Why are some not drawn?
A cautious response to a difficult question.
What is being born of water in John 3:5?
Is it baptism, amniotic fluid, or is John tracing a trajectory of Old Testament allusion and physical metaphor?
If God wants to save everyone, why did he only choose Israel?
If you want all people to be part of your kingdom, you don’t disinherit them and then pick just one family.
Does James teach justification by works?
Yes—inasmuch as works are a proper part of the living faith by which we dwell in Jesus, and he in us.
Why doesn’t God just do whatever it takes to make people believe in him?
In which I point out four faulty presuppositions behind a common atheistic question.
Why do some people exercise faith and others not?
In a synergistic framework, what is the explanation for some people responding affirmatively to prevenient grace, while others do not? If it is because of the grace they receive, then God shows partiality; if it is because of their character, then they have reason to boast; if it is neither, then salvation is down to luck.
Was the atonement wasted if God chooses who to save?
A response to the common intuition that, under Calvinism, Jesus’s suffering was wasted for all those who God did not choose to save.
On the atonement, part 6: unlimited satisfaction fails to actually accomplish redemption for anyone
Part 6 of 6, in which I consider and confute the objection that an unlimited satisfaction would not actually secure or guarantee salvation for anyone.
On the atonement, part 5: universal salvation, or double payment
Part 5 of 6, in which I refute the objection that unlimited satisfaction entails either universal salvation, or a double payment for sins.
On the atonement, part 4: God’s desires frustrated?
Part 4 of 6, in which I interact with the objection that unlimited satisfaction requires that God be at cross-purposes with himself, entertaining frustrated desires which he cannot fulfill.
On the atonement, part 3: the objective grounds for faith
Part 3 of 6, in which I forward the argument that limited satisfaction undermines the assurance of salvation at exactly the times we most need it, by removing the objective grounds for faith.
On the atonement, part 2: the grounds for the universal gospel call
Part 2 of 6, in which I argue that limited satisfaction is inconsistent with the universal gospel call—whether conceived of as an invitation, or as a command only.
On the atonement, part 1: headship and imputation
Part 1 of 6, in which I show that limited satisfaction is inconsistent with what is revealed in Scripture about federal headship and forensic imputation: two doctrines central to Jesus’ penal substitution.
On the atonement: introduction
In which I introduce the case I will forward for a particular redemption grounded in an unlimited satisfaction on the cross.
A simple argument against God’s universal salvific intent
A basic argument, with commentary, in favor of the Calvinist view of election, and against the view that God purposes to save all people without exception.
Does God desire the salvation of all?
This article is the culmination of some discussion with hyper-Calvinist Ron Di Giacomo on the nature of God’s intentions towards the reprobate. In it, I argue that there is a sense in which God desires all people without exception to be saved, even though he has determined that he will only save his elect.
God Is Love
One of the blogs to which I subscribe is ‘The Reformed Baptist Thinker’, who recently posted an article entitled ‘Bishop Carlton Pearson, “The Way I See It”‘. Briefly described is the announcement by this Pentecostal bishop that no one goes to hell. In his own words, In reality, hell is not such an intention of […]