[BBC List] reading notes - simply wonderful
Mike Abendroth
bbcpastor at bbcchurch.org
Fri Sep 1 08:45:45 EAST 2006
Reading Notes for:
No Place for Sovereignty: What's Wrong with Freewill Theism
R. K. McGregor Wright
© 1996 R. K. McGregor Wright
InterVarsity Press
Downer's Grove, Illinois
Available at: HYPERLINK
"http://www.ivpress.com/cgi-ivpress/author.pl/author_id=803"http://www.ivpre
ss.com/cgi-ivpress/author.pl/author_id=803
_____
Foreword by Alan Myatt
* the Armininan doctrine of autonomy: Autonomy implies that the will
is subject neither to more ultimate causes in history nor to the eternal
counsel of God. [p. 7]
Introduction
* Socrates believed that the autonomous human consciousness is its own
sufficient reference point, so that key to ultimate truth is to be found
"within" [p. 13]
* Autonomism is the theory that the human consciousness can interpret
its experience of the world without any reference to a higher source of
meaning outside the world [p. 14]
_____
1. An Ancient & Continuing Controversy
A. The Apostolic Fathers
B. Pelagianism
* Augustine saw clearly that the esssence of the Pelagian error was
its view that the will, even in fallen man, was essentially free from the
corruption of sin and had the ability in itself to choose and perform good
works [p. 21]
C. Gottschalk
D. Augustinianism
E. Humanism
F. The Reformation
* the denial of the freewill theory was at the heart of the
Reformation doctrine of free grace [p. 26]
G. Arminianism
* Synod of Dort (1618-19), a reponse to the Remonstrance of 1610: a
fallen human nature is able to rise above itself to exercise saving faith
only when comprehensively regenerated by God [p. 29]
* the spiritual inability of the will to free itself from the
influence of sin
H. English Arminianism
* the first Pilgrims who journeyed on the Mayflower came to the North
American continent to escape persecution by the statist Arminians in England
[p. 30]
I. Enlightenment Rationalism
* Socinianism combined Christianity with a rationalist methodology [p.
31]
* in England the main stronghold of Calvinism was increasingly found
among the nonconformists, such as the Baptists and later the more
conservative Presbyterians from Scotland
J. Wesleyanism and the Great Awakening
K. Finney Invents Revivalism
* Finney was essentially a Pelagian with regard to human nature, but
embraced Arminianism in matters of salvation [p. 33]
L. Charles Haddon Spurgeon
M. Evangelicalism
N. A Personal Pilgrimage
O. Why People Believe in the Freewill Theory
1. if we have no free will, we are not responsible for our actions [p.
40]
2. it is essential to the image of God
3. the denial of free will undermines both human effort and morality
4. the Bible teaches free will
5. free will gets God off the hook in the problem of evil
_____
2. The Incoherence of the Freewill Theory
A. Definitions
* free will: the human will has an inherent power to choose with equal
ease between alternatives [pp. 43-44]
* compatibalism: the freedom of the will coexists with all events
being determined by previous states of affairs
* when Arminians say that the will is "free," they mean free from
previous determining causation
* when Arminians speak of "the will," they are referring to an
independent and self-determining power by which we are enabled to make
autonomous choices
* metaphysical autonomy: freedom from external ontological control [p.
45]
