Archive for category: Reformed Apologetics

   I have been saying often in my review of Steve Gregg’s materials that I truly see no consistent reason why Mr. Gregg is not an Open Theist. Don’t get me wrong, I’m glad he isn’t, but the problem is, he really has no consistent reason why he is not. His theology of man’s will, and his theology of God’s creatorship,

   Ever intent upon demonstrating that the “r” part of “rC” is a meaningless addition, the boys of the oxymoronic blog have provided some hum-dingers of late. Both Kevin Johnson and Tim Enloe have used the “post something that is ultra nasty and names names and demonstrates we are as sectarian as they come and detest conservative Calvinists with a passion

   C. Gordon Olson needs to be held to the standard his own writings have placed upon him. As we have begun noting, Olson seems to view himself as one with sufficient basis to overthrow the consensus translations of all major English translations of the Bible as long as it fits into his “mediate theology,” i.e., his particular brand of synergism.

C. Gordon Olson presents a fair amount of historical analysis in Beyond Calvinism and Arminianism. Coming under scrutiny is none other than John Calvin. One curious historical tidbit by Olson is the implication Calvin did not believe faith is the gift of God given to a specific chosen people. Of Calvinists believing faith is a gift from God, Olson says,

   The irony, of course, is that not only does Falwell demonstrate tremendous inconsistency in his own presentation, and in reference to his statements of the past, but he does so at an institution that is constantly attacking Reformed theologians as “hyper-Calvinists,” while he himself is the one illustrating the nature of what it means to be “hyper” by identifying the

C. Gordon Olson’s Beyond Calvinism and Arminianism (New Jersey: Global Gospel Publishers, 2002) hasn’t sold as many copies as other books against Calvinism. Since the book appears to be self-published, those in New Jersey have more copies than most other regional locations. The author lived in New Jersey when the book was released, and gave lectures in local churches based

   C. Gordon Olson is one of the better known opponents of Reformed theology today. He is an instructor at Liberty University. This past week a student contacted me (and I assure you, I will not be divulging the student’s name, for obvious reasons) with questions about the things Olson is teaching in class, and in particular, his claim that many

   I was just about to head out for the night after finishing up the Olson blog article (above) when someone said, “I just watched this clip on GodTube, and you might find it interesting.” So I clicked on it. And I sat there watching, with this odd feeling. “Man, that sounds…familiar.” And the more I watched the more I realized…I

Those names don’t exactly go together, but in this post they do. You might enjoy (a break from the “nasty boys”) the following… Ken Samples Lectures on St. Augustine Part 1 – St. Augustine’s Spiritual Quest Part 2 – Apologetic Factors in Augustine’s Conversion Part 3 – Augustine as Bishop and Theologian Part 4 – Augustine: Philosopher and Saint Kim

Calling all Christian apologists! Here is a book you are going to want to digest: Revelation and Reason New Essays in Reformed Apologetics, Ed. K. Scott Oliphint & Lane G. Tipton (P&R, May 2007; ISBN#: 9-78087-55259-69), 360 pages. Book Description: The purpose of this collection of essays is to set in the foreground the necessity of exegetical and theological foundations

   The following letter appears without comment in the current edition of Dave Hunt’s newsletter. It is a sad example of how the Hodges/Wilkin heresy on salvation, promoted by Hunt, not only leads to a rejection of God’s divine freedom, but likewise creates gross confusion on the matter of assurance. Instead of finding one’s assurance in the promises of a sovereign

   I have mentioned that last year we attempted to arrange a debate in Utah with George Bryson on Calvinism. He refused to allow for cross-examination in the debate. I think this video explains why. I have honestly never heard anyone spin in tighter circles in the face of basic contextual questioning than in this instance.    The DVD of this debate

   I am not sure why I check Dave Hunt’s newsletter every month. Maybe there is a ray of hope that he will begin to engage with concrete objections presented to him over the years. But once again, we find his February Newsletter Q&A section consistently disappointing.    Someone wrote in with a Calvinist persuasion and asks Hunt some honest questions about

   I’ve seen a lot of chatter about Open Theism over the past week. Here is a clip from the cross-examination portion of my debate with John Sanders at Reformed Theological Seminary in Orlando a few years ago. The DVD is available here (#551).

