Arminian Today

I was listening to brother Ray Comfort’s teaching, True and False Conversion the other night while working.  I do recommend the teaching.  While we don’t agree eye to eye on all points, Ray Comfort’s passion for holiness is heard in this teaching.  He looks around at the church and sees so many who are not Christ-lovers.  They are abiding in sin, playing games with the world, and never seeking after righteousness.  Comfort calls them “false converts.”

Are there really false converts in the modern Church?  Of course there are.  Comfort does a good job of showing in the teachings of Jesus that there would be sheep and goats (Matthew 25:32), wheat and tares (Matthew 13:24-30), and many who will say on the day of Judgment that Jesus is Lord but He will not be their Lord (Matthew 7:21-23).  Comfort walks his hearers through Mark 4:1-9 and the parable of the sower with Jesus’ own explanation of His parable (Mark 4:14-20).  He shows from Mark 4:14-20 who the true and false converts are.

Several points he makes are solid.  Comfort points out that salvation is a work of the Spirit of God.  No Arminian would disagree.  We believe that the Holy Spirit takes the gospel and He opens the sinners heart to receive the Word of God.  While the Spirit is not mentioned in John 6:44, no doubt He is the one who leads us to the Father to be saved through the Son (Acts 16:14-15) as Jesus said that He would convict the world of sin, righteousness, and judgment (John 16:8-11).

Next Comfort points out that if a person is truly saved, we will not need to baby sit them to keep them saved.  Some think that we need to take a new disciple and take them away from temptation and away from the world and away from their old friends but Comfort says that if a person is truly saved, temptation drives us to Jesus and not away from Him (Mark 4:20; Romans 5:1-3; James 1:2-5).  Comfort points out that true salvation leads one to build on Jesus so that when storms come from the world or from temptation, we are on solid ground in Christ but not so with the false convert (Matthew 7:24-27).

The differences I had with his teaching were not that there are false converts.  I agree that there are many false converts.  However, Comfort holds to eternal security and therefore he believes that every person who turns away from Christ was a false convert.  He points to Judas Iscariot.  He points out that Judas was not a believer who fell away.  He says that Judas was a false convert.  He turns to John 6:66-71 and points to Peter as a true disciple who falls into sin but comes back but Judas was never saved to begin with.  He points to Luke 22:31-34 as proof that Jesus was praying for Peter but not Judas.  He points out that Judas is called a thief in John 12:6 and not that he became a thief.  Judas was a thief the whole time he was with Jesus.  He was a false convert.

From this, Comfort holds that a person can seemed to be anointed, seem to preach the gospel (as Judas did), and seem to do great things for the Lord but inwardly they are like Judas, a thief and a false convert.  He points to Acts 20:30 to wolves who will arise inside the church to deceive people from Christ.  They are wolves who appear to be sheep (Matthew 7:15).  No matter how long a person may “serve” Christ, if they do not remain faithful to Him, they are a false convert.  They were never born again.

I know some Arminians who would agree with Comfort on this.  They, like Comfort, hold to eternal security but only if a person remains faithful to Jesus.  If they fall away, they were never saved to begin with.  I have dealt with such teaching before on this blog and will not labor back over that.  I actually could sit under that teaching (and by the way, I do appreciate Ray Comfort even if we don’t agree on this issue) better than under the radical, “once saved, always saved” teaching that allows for continued sinning without repentance.

However, I believe that Scriptures do teach apostasy and that it is something we should beware of.  If we hold to the “never saved to begin with” theory, we must do something with the warning passages such as Matthew 18:21-35 or 24:4-5, 13 or Luke 8:21 or John 8:51 or 15:1-8 or Acts 13:43 or Romans 11:20-22 or 1 Corinthians 9:24-10:21 or 2 Corinthians 1:24 or Galatians 5:1-4 or 6:7-9 or 2 Peter 2:1-22 and so many more.  We must do something with the warnings issued by Jesus in Revelation 2-3 where He gives specific promises to overcomes and warnings to those who fail to abide in Him.  We must do something with the entire book of Hebrews!  We must view these warning passages as hypothetical or twist them to mean something than they clearly mean if we hold that a person can never fall from grace.