* epistemological autonomy: the capacity to understand and interpret
experience with oneself as the starting point
* ethical or moral autonomy: the ability to make moral judgments from
an interior sense of right and wrong
* teleological autonomy: the ability to determine one's own destiny by
one's own choices and to set one's own goals
B. The Arminian Circle of Assumptions
C. In What Sense Is the Will "Free"?
* chance events cannot be the stuff of character [p. 47]
* unless the actions of the will are tied directly to character, how
can we be held answerable for our actions? [p. 48]
* therefore the freewill theory [chance] destroys responsibility
rather than supports it
* the question must be pressed as to how a purely spontaneous
("self-moved") will could ever begin to act at all? If it starts out
neutral, how does it ever get off dead center? [p. 49]
* the Bible makes it clear in many passages that the will is not
morally neutral
D. Omniscience and Certainty
* Westminster Confession Chapter 9: points out that the will in a
fallen nature is not free to perform spiritual good, speaking of a "natural
bondage under sin" that only regeneration can free us from [p. 51]
1. the natural fallen will cannot even prepare itself for regeneration,
let alone convert itself
2. the will is free only in the sense that it is free to express the
person's character
3. the will must be regenerated before it is free for obedience to God
4. the will is never forced to act against its own nature
E. Inconsistent Calvinism
F. A More Recent Case
* the answer to rationalist determinism is not irrationalist
indeterminism, but the sovereignty and personal plan of the God of the Bible
[p. 54]
G. What Is "Responsibility"?
* in Religion, Reason and Revelation Gordon Clark points out that no
one has ever demonstrated that the concept of responsibility is in any way
dependent on a prior state of free will
* no where in the Bible is responsibility linked with free will [p.
56]
H. Biblical Responsibility
* responsibility is simply a synonym for "answerability," and means
that we are answerable to God as the judge of our actions
* the Bible bases responsibility on four things
1. we are responsible to God because he is the Creator and we are the
creatures
2. we are responsible to God because he is the moral reference point
for right and wrong, and not we ourselves [p. 57]
3. we are answerable to God for the knowledge we have
4. because the purpose of creation is the glory of God, we are
responsible as stewards of God's blessings to fulfill the end or purpose of
God in creating us in the world [p. 58]
I. Theological Incoherencies
* if the will acts according to its own previously existing
properties, its actions are to some degree being caused
* if God has to continually make adjustments in his hope for the
future by modifying his plans to fit the multiple permutations and random
fluctuations of millions of human freewill decisions every second of every
day, how can I have any confidence that any prayer of mine (or promise of
God, for that matter) will be fulfilled? [p. 59]
* freewillism leads eventually to process theology
* if it is really true that "God never overrides the free will," how
can the Christian honestly pray for anyone's salvation?
* all predictive prophecy in the Bible is undermined by introducing
free will as a causal factor in history
* how can God have certain knowledge of an uncertain future? [p. 61]
_____
3. What Makes Us Human? Humanism & Christianity
A. Seven Theories of Human Nature
* Plato
1. a preexistent spiritual entity that is temporarily imprisoned in the
material body [p. 64]
2. humanity is the measure or standard of all things [p. 65]
* Freud: we are basically chemical machines seeking to adjust to our
circumstances, and we are happiest when fully adjusted [p. 66]
* Marx
1. an animal who is conditioned by society, particularly by economic
conditions in recent history
2. the only animals who are conscious of their own evolution;
therefore, they can modify and control that evolution
* Skinner
1. all of our actions are strictly determined by previous states of
affairs in our body chemistry [p. 67]
2. we modify behavior by modifying stimuli [p. 68]
* Lorenz: a species evolved from prior animals and motivated by an
inner state of aggression
* Sartre
1. there is no ultimate meaning to human experience apart from our
individual commitment to a chosen ideal or course of action
2. human nature is just an irrational choice that my choices must
somehow mean something, when nothing really means anything [p. 69]
* Christianity
B. The Biblical Idea of Freedom
* for the writers of the Bible, freedom is one of three things: [p.
