Archive for category: Reformed Apologetics

Well, it finally arrived. George Bryson’s The Dark Side of Calvinism is finally sitting on my desk. Despite only having “seen it from afar,” so to speak, I finally had a chance to look over the work today. The sub-titles are great: “A Biblically-based examination, evaluation, and refutation of the Reformed Doctrine of Redemption and Reprobation” appears at the top

Sorry for the delay in getting back to the blog. Arrived home late Sunday night from New York, and the day after you get home is always very busy. Anymore it takes you an hour just to delete all the spam in your mailbox…. Very briefly: the “blog wars” have devolved to the level of “oh yeah!” I shall allow

TGE blew a fuse and came unglued because I dared to contextualize my comments in providing a calm, reasoned response to a point raised by Alastair (below). Compare what I said with this kind of vitriolic ad-hominem:   I think, rather, that you’re just one more arrogant little Modern pretending to be better than everything and everyone who’s come before

I recognize that there is a fair amount of confusion on the part of some regarding the current controversy noted in the recent blog entries. It is my hope that over time that confusion can be cleared up, and in the process, some of God’s people will be blessed. Even with the gaseous cloud of vituperative sarcasm being belched out

I just got an e-mail wherein someone recounted showing Angel’s recent work to Dave Hunt. His response, rather than explaining his continued misrepresentation of Spurgeon, was to allege that I was not able to get the “required” three endorsers for our debate book (which we will soon be listing here on the site). Hey Dave, Multnomah asked me ONCE for

I do not have any idea who “Alastair” is outside of his being a big fan of NT Wright, NPism (wait…another connection between AAPC and NPism?) and the author of a very poor “review” of J. Ligon Duncan’s article in response to NPism. But he has decided to take up the cause for TGE, and in the process has given

Tim Enloe says he’s not going to respond, and then he responded. 🙂 In part: So go ahead, Dr. White. Blog some more about my “discontent with truth”. You’re only preaching to a very narrow choir. Which is, of course, exactly how your very narrow, very much Donatist-like theological tradition likes it. For those not familiar with the digs used

Now for our contingent of humorless Calvinists: Angel’s cartoons come from listening to the Dividing Line and other tapes and materials presented by this ministry. They are meant to make a point. They do so with humor and yes, sarcasm. That’s how they get the message across in a way it will be remembered. Dave Hunt grossly misrepresented Spurgeon (see

Norman Geisler has resigned from ETS (Evangelical Theological Society) in light of the organization’s inability to remove Dr. Pinnock and Dr. Sanders from its membership. Here are his reasons: http://www.normgeisler.com/etsresign.htm

Click here for the review. It begins, “The debate over God’s sovereignty in salvation has reached a new low with the publication of this book.” Nice to hear others saying the same thing.

Anyone who has taken the time to read much of Charles Spurgeon knows he believed in, and preached, the dreaded doctrine of “limited atonement,” or as many of us prefer to put it, “particular redemption.” I took the time last year when Dave Hunt’s new book came out to read a sermon from Spurgeon that made the point rather clear.

For some odd reason someone unknown to me recently posted to a discussion forum one of those e-mails you write because you really feel strongly about something. I had forgotten, but a few years ago Marc Carpenter, one of the more famous Internet Hyper Calvinists, had sent out one of those unsolicited e-mails to a large group of folks (you

A fine young fellow that I’ve been seeing a lot of lately (has something to do with my lovely daughter, I do believe) showed me a periodical titled “The Arminian.” I was first amazed that there are still folks left on planet earth that willingly, gladly, without a word of remonstrance, accept the name of themselves. But what was far

We received a phone call at PRBC this weekend. A woman in northern Utah called, seeking help. Seems someone from a “Reformed Baptist Church in Phoenix” had given some literature to her husband years ago outside the Salt Lake City Temple. She had read these books and wanted to know more about what she had now come to believe was