Further, I believe that such a view never truly gives assurance of salvation.  I have no problem teaching that a person must continue in the faith since this is all through the epistles (see Colossians 1:21-23 for example).  We should urge disciples to continue seeking Jesus always and always placing their faith and hope fully in Him and His cross for our salvation and never in our works (Galatians 3:1-5).  We should preach perseverance of the saints and not preservation of the sinner.  We should point out that there is never any promises of eternal life given to those abiding in sin.  None.  We should preach that the disciple of Jesus is called to victory in Christ Jesus (Romans 8:12-13, 37).  This leads to assurance that we are saved (Romans 8:14-17 in the context of Romans 8:12-13).  To tell people, “if you don’t continue in the faith, you were never saved to begin with,” how can this not lead to a lack of assurance?

Are there many promises given in the New Testament to the keeping power of God?  Yes!  I trust in them!  Yet every single promise is given to those who are in Christ Jesus.  Each passage assumes that disciples are in Christ Jesus through faith (John 10:27-29).  We are protected by God’s power through faith (1 Peter 1:5).  This faith is ongoing.  It not momentary.  It is not false. It is a continual trust in the finished work of Jesus Christ for our salvation.  We have the promise of 1 John 2:24-25 if we remain in Jesus by faith.

I do appreciate Ray Comfort greatly and praise God for his service to the kingdom of Christ.  His books on evangelism are excellent resources for all believers.  Both Arminians and Calvinists and everyone in-between can learn much from this man of God.  I just disagree with him over his teaching that anyone who turns away from the faith was never saved to begin with.  I don’t believe this faithfully deals with the warning passages of the New Testament and leads to a lack of assurance of our salvation.  The question before us is the same that the Puritans use to ask themselves daily, “Am I trusting today in the cross of Christ or in my own flesh?”  That is something we should all yearn for, that complete trusting in Jesus alone for our eternal salvation (2 Peter 1:10-11).

In Ephesians 4:13 we read

In Him you also trusted, after you heard the word of truth, the gospel of your salvation; in whom also, having believed, you were sealed with the Holy Spirit of promise. (NKJV)

Several things I notice about this text.  First, notice that belief followed hearing the gospel.  We must hear the gospel to be saved (Romans 10:14-17).  This is why evangelism is so important to the disciple of Jesus.  We simply are following the command of our Savior to take the gospel to all of creation (Mark 16:15).  We believe that none can be saved without the gospel of Jesus Christ (John 14:6; Acts 4:12; 1 Timothy 2:5-6).

Secondly, notice that our salvation is found in Jesus.  Not in our own election.  Not in our doctrinal system.  Salvation is found in the person and work of the Lord Jesus Christ.  The focus of Ephesians 1:3-14 is not on you.  It is on Jesus.  Jesus is the main focus here.  Election in Arminianism is always Christ-centered and not man-centered.  Our focus is on Jesus whom God chose to send to die for our sins in our place (Isaiah 53:10-12; 2 Corinthians 5:18-21; 1 Peter 2:21-24).  Over and over again the focus is on Him in Ephesians 1:3-14.  ”In Christ” (v. 3), “in Him” (v. 4), “by Jesus Christ to Himself” (v. 5), “His grace” (v. 6), “In Him” (v. 7), “He made” (v. 8), “His will” and “His good pleasure” (v. 9), “in Christ” (v. 10), “In Him” (v. 11), “in Christ” (v. 12), “In Him” (v. 13), and “His glory” (v. 14).

Thirdly, notice when the sealing of the Spirit takes place.  Paul writes that after believing, we are sealed with the Spirit.  This is important because the sealing of the Spirit marks ownership.  We become God’s elect when we believe the gospel.  We can debate about whether election is unconditional or conditional but the passage is clear that when we believe, we are then marked with the Spirit and become God’s possession.  This is detrimental to the teaching that regeneration must be before faith.  If this were the case, surely the Spirit knows those who are the elect already since He regenerates them before believing the gospel.  In fact, the regeneration before faith view teaches that the Holy Spirit must regenerate people before faith otherwise faith becomes and a work and a person has “worked” their own salvation through their own faith.  Yet this passage is clear that having believed, we are then sealed with the Spirit of promise.  Is then teaching a second blessing?  Is this teaching that the Spirit regenerates before conversion but then He does something else after conversion?