71]
1. the freedom of the captive who is recaptured or purchased back
(redeemed) from the enemy
2. the condition of being spiritually free from demonic and idolatrous
religious influences [p. 72]
3. freedom from slavery or bondage to sin and its results
* John 8:36 "if the Son sets you free, you will be free indeed"
C. What is Man That Thou Art Mindful of Him?
D. So, What Is the Meaning of Life?
* throughout all the biblical references to the image of God, its loss
in the Fall and its restoration in Christ, not a hint appears that the image
necessarily includes anything recognizable as free will [p. 76]
E. Clutching at Straws
F. Conclusion
_____
4. Apostate Autonomism: The Fall & the Autonomist Theoria
A. Before the Fall
B. There Are Only Two Worldviews
* freedom means ethical submission to God and the resulting blessings
of personal fulfillment. It does not mean the autonomy of the will, and idea
never encountered in the Bible. [p 83]
C. Absolute Rationalism
D. Absolute Irrationalism
E. The Problem of the One and the Many
F. The Great Chain of Being
G. There Are Only Two Religions
* in humanistic religion we are told on the one hand that all views
are equally legitimate, but on the other hand, that evangelical orthodoxy
must be excluded at all costs [p. 89]
* every form of human spirituality may be comprehended and tolerated
as part of the apostate world vision (the demonic theoria) except historical
Christianity
H. Arminianism and Calvinism
* it is my view that Arminian thought is best understood historically,
as a compromise of the Reformation gospel with the humanistic motif of the
autonomy of the human consciousness flowing out of the ancient pagan
learning that had just been rediscovered in the Renaissance and that was
soon to come to maturity in the Enlightenment [p. 90]
_____
5. Salvation as God's Choice to Save: All Is of Grace
A. Charles Spurgeon and "God Saves Sinners"
B. Free Will a Slave
* for Spurgeon, the will is not an independent mechanism in the head,
but a function of a character [p. 96]
* the will is not independent entity, but a manifestation of the whole
person, of the fallen character [p. 97]
C. The Remonstrants After the Synod of Dort
D. Frederic Platt's Admissions
E. The Five Points of Calvinism
* Total Depravity:
1. the seriousness of sin [p. 100]
2. Arminianism: the will acts in autonomy from any previous causation
3. the Arminians were free at last from the Reformation doctrine of
God's sovereignty in salvation [p. 101]
* Unconditional Election:
1. God elects or chooses those whom he will save without regard to any
merit or condition on their part
2. all sinners equally deserve death
3. Arminians: election on the basis of foreseen merit [p. 102]
4. Dort: if grace be grace, there can be no merit or a humanly supplied
condition preceding God's eternal election
* Limited Atonement:
1. God intended the death of Christ to be a substitutionary sacrifice
to actually effect the salvation of only the elect
2. common grace is used by Calvinists to describe the nonsaving effects
of the atonement
3. the Arminian theory means the death of Christ was so limited in its
power that it is in fact not effective at all [p. 103]
4. Arminian: Christ's dying makes people savable but does not actually
save any particular person
* Irresistible Grace:
1. when God decides to save a particular sinner whom he has chosen, his
power is such that he cannot but succeed in getting the job done
2. Scripture teaches that no one can stop God from acomplishing his
plans
3. when the Arminian insists that somehow God limits himself at the
door of the human will, this can only mean in practice that the sinner must
supply something for something for salvation that God is powerless to supply
[p.104]
F. A Test Question
* we would be wholly incapable of embracing Jesus Christ as our
Savior, or of continuing in obedience, if God did not give us the ability -
no, the life - to do so [p. 105]
* Perseverance of the Saints
G. The Real Difference
* the real difference between Arminianism and Calvinism is the
determination of Arminians to combine their Christian testimony with the
rationalist-irrationalist presupposition of autonomy [p. 106]
_____
6. Depravity & Election: Spiritual Incompetence & Divine Sovereignty
A. Syncretism and the Search for the Middle Ground
* it is not the reality of the will that is in question, but its
independence from the rest of our fallen nature and its capacity to choose
autonomously against God's eternal purposes [p. 112]
B. Depravity: The Scriptural Evidence in Five Steps
1. since the Fall of Adam and Eve, all are born spiritually dead in
their sin nature, and therefore require regeneration to a life they do not
naturally possess
2. being fallen, the natural heart and mind is sinfully corrupt and
unenlightened [p. 113]
3. because the whole of nature is involved in the Fall and its results,
sinners are slaves to sin [p. 114]
4. no one escapes the unrighteous tendencies of the sinful Adamic
nature
5. left to themselves, those dead in trespasses and sins have no
spiritual ability to reform themselves, or to repent, or to believe savingly
[p. 115]
C. Arminian Misconceptions Clarified
* one of the basic presuppositions of the original Arminians was that
"inabilty limits responsibility" [p. 116]
* but the unregenerate sin quite willingly
* Arminians presuppose that the unregenerate heart is quite able to
repent whenever it wishes and merely needs encouragement and opportunity [p.
