's referring to all of us, believers and unbelievers alike. Sounds a little too close to universalism for my comfort.
  
  
• If Calvinism is true, why evangelize? Let's start with this: God tells us to do it.
  
  
• Craig Olson draws some parallels between abortion and Calvinism and the issue of choice. Yes, we all make choices in life, but in the case of abortion the unborn baby isn't free to make a choice, so I'm not sure how the illustration applies to God giving us free will.
  
  
• Bobby Grow announces the end of his Evangelical Calvinist blog. His blogging efforts will now be focused here.
  
  
• Steve Hays on Norman Geisler's charge that Calvinism is "theological racism."
  
  
• James White reflects on Geisler's book Chosen But Free.
  
  
• I don't know about you, but I'm really growing tired of how paranoid atheists always point to isolated incidents involving "religious nuts" to discredit everyone who has a belief in the supernatural. And how they always bring up the Inquisition and the Salem witch trials as examples of the evils of religion. And how they exploit the execution of Michael Servetus without bothering to read up on their history. I suppose that kind of willful ignorance explains why C. Boyd Pfeiffer can make the erroneous claim that "Calvin insisted that he be burned 'slowly' to extract the maximum amount of pain for his sin of differing theological views."

This Week in Calvinism - January 21, 2011

• TurretinFan continues his review of Louis Ruggiero's book, The God of Calvinism: a Rebuttal of Reformed Theology, here, here, and here.
  
  
• For a look at the other side, you may want to check out Arminius Speaks: Essential Writings on Predestination, Free Will, and the Nature of God. Hey, it's endorsed by Roger "I'm not sure how to distinguish [the God of Calvinism] from the devil" Olson, so it must be good.
  
  
• Regarding 1 Timothy 2:4 and God's desire for all people to be saved, Rick Ianniello notes that the free offer of the gospel "is a bona fide expression of God's good will."
  
  
• The new Waterproof Bible "gives you the freedom to take God's Word with you anywhere -- boating, traveling, camping -- with worry-free confidence that your Bible will withstand the test of time."
  
  
• Can non-Calvinists hold to the perseverance of the Saints?
  
  
• C. Michael Patton gives us a top ten list of systematic theologies.
  
  
• Saying what you believe is clearer than saying "Calvinist."

This Week in Calvinism - January 14, 2011

• Bob muses, "If God can be surprised, can Calvinists claim unconditional election with absolute certainty?" I think a better question to ask is, "If God can be surprised, can he be God?"
  
  
• Sarah is "giving up on this whole Calvinism argument."
  
  
• Joel explores keeping the Sabbath, believing that command to be binding on Christians today. He admits it may be difficult, raising such dilemmas as deciding whether or not to eat out at a restaurant or take a taxi. But Jesus himself said, "The Sabbath was made for man, not man for the Sabbath" (Mark 2:27). I believe the Fourth Commandment finds its fulfillment in Christ, as he is our Sabbath rest (Hebrews 4:9-10). (There's an interesting article on that here.)
  
  
• Calvinistic Cartoons: The Game!
  
  
• It's an age-old story. Calvinist boy meets Arminian girl online and they fall in love.
  
  
• Fred Phelps and other members of the Westboro cult are not Calvinists.
  
  
• TurretinFan points out a glaring inconsistency in Louis Ruggiero's book, The God of Calvinism: a Rebuttal of Reformed Theology.

Proverbs 3:6

(via)

Looking for a Bible-Reading Plan for the New Year?

Justin Taylor provides an extensive list with many helpful options.

This Week in Calvinism - December 31, 2010

• C. M. Granger describes the anatomy of a straw man.
  
  
• The Catechizer recently posted part 5 in a series entitled "Who is Sovereign in Salvation?" (Be sure to check out parts 1, 2, 3, and 4.)
  
  
• Ryan on the sufficiency of Christ's sacrifice.
  
  
• The Seeking Disciple TheMessianicDrew writes, "If Arminianism is true and our witness does make a difference in the salvation of others, then Arminianism will very likely produce more saved people than Calvinism. Specifically, Arminians tend to be more involved in outreach, and if salvation does depend on human free choice, apologetics that acknowledge this will be more effective." Salvation depends on "human free choice"? Did someone just let the Arminian cat out of the bag?

Merry Christmas!

"But when the fullness of time had come, God sent forth his Son, born of woman, born under the law, to redeem those who were under the law, so that we might receive adoption as sons."
- Galatians 4:4-5

This Week in Calvinism - December 17, 2010

• Why am I not surprised that the pastor of an independent, premillennial, King-James-only, Baptist church thinks Calvinism is a false doctrine?
  
  
• As Trevor W. points out, it's rather inconsistent of a publication to run a series of articles entitled "The Case Against Calvinism" while at the same time reprinting sermons by C. H. Spurgeon.
  
  
• Carl Gobelman continues blogging through the Westminster Shorter Catechism.
  
  
• One of the things Scott Oakland loves about being Presbyterian "is that the issue of Arminianism v Calvinism is not an issue like it is in congregational evangelical church."
  
  
• Theologian Roger Nicole passes away at age 95.

This Week in Calvinism - December 10, 2010

• Calvinist pick-up lines.
  
  
• John Calvin was a young-earth guy.
  
  
• Chris makes some interesting comparisons between John Calvin and the Wesley brothers.
  
  
• Adrian Warnock has some good things to say on the conflict between Calvinists and Arminians.
  
  
• One of the preachers at Monroe Valley Church of Christ believes that "God predestined only a certain group of people to be saved," but considers Calvinism "a very popular false doctrine that has infected many churches."

This Week in Calvinism - December 3, 2010

• We Calvinists need to remember this: "The Arminian Christian believes that Jesus Christ is God come in the flesh to save sinners and that the saving work of Christ comes to the sinner by way of the grace of God received through faith. Whatever issues relevant to salvation we disagree upon, let us agree on this: the Calvinist and the Arminian are brothers in Christ."
  
  
• The new Calvinist Gadfly.
  
  
• Faith is the embracing, not the embraced.
  
  
• Win a copy of Letters to a Young Calvinist.