That someone receives salvation through faith as opposed to works is clear in the New Testament.  However, simply because someone has faith in the gospel and then is regenerated does not make this faith a work.  To receive a free gift that a person did not earn nor deserve does not make it less than a gift does it?  Even so salvation is through faith and a person is responsible to believe the gospel or reject it but salvation is always by grace through faith and not by works of righteousness that we have done (Ephesians 2:8-9; Titus 3:5-7).  Yet a person is not force to believed nor could they not reject the free offer of the gospel if they so choose.  This does not make salvation by works but acknowledges that a person must believe the gospel to be saved.

While Arminianism affirms justification by faith and affirms that salvation is a work of God and not of man (John 1:12-13) and we affirm that salvation is all of grace (Acts 15:11; Ephesians 2:8-9) yet because we affirm that we believe that people are responsible to believe the gospel once they hear the gospel preached to them (Romans 10:9-17) that this leads to justification by works.  Faith, in this case, is seen as a work since we are telling people that they must believe the gospel to be saved (Acts 2:21).

The problem with this view is that while Arminians do believe that people must believe the gospel to be saved and they must exercise their free will to follow Jesus (Luke 14:25-35), we believe that this is the work of the Spirit.  Apart from the Holy Spirit, no one could be saved.  The Holy Spirit is the one who woos the sinner’s heart to salvation.  He anoints the preaching (Acts 1:8), opens ears to the gospel (Acts 16:14), and He takes the gospel and applies it to the sinner’s heart (Acts 15:9).  When a person then believes the gospel through faith and repentance (1 Corinthians 1:21), the Spirit of God regenerates them (Titus 3:5-7).  Being regenerated by the Spirit is absolutely essential to eternal life (John 3:3-7).

Now at this point Calvinists would agree with much of what I just wrote.  They too would affirm all that I said but would add that once a person does believe it is because the Spirit of God must deposit faith into them by His sovereign grace or they would not be saved.  Because of their view of complete and total depravity of the person, how can a dead person believe the gospel and be saved (Ephesians 2:1)?  Since a dead person cannot respond to the gospel, the Spirit of God must regenerate them to believe the gospel.

The problem with such a view abounds.  First, there is simply no biblical basis for this view.  This is an assumption that Calvinists carry over to the Scriptures and make fit.  I have seen Calvinist theologians strain to make 1 John 5:1 fit their theology.  No where in the New Testament does it teach that regeneration precedes faith.  Faith is always seen as the way to salvation.

Secondly, the view that regeneration must precede faith, in my estimation, would naturally lead to double-predestination.  John Calvin seemed to embrace this view as did many other Calvinists after him including theologians such as Jonathan Edwards or even modern theologians such as John Frame.  Calvin called this doctrine, “the horrible decree” because it viewed God as choosing before time whom He would save and whom He would damn.  The person bound for hell is bound there no matter what.  The gift of faith will never be given to them even if they seem to believe for a while.  If the gift of faith is required in order for someone to be saved, why doesn’t God just give this gift to all people?  Why limit this “for His glory?”  If God has the power to save all, why doesn’t He?  Arminianism affirms that His desire is to save all who would believe the gospel (John 3:16; 1 John 2:1-2).  We affirm a universal atonement that is so powerful that it can save all who come to God through faith just as Moses and the snake in the wilderness could heal all who looked upon the serpent on the poll (John 3:14-15).

A few passages do seem to present faith as a gift.  Let’s look at a couple.  First is the Ephesians 2:8-9.  I have read this verse thousands of times and yet to see how Calvinists see the phrase “this is not your own doing” as being the gift of faith and not salvation apart from works?  Verses 9 and 10 both are emphasizing works yet we are to believe that the gift of faith is the issue in verse 8?   We affirm that salvation is by God’s grace through faith and have no problem proclaiming that truth but to read into verse 8 as the gift of faith, I believe, is not an accurate exegesis of the passage.  By the way, John Calvin was noted for not always being consistent in his views and he wrote this about Ephesians 2:8-9:

“He does not mean that faith is the gift of God, but that salvation is given to us by God, or, that we obtain it by the gift of God.” (Commentaries, vol. 11, 145).