117]
* the Reformed view is that if the hearer is elect, God will
eventually use the preached Word to regenerate the sinner, turn the heart to
the Savior and give the gifts of faith and repentance
* it is the Word in the sovereign hand of the Spirit of God that
regenerates, not an autonomous will
D. The Election of Grace
* the choice is God's [p. 119]
* the supreme principle of Arminianism is conditionalism
* God's knowledge is certain knowledge - God could only be right about
this claim on the future if he actually controlled the future to such a
degree that he could secure the intended result [p. 120]
E. The Biblical Evidence for Election
* the whole point of the Arminian theory of election on the basis of
foreseen faith is that election is based on something the individual does
[p. 123]
* the Bible expressly states that faith (and/or repentance) is a gift
of God in Ephesians 2:8-10, Philippians 1:29 and 2 Timothy 2:25, to list a
few places [p. 125]
F. Conclusion
_____
7. Grace & Perseverance: Salvation & Its Security
A. The Glory of God
* to "glorify God" means to exhibit and express the greatness of God's
attributes in the creation, usually by worship and obedience [p. 129]
B. God Did Not Need to Create
C. Theology and Worship
* the kind of God we believe in determines the kind of worship we give
[p. 130]
D. Irresistible Grace
* if God had elected to save everyone without exception, all would
certainly be saved [p. 131]
E. Regeneration Is Not an Experience
F. Key Verses on Irresistible Grace
* Deut. 30:6; Ezek. 36:26-27; Matt. 11:25-27; John 1:12-13; 3:3-8, 17;
5:21; 6:37, 44-45, 64-65; Acts 11:18; 16:14; Rom. 8:30; 1 Cor. 4:7; 2 Cor.
3:6-8; Gal. 1:15-16; Eph. 1:11, 18; 2:1-5, 8-10; Phil. 1:29; 2:12-13; 2 Tim.
2:25-26; Heb. 9:15; 1 Pet. 1:23; 2 Pet. 1:3
G. Is the Divine Purpose Always Accomplished?
H. The Perseverance of the Saints
I. Scriptural Proof of Eternal Security
* God's elect are known to have eternal life the instant they believe
[p. 137]
* Mat. 18:12-14; John 3:16, 36; 5:24-25; 6:35-40; 10:27-30; 17:11-15;
Rom. 8:1, 29-30, 35-39
* God will keep his people faithful
* Rom 8:37-39; 1 Cor. 1:7-9; Eph. 1:5, 13-14; 4:30; 1 Thess. 5:23-24;
Heb. 9:12-15; 10:14; 1 Pet. 1:3-5; 1 John 5:4, 11-13, 20; Jude 1, 24-25
J. Two Key Passages
* to imagine erasing a supernatural seal from our own souls is rather
like trying to imagine our just deciding never to dream at night. We simply
do not have that kind of control of our own inner natures [p. 138]
* John 10
* Romans 8:28-39
K. Conclusions
_____
8. An Effective Atonement
A. Theories of the Atonement
1. ransom theory
2. satisfaction theory
3. penal substitution theory
4. moral influence theory
B. The Governmental Theory of the Atonement
* governmental theory
* in Grotius's view, the actual efficacy of the death of Christ in
saving us depends entirely on our response [p. 147]
C. The Reformed View of the Atonement
* Christ offered himself as a necessary satisfaction of God's justice
by dying as a substitute for all those whom the Father had elected from
eternity for salvation [p. 148]
D. John McLeod Campbell
* because John Owen believed the nature of the atonement is
substitutionary, his conclusion that the extent of the atonement is limited
to the elect is unavoidable [p. 149]
* a substitutionary atonement must either save everyone without
exception or be seen as a limited atonement in the sense that it was
designed to save only the elect
* to abandon the element of substitutionary sacrifice is to abandon
the atonement as taught in Scripture and as understood by the Reformers [p.