Ever wondered why anyone would object to the Lazarus story as illustrative of God’s work of regeneration? I was thinking about it after George Bryson said on BAM that God changes hearts, but, not everyone whose heart is changed believes, because there are different “levels” of change. I had mentioned the biblical phraseology from Ezekiel 36:26, taking out a heart

How can a person who defends the Trinity, for example, properly and accurately from Scripture, then turn around and defend the idea that God’s sovereignty is a chimera, and that man is actually sovereign over God, so that man’s libertarian free will is actually supreme, in the great matter of salvation, over God’s? The answer has become clearer for me

I have been severely criticized by some for noting the similarity of conclusions drawn by some in the Auburn Avenue movement and those found in New Perspectivism. Yet, as I am monitoring both sides, I cannot help but seeing a confluence of perspectives, despite the very different backgrounds and sources of the two movements. A good friend of mine, who

As listeners to The Dividing Line know, a book is being written that embodies a written exchange between myself and Dave Hunt on the subject of Reformed theology or “Calvinism.” This book grew out of the publication of Mr. Hunt’s What Love is This? Shortly after the book came out I wrote an open letter exposing some of the many,

Using Obfuscation to Avoid Admission of Simple and Documented Error It is obvious that a number of truth-loving “Bereans” have been contacting Dave Hunt’s ministry, The Berean Call, and calling him to accountability regarding the documentation of his error concerning the beliefs of Charles Haddon Spurgeon which I presented in my Open Letter responding to the publication of his book,

What about 2 Peter 2:1? This is one of many questions that surface during conversations between Reformed and non-Reformed1 believers when discussing the emotionally charged issue of “Particular Redemption” (or as it is historically called, “Limited Atonement”). Often many non-Reformed believers cite the “terrible ‘L’” as the big stumbling block that precludes them from embracing the doctrines of grace at all

Background While the church has, from its earliest days, recognized that the Old Testament is a part of her heritage, there has by no means been a consensus view with regard to its interpretation. Origen, and others of the Alexandrian tradition, favored an approach to Old Testament theology that saw the entire work as an allegory–beneath any Old Testament text

Regarding His Newly Published Attack Upon the Reformation, What Love Is This?  Calvinism’s Misrepresentation of God Updated 5/16/02, see bottom of file Dear Dave,  In the period of time since I finally received my own copy of your book (you may recall I scanned through it while standing at your table in St. Louis at the PFO Conference) I have

Below I have produced the notes I used in doing the Dividing Line Webcasts responding to Dr. Geisler’s added appendix on The Potter’s Freedom (these programs aired 8/11, 8/18, and 8/25/01. This is not my “published” reply to Dr. Geisler.  That is found at here.  These are simply the rough notes I used.  I expanded on some points in my written

I had not heard even a whisper about the inclusion of an appendix (now the 13th appendix in the book) in a new edition of Dr. Norman Geisler’s Chosen But Free.  Thankfully, a kind brother in Indianapolis e-mailed me and informed me of the appendix, assuming, however, that I had already seen it.  I had not.  I immediately requested, and

Christians are unpopular folks today. I mean by that, anyone who takes seriously biblical truth and biblical principles will find himself on the sharp end of angry stares if we dare speak the truth in the midst of today’s national crisis. To what do I refer? America has all of the sudden gotten very religious.  There are vigils and candlelight

Lutheran scholar R.C.H. Lenski wrote a series of New Testament commentaries that are still in circulation today.  His strongly anti-Reformed stance comes through clearly in his writings.  Recently his view of Romans 9 has been promoted widely, so I felt it proper to provide some thoughts on Lenski’s position in

Some time ago I was presented with an article, “Calvin’s Error of Limited Atonement” by Dr. D.A.Waite, and subsequently began working on a joint response with another member from Alpha and Omega Ministries. The article seeks to attack Limited Atonement as affirmed by historic Calvinism. It was my desire to compose a complete response to all the issues raised in