The Fallacies of Calvinist Apologetics – Fallacies #14: Conditional Election Makes God a Respecter of Persons?

Related Fallacies: Equivocation John Hendryx, who we’ve noted has employed numerous fallacies in defense of Calvinism and distortions against Arminianism, is at it yet again. This time he’s trying to prove that it’s conditional election, not unconditional election, that makes God into a “respecter of persons.” Before I address his points, I believe that the [...]

Where Calvinism Gets Romans 9 Wrong: Proof-Texting From a Translation Choice

So then it depends not on human will or exertion, but on God, who has mercy. (Romans 9:16 ESV) Romans 9:16 is often cited by Calvinists to prove that who is saved is in no way connected with free will or any kind of “human effort.” The problem with this claim is that the wording [...]

Where Calvinism Gets Romans 9 Wrong: “Not of Works” means “No Conditions”

10 And not only this, but when Rebecca also had conceived by one man, even by our father Isaac 11 (for the children not yet being born, nor having done any good or evil, that the purpose of God according to election might stand, not of works but of Him who calls), 12 it was [...]

Preach Reprobation and Preach it Hard!

As I noted in my previous post, according to Jesus, far more will be lost than saved (Matt. 7:13, 14).  In Calvinism this can only mean that God has reprobated from eternity far more than He has elected to save.  According to Calvinism, God’s reprobation of most of humanity is “for His glory”.  From this [...]

1 Corinthians 15 and the Claims of Calvinism

Calvinism as a system claims that God reprobated a large segment of mankind so that they can never be saved. [1] It further claims that the atonement is for this reason limited only to the elect who alone will benefit from the atonement and be saved (with no possibility of falling away).  In such a [...]

Acts 13:48: Two Non-Calvinist Views

Below are links to two articles dealing with the claims of Calvinism regarding Acts 13:48.  The first is an excerpt from a larger article by Brian Abasciano on Corporate Election.  In that article Abasciano briefly tackles the Greek and shows how the Calvinist interpretation is not demanded by the Greek and is contrary to the context.  He takes [...]

Brian Abasciano Responds to Bill Mounce on 2 Thess. 2:13

Brian Abasciano argues against Mounce’s claim that the grammar of 2 Thess. 2:13 argues for unconditional election.   He counters that the grammar actually more strongly favors the Arminian view of election conditioned by faith.  Check out the full response at SEA:  http://evangelicalarminians.org/node/1236

Does Erwin Lutzer Offer False Hope to Calvinist Parents?

I hope to do a few posts on Erwin Lutzer’s[1] book, The Doctrines That Divide: A Fresh Look at the Historic Doctrines That Separate Christians.  One might expect that such a book would look to lessen division and ease tension between Christians, but it seems that Lutzer’s purpose is more to present certain divisive doctrines [...]

Jack Cottrell: Did The Early Christian Fathers Teach Calvinism?

Did the Early Christian Fathers Teach Calvinism? by Jack Cottrell on Monday, July 25, 2011 at 12:59pm QUESTION: Some say that the doctrines of Calvinism did not begin with John Calvin, nor even with Augustine (died A.D. 430). Rather, they claim that the TULIP doctrines are present throughout the writings of the church fathers from [...]

Where Calvinism Gets Romans 9 Wrong: Prerogative Equals Unconditionality

Continuing with the series on Romans 9, we’ll now address the issue of God’s prerogative in saving who He wishes and how Calvinists often misinterpret its implications. God’s Prerogative Reaffirmed When speaking to zealous Calvinists, especially those who are very young and/or “educated” by internet echo chambers, the strawmen abound. It’s not uncommon to hear [...]

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 53 other followers