Another common cited passage is Philippians 1:29.  However, we Arminians affirm that faith is a gift from God in the sense that the Spirit helps us to believe.  We believe the gospel but the work of salvation is all of God and not of us and even our believing comes because the Holy Spirit used the gospel to save our souls.  There is not boasting from a biblical Arminian about “saving ourselves” through our free will.  We believe that because of sin, we are lost without the aid of the Holy Spirit drawing us to salvation in the Savior (John 6:44).  However, I do want to point out that few speak much about the gift of suffering that Paul has in mind in Philippians 1:29.  Many want to debate the issue of believing but not the suffering to which we are also called (Romans 8:18).

A final problem I want to point out about the issue of regeneration before faith is found in F. Leroy Forlines book Classical Arminianism in which he writes about the problem of justification and regeneration in Calvinism.  If regeneration takes place before faith then this would mean that the elect are justified before faith but this would logically go against passages such as Romans 5:1 and would ignore the need of sanctification.  If the elect are eternally justified then sanctification is meaningless.  They are not sinners.  The elect are born justified and from all eternity have been so.  Justification comes through the work of Jesus Christ.  Jesus obtained our justification on the cross.  Yet if regeneration takes place before faith then this would mean that the elect are justified already before faith since they are regenerated and their sins are gone.  This would mean that all the elect are born sinless.  They are seen as justified before God.  Forlines points out that some Calvinist theologians such as Louis Berkhof saw this problem in his systematic theology text.  R.C. Sproul, however, does not.  In his book, Chosen By God, Sproul defends the view that regeneration must precede faith.  He ignores the issue of eternal justification.

I believe that the Arminian view that justification is by faith is the correct one.  This was the major focus of Paul the Apostle in the book of Romans and no where in Romans does he say that regeneration takes place before faith.  He makes faith the condition.  Romans 3:25-26 are strong verses that show that justification is by faith in Jesus Christ.

One final point from Forlines that I believe is worth repeating is that he makes the point that faith is the condition for salvation and not the grounds for it.  Forlines points out that when we speak often of justification by faith and focus on faith and not Christ as the grounds for our salvation, we then get caught in examining our faith and not the person and work of Jesus Christ.  As I have pointed out many times before, Jesus is our salvation.  We can debate faith and regeneration and sanctification but Jesus is our salvation.  We are saved by a Person and not a theory.  Certainly I agree that we are justified by faith but my focus must be on Jesus Christ (Romans 6:23).  Jesus is the one who died for me and His blood alone cleanses me from all sin (Ephesians 1:7).  In eternity, the praise and glory will not be for the elect or the gift of faith but upon Jesus who gave His life for the Church (Revelation 5:9-10).  Jesus alone is the one that our faith needs to focus on and not our theological assumptions which are so often wrong.

Both Arminians and Calvinists affirm that salvation is a work of God.  We both affirm that regeneration takes place not by the sinners choosing but by the work of the Holy Spirit (John 3:3-5; Titus 3:5-7).  We both affirm that because of sin, humanity needs the divine aid of God in order to be saved.  The differences lie not in our understanding of salvation in terms of justification by faith (Romans 5:1; Ephesians 2:8-9) but in terms of whether this salvation is conditional or unconditional.  Calvinism teaches that salvation is given only to the elect whom God has sovereignly chosen by His own will (Romans 9:18).  All through the Scriptures Calvinists see the hand of God in bringing His elect to salvation.

Arminianism differs in that while we agree that the application of the gospel of Jesus Christ is from God as well as the ability to believe the gospel through the Holy Spirit (John 6:44), we believe that the responsibility to believe the gospel lies not with God but with mankind.  People are free to either believe the gospel or reject the gospel (John 5:40, 46; 6:35-36; Acts 7:51; 2 Corinthians 6:1-2).  We believe that the duty of the disciple of Jesus is to proclaim His salvation in all the earth by the power of the Spirit (Acts 1:8) and He will save sinners (Acts 2:47).  Yet we disagree with our Calvinist brethren in that we believe that God does not force (or drag as R.C. Sproul likes to pull out of John 6:44 while ignoring the same word in John 12:32) people to come to Him.  He gave His Son who died for all to come and be saved (John 1:29; 3:16; 2 Corinthians 5:18-21; 1 Timothy 2:1-6; 1 John 2:2) but only those who believe become the elect of God (1 Timothy 4:10; 2 Peter 1:10-11).  The Spirit of God is at work to draw sinners to the Savior through the gospel that is preached (John 1:6-9; 1 Corinthians 1:21).