150]
E. Payment for Something Purchased
* Arminians believe that Christ merely made God propitious toward
everyone, without guaranteeing that salvation of any
* Calvinists believe that Christ satisfied God's justice for the sins
of a specific group, for whom a certain salvation in all it contributing
parts was secured by a complete purchase, infallibly, and forever
F. An Omnipotent Savior
* if he intended the salvation of all, could he not then achieve the
salvation of all? [p. 151]
G. Scriptural Proof of Particular Redemption
1. the purpose of the atonement was the salvation of a specific group
(Mt. 1:21; Jn 3:16; Gal. 1:3-4; Tit. 2:14; 1 Pet. 3:18), and it actually
achieved that result (Rom. 5:8-10; Eph. 2:15-16; Col. 1:21-22; Heb. 9:12)
[p. 151f]
2. Christ actually secured by purchase all the gifts needed for the
regeneration and sanctification of this group (1 Cor. 1:30; Eph. 1:3-4;
5:25-26; Phil. 1:29; Tit. 2:14; 3:5-6; Heb. 13:12)
3. this group was known to God from eternity, and the sacrifice was
designed for them, and for them alone (Jn. 6:35-40; 10:11, 14-18, 24-29;
11:50-52; 17:1-11; Acts 20:28; Rom. 8:32-34; Eph. 1:3-12; Heb. 2;17; 3:1;
9:15; Rev. 5:9)
_____
9. Are There Any "Arminian Verses" in the Bible
A. A Question of Strategy
B. Freewill Verses?
* the "freewill offerings" that were encouraged over and above those
prescribed by the Law, such as tithes. The poin is a distinction in the Law,
not a metaphysical statement about whether the faculty of choice is caused
or not [p. 157]
* in order to prove the Arminian view of the human will, it would be
necessary to find verses that establish that the faculty of choice (or of
the "will") is not only not influenced or caused to act in one way rather
than another by any external pressures, but also that the faculty of choice
is not caused to act by any causes or psychological influences from within
the soul either [p. 158]
* strictly speaking there are no verses in the Bible that teach a free
will in the Arminian sense. A request by Calvinists for exegetical proof of
the Arminian notion of free will usually brings a stunned silence
* the freewill theory is exposed for what it really is: an
extra-biblical presupposition imposed on the Bible from without
C. The Term Will
* Revelation 22:17 [p. 158]
1. it is the gospel that is free, not the will [p. 159]
2. there is no word for "whosoever" in the original
* John 3:16
1. states explicitly that the purpose of God in sending his Son to die
was limited to atoning for believers only
2. this is what Calvinists call a limited atonement
3. the issue then for Calvinists is not "whoesoever will" but why some
will or choose to come to Christ and others do not
4. the Bible says they come because the Father draws some and not
others (John 6:44)
* John 10
1. Jesus explains to his unbelieving enemies that the reason they did
not believe in him was that they were not in the category of his sheep (John
10:26) [p. 160]
2. they could not believe, because God had blinded them (John 12:37-40)
D. Human Choices
* the question is not about the reality of the choices, but about
whether they are caused or not [p. 161]
* Arminians conclude that because they are not conscious of causes
affecting their will, it must be free from all causes
E. Commands
* it was the anti-Christian philosopher Immanuel Kant who said, "Ought
implies can," not the Bible [p. 162]
* Socrates held the view that because human nature is ultimately
rational, to know the truth is to do it.