   A faithful reader of this blog has borrowed some of the quotes from my first blog article on Heinrich Bullinger. Unfortunately, he also borrowed four points where I summarized a section of his sermon and confused them with Bullinger’s words. As honored as I am to be confused with Bullinger, I concede that there is a bit of an age

   I had a tremendous time this weekend. Far beyond my expectations. My mind is still reeling from all the information I took in regarding the oldest manucripts of the Qur’an. Great information. I’m tremendously excited. You will definitely be hearing the fruit of this weekend in future debates. I am thankful to those who support this work that I had

Mr. Bonomo,    Thank you for your letter. I confess it would be a bit easier for me to respond in detail if your original post, and the comments to which you make reference, were still available, but I will do the best I can in the absence of this material.    I have noted your comments upon reading materials written by

I made sure I looked both ways before posting. It appeared clear, so cover me: I’m going in.    Kevin Johnson responded to my article on Bullinger. He seemed to understand the implications of Bullinger’s views regarding Rome to some of his own views on the matter, although it seems he missed the larger point of the article. The main objections

capitulate /k«ÈpItjUleIt/  v.v. verb cease to resist an opponent or an unwelcome demand; surrender. Soanes, C., & Stevenson, A. (2004). Concise Oxford English dictionary (11th ed.). Oxford: Oxford University Press.    When you are challenged on a theological and biblical claim you have made in public, it is expected that you can respond to said challenge with serious and sober argumentation,

   The first comment on Mr. Johnson’s post is by a fellow by the name of Mike Spreng: Don’t you just love how he fires those shots without leaving a chance for anyone to comment on his site (not that anyone wants to interact with such a man)? What can be said about guys like this that only go as far

   Kevin Johnson has responded to my comments about his “mind of the church” hermeneutic comment last evening. Let’s remind ourselves what he said and the context in which he said it (for that little element got lost in his response): My belief is that context ought to be centered more in the concerns of the mind of the Church rather

   Those who have followed this blog over its two-plus years now know how often the topic of “The Gospel in Capernaum” has come up. I have reviewed a number of attempts to get around this tour de force of clear salvation teaching on the part of the Lord of glory, and all have crumbled to dust when the simple reality

   Tom Nettles’ classic work, subtitled A Historical, Theological, and Practical Study of the Doctrines of Grace in Baptist Life, from Founder’s Press, is currently being offered by SGCB for less than $20 until mid-February. If you don’t have this in your library, you’ll want to pick it up. Great resource, important citations.

   Let me set a few things straight regarding Mr. Stafford’s recent comments on his website:    1) mail@aomin.org is not a valid e-mail address. Period. It has never been used by me, it is not my personal e-mail, or anything else. In fact, it has not been in use since, as far as we can tell, the late 90s, and then

   Here is a quick comment from Greg Bahnsen I heard today that is very relevant to discussions taking place these days. You can download the three mp3 set here. Hopefully the advertisement will cover for the 2 minute citation!    I am off to New Jersey. Lord willing, the blogosphere will return to some semblance of balance and normalcy by the

   A few days ago I noted, very briefly (all of a single paragraph at the end of a longer blog entry), the continued campaign of Watchtower apologist Greg Stafford in reference to Reformed theology, and in particular, the sovereign decree of God and Yahweh’s exhaustive knowledge of future events. I doubt our Open Theist friends are overly appreciative of the

   To my knowledge, no one has contacted me to ask if Phil Johnson and I are at odds over the current discussion of Stop and Think. Despite how easy it is to contact me (how many folks do you know who sit at a toll-free number an average of two hours a week, and are almost always available on line?),

   Wow! A quick blog run has brought me an embarrassingly rich number of things that really, really need to be addressed, each of which can be made into an edifying blog article. But I don’t have time to do them all!    First, I note Paul Owen has shown he thinks himself much wiser than his far better known namesake (John

   Among the charges the Reformers leveled against Rome was that it was corrupt and heretical. The Reformers also leveled charges against the Anabaptists stating that they were schismatics and unjustified in leaving the church. This same charge was, simultaneously, being leveled against the Reformers by Roman defenders, labeling the Reformers as being schismatic for departing from the catholic faith. Setting

   I was listening to a debate while riding this morning (nothing new there). What was unusual was 1) it was cold (for Phoenicians, 43 and windy is cold, and for anyone, really, on a bicycle, that’s cold), and 2) the Christian in the debate illustrated for me yet once again how theology matters. Your theology determines your apologetic, by nature.

   What keeps God’s love from becoming mere maudlin sentimentality? What is the bulwark, the firm foundation, that keeps the love of God from falling into the abyss of universalism, and prohibits us from the idolatry of seeing God as the great grandfather in the sky, filled with woe and sadness at His inability to make us all happy? I suggest