Many Calvinists I know of agree with me that people are responsible to believe the gospel.  I had a Calvinist teacher in college who was a TULIPER he said.  He added “ER” as “evangelism” and “responsibility.”  In his case, he believed that people are to evangelize the lost (as some hyper-Calvinists disagree with) and he believed that we are responsible for our actions, sins, and the gospel itself.  Most Calvinists also preach this way, as if people are responsible to believe the gospel.  While many oppose altar calls (as do I), most have no problem telling people to come to Jesus and repent of their sins and be saved.  Few would oppose such teaching and practices.

The difference would be when people do come to Jesus for salvation, whether that was by God’s unconditional choosing or because of His grace working on the sinner’s heart but allowing them to be responsible for believing the gospel.  The amazing thing is that once a person does repent of their sins and is baptized into Jesus, it was all of grace (Acts 15:11)!  Salvation is not because we choose to be saved (John 1:12-13) but because we surrendered completely to the Lord for His salvation.  We declared that Jesus alone saves and we came to Him alone for our salvation and not our works.

Some Calvinists will protest that the words “free will” are not used in reference to salvation in the Bible.  While I would agree, I do believe that free will is implied throughout the Scriptures from the fall of Man in Genesis 3 to the promise of Revelation 22:17.  All through the Bible God commands things to be done.  He commanded Adam and Eve not to eat of the fruit of the tree of knowledge (Genesis 2:16-17).  This implies that they had the power of contrary choice.  In Genesis 4 we have God speaking to Cain in verse 7 that he has the power to overcome temptation.  How can this be apart from the power of contrary choice?  The history of Israel as a people is one large case study in God giving them promises and telling them to keep them and choosing to follow Him (see Joshua 24:14-15).  Over and over again we see the children of Israel turning either to the Lord (Exodus 2:23-25) or away from Him (Judges 2:1-3).  This implies free will in my estimation.

To sum up, the Arminian viewpoint is that the work of the gospel is Jesus.  The application of the gospel is through God.  The power of the gospel is in God.  But the responsibility to believe the gospel is not God’s.  He desires not that people die in their sins and rebellion against Him (Ezekiel 18:32; 2 Peter 3:9).  God’s desire is to save whosoever will come to Jesus to be saved (John 6:39-40).  No doubt God is the one who opens sinners hearts when the gospel is preached (Acts 16:14-15) but He does not force Himself on anyone.  He lovingly allows people to hear the gospel and respond to the gospel through His prevenient grace.

In Exodus 3:18-22 we read what Yahweh tells Moses concerning Pharaoh and the plunder of the Egyptians.  God tells that Moses that He is going to set His people free from the bondage under the Egyptians (vv. 7-8).  He then tells Moses in verse 18 to go and tell Pharaoh that the Jews were to go into the wilderness to sacrifice to the LORD yet Yahweh tells Moses in verse 19 that He knows that Pharaoh will not let them go unless compelled by a mighty hand and so in verse 20 Yahweh tells Moses that He will strike Egypt with wonders and then Pharaoh will let them go.  God even promises in verses 21-22 that He will give the Jews favor with the Egyptians so that the Jews will plunder them.

Anyone who knows the book of Exodus and the history of the Israelites knows that all this comes to pass.  Moses goes before Pharaoh and sure to God’s word, Pharaoh denies that the Israelites can go free.  God does wonders that amazes both the Egyptians and the Israelites and finally, after the striking down of the first-born in all of Egypt, Pharaoh calls Moses to him and tells him to leave (Exodus 12:31-32).  The Israelites even plunder the Egyptians as God promised (Exodus 12:36).

What amazes me about Exodus 3:18-22 is that Yahweh clearly foresees all the free will decisions that will come to pass.  In His complete omniscience He knows what Pharaoh will do and say and even what the Egyptians will do for the Israelites after God’s judgment upon them.  Romans 9:14-18 gives us insight into God’s choosing of Pharaoh for His own purpose.  Romans 9:14-18 is not salvation in nature.  The point of Romans 9:14-18 is that God is sovereign to choose whomever He desires for His own purpose without saving them in the process.  Pharaoh could have been saved if he had repented of his sins but he continued in his unbelief and hardened his heart toward Yahweh.  The parallel between John 15:16 and Romans 9:17 are similar.  Jesus’ choice of His Apostles in John 15:16 was to service and not entirely to salvation (as the case of Judas shows).  This is true of Pharaoh as well.  He was chosen by God for God’s own purpose: to show His glory and wonders to the Israelites.