1. but the Bible knows nothing of such speculations.
2. instead, it speaks of slavery to sin
* Kant's statement is a presupposition, not a rationally proven
conclusion
* God on the other hand, may have many reasons for commanding sinners
to do what he knows they cannot do.
1. one reason would be to reveal the seriousness of slavery to sin
(Rom. 7:14-24)
2. another reason might be that by convicting the people of their
sinful inability to be good, he might thereby induce them to seek God's
mercy (Rom. 7:22-8:24) [p. 163]
F. Invitations
* Arminians seem to think that God's invitations presuppose the
ability to respond in the right way. The Bible expressly denies this ability
(Mt. 11:27-28)
* it is clear that throughout John's Gospel, invitations are given not
merely to condemn those who refuse them, but also to provide occasions for
the sheep whom the Father has given to the Son to respond as he draws them
(John 6:37)
* invitations are primarily occasions for the elect sheep to be
distinguished from the nonelect goats [p. 164]
* the purpose of evangelism is the gathering in of Christ's sheep
G. Verses Mentioning Free Will in Some Versions
* 2 Cor. 8:3: the word is authairetoi - the point is only that they
gave without it being demanded of them
* Philemon 14: the same thing occurs - Paul wants Philemon to forgive
Onesimus out of his own regenerate nature, and not submitting to apostolic
authority unwillingly [p. 165]
* when the Calvinist uses the term free will, nothing is conceded tot
he Arminian theory, but rather it is simply meant that people choose
according to their natures or characters
* bad trees freely (unconstrainedly, and out of their own natures)
produce bad fruit, and good trees likewise produce good fruit - it is not
possible for it to be otherwise (Mt. 7:18) [p. 166]
* besides, even if God or Jesus has free will in the Arminian sense,
it would still not follow that you and I do
H. Presuppositions and the "Obvious Meaning" of the Text
* as we discovered with the well-known verse John 3:16, a look at the
Greek instantly destroyed its apparently obvious Arminian meaning [p. 167]
I. Two "Obviously Arminian" Verses
* 2 Peter 3:9
1. Arminians assume "any" to mean "any human being whatsoever" [p. 168]
* the simplest response to this curious notion is that if God did not
want anyone to perish, he should not have created us with a free will in the
first place, because this made the Fall inevitable sooner or later
* more to the point, we might suggest that God should have done what
would be necessary to save everyone, thus ensuring that everyone would not
perish
2. do Arminians care to allow that once glorified, we no longer have
free will?
* if they say yes, they concede that free will is not finally
necessary to our humanness?
* if they say no, how can they deny the likelihood that a million or
so years in the eternal blessedness some unfortunate saint will not spoil
the whole deal by sinning again?
3. who the "any" are [p. 169]
* Arminians merely assume that it must mean "any human being existing"
* the salutation of the first epistle show that these two letters are
addressed to a category identified by the author as the "elect" (1 Peter
1:1)
* they have been born again (v. 3)
* and are "kept by the power of God through faith unto salvation" (v.
5)
* God is not will that any of us, the beloved elect, should perish,
but purposes that all of the elect from all times should come to repentance
* furthermore, in a Greek sentence such as this, an indefinite pronoun
such as any (tinas) normally refers to the most immediate antecedent in the
sentence
* 1 Timothy 2:3-6
1. the Arminian assumes that "all men" and "all" must mean "all
existing human beings" [p. 170]
2. all (pas) need not mean all examples of its class whatsoever (cf. 1
Tim. 1:16; 2:1, 2, 11; 3:4, 11; 4:8, 9, 10, 15; 5:20; 6:10, 13, 17)
3. if it can be shown that the word all often means "all kinds of"
instead of "all existing examples of" its referrent, the verse is no longer
an Arminian stronghold
* 1 Tim. 2:4 "all men" could not include Judas Iscariot
* 1 Tim. 2:8 "everywhere" can hardly mean "the North Pole" or "in
hell"
* 1 Tim. 4:4 "everything God created is good" cannot include Satan;
verse 3 limits verse 4 to food and marriage [p. 171]
* 1 Tim. 6:17 "everything for our enjoyment" cannot include sin
* 1 Tim. 2:4 then naturally means "all kinds of people."
4. therefore there is no reason to assume that "ransom for all" can
only mean that Christ intended to die substitutionally for "all existing
human beings." It simply means "all God's people" or "all kinds of people
[p. 172]
J. Conclusion
* "freewill theists" do not arrive at their Arminianism by the
exegesis of Scripture ... they begin with it as the necessary presupposition
of their humanism [p. 174]
_____
10. The Problem of Evil: The Final Stronghold of Unbelief?
A. The Biggest Problem of All
B. Possible False Solutions
* why should anyone assume that God is under any obligation to either
prevent evils or eliminate them as soon as they arise? [p. 183]
C. God Versus Syncretism
D. The Freewill Defense
* the most popular solution to the problem of evil is the freewill
defense [p. 188]
* determinism means that all states of affairs in a created cosmos are
caused by previous states of affairs - that there are no uncaused or chance
events [p. 189]
* freewill defense requires that the events of the world are partially
not determined
* acts of the will are not determined by previous states of affairs
either from within human nature (the bondage of the will to the sin nature)
or from without (for example, God does not override the will's freedom)
E. Indeterminism?
* if it is objected that we have free will now, but will not have it
in eternity, it would seem that a free will is not really necessary to the
image of God [p. 192]
* how can Arminians pray for the conversion of a person if God would
have to override the free will to convert that person? [p. 193]
F. Biblical Determinism
G. The Real Solution
* good is good because God determines it as such, not because it
conforms to my irrelevant innate conception of how things ought to be [p.
197]
H. Job's Answer to the Problem
I. Who Then Is the Author of Sin?
J. Responsibility Again
_____
11. The Location of Ultimacy & the Attributes of God: A Current Debate
A. The Unanswered Question
B. The Case of Clark Pinnock
C. The New Apologetic
D. The Location of Ultimacy
E. The Christian Ultimate
F. Tiamat Lives Again
G. Finite Godism
H. What is Idolatry?
I. Theological Crossfire
* if you do not believe the Bible to be inerrently infallibl in all
that it says, you must have an authority outside the Bible to tell you what
is reliable and what is not [p. 219]
J. Pinnock on God and Man
K. Fruits
L. Idolatry Again
M. The Openness of God
* the entire structure of freewill theism is based on reconstructing
evangelical theology to conform to the presupposition of the autonomy of
that human consciousness [p. 227]
N. Conclusions: A Virus Identified
O. Every Thought Captive
Charis,
Mike Abendroth
'God rides forth conquering in the chariot of His Gospel. . . He conquers
the pride of the heart, and makes the will which stood out as a Fort Royal
against Him, to yield and stoop to His grace; He makes the stony heart
bleed. Oh! it is a mighty call! Why then do some men seem to speak of a
moral persuasion? That God in the conversion of a sinner only morally
persuades and no more? If God in conversion should only morally persuade and
no more, then He does not put forth so much power in saving men as the Devil
does in destroying them.' Thomas Watson
HYPERLINK "http://www.bbcchurch.org"www.bbcchurch.org
--
No virus found in this outgoing message.
Checked by AVG Free Edition.
Version: 7.1.405 / Virus Database: 268.11.7/434 - Release Date: 8/30/2006
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.bbcchurch.org/pipermail/bbc_list/attachments/20060901/b59a6c26/attachment.htm
More information about the Bbc_list
mailing list