What is amazing though is that God knows the free will choices that Pharaoh and the Egyptians would make.  God does not force these decisions but He knows them just as He knows your thoughts before you even utter them (Psalm 139:4).  Jesus knew the thoughts of many in the Gospels.  In Mark 2:8 we read that Jesus perceived the thoughts of the people questioning His words in their hearts.  In John 2:25 we read that Jesus knew what was in man.  In John 6:64 Jesus even knew who did not believe about the disciples spoken of in verse 66 and about Judas (verse 71).  On a side note, Adam Clarke makes the point that could it be that Jesus was reaching out to Judas trying to call him to repent of his wickedness beforehand?  I know this is speculation on Clarke’s part but I do see the love of Jesus even for a Judas.

I write all this because some accuse us Arminians of rejecting the omniscience of God.  They believe that we hold to open theism, that God does not know all future actions of free will creatures.  I certainly reject this notion.  I believe from passages such as Exodus 3:18-22 that God does indeed know all things.  He knows even the free will decision of people.  He foreknows even those who will believe the gospel of Christ (Romans 8:29).  While this knowledge is not unconditional in that salvation is based on conditions that God has set including belief, He does know those who will believe.  This mystery is beyond me.  I cannot fathom knowing all things including decisions others are going to make.  God does.  God knows all things.  He foreknows all events.  He has chosen in His sovereignty to allow for free will from His creatures so that none can accuse Him of evil and say on the day of judgment that they were only doing what God had caused them to do.  Calvinists believe that God renders certain whatsoever comes to pass including sin.  How does this not make God the author of sin?  If God is going to render certain all things that come to pass then this means that He causes them to come to pass.  In essence, this makes God the one who caused the event (even sinful) to be rendered certain.

The Arminian view is that God simply knows.  That is it.  God knew the free will actions of Pharaoh and the Egyptians before it happened because He knows.  God knew when you would believe.  God knew that I would write this post.  That God knows is not the same as God caused.  God foreknows all things including the free will decisions of people.  He controls all things but He does not cause all things.  He knew the free will actions that would be taken toward His Son (Isaiah 53:4-6) but He allowed those free will choices to be made and for Jesus’ death to come to pass (Acts 2:23 notice that Peter says that those Jews were guilty of Jesus’ death through the hands of lawless men).  God allowed people to make free will choices to crucify His Son but He knew those choices would be made even if He didn’t make that choice for them.

There are some who take comfort in a fatalistic view of God’s omniscience.  I have even known some who would abide in sin believing that God knew and rendered certain their sin so why fight it?  I have seen some find comfort in their struggles of life by believing that God caused their troubles to come upon them by His own sovereign choice.  I have seen women mourn over their dead baby only to bless God for killing the child.  They find comfort that God causes all things to come to pass even if they don’t understand God’s ways.  They read the book of Job and see the hand of God crushing Job as proof that we should expect the same in this life.

I don’t know.  I don’t find much comfort in that thought.  I do believe that God is sovereign.  I do believe that God foreknows all things.  I do believe that God controls all things.  I reject that God causes all things.  Did God cause Adam to sin?  Did God cause Judas to betray Jesus?  Did God cause Hitler to murder over 6 million Jews?  Did God cause the rapist to rape a little girl?  What kind of God is this?  Despite the picture that Scripture presents of Him being loving and good, I would find this fatalistic view of God as appalling.

I am not sure if either Arminianism or Calvinism has the answer to the problem of evil.  The Calvinist views the sovereignty of God as meaning that He must cause all things to come to pass for His glory even the hardening of sinner’s hearts.  The Arminian views the sovereignty of God as God allowing free will decisions to be made that He does know but does not cause.  The open theist view is that God allows the future to partly open so that free will decisions are completely unknown to Him before they take place in time and then God reacts to those free will decisions.  I believe that all three may have problems but I accept the Arminian view as I believe from cases such as Exodus 3:18-22 that God does know all things including the future free will choices that others will make and He is able to make prophetic statements in that regard.

Head over to the White Horse Inn and listen to their podcast featuring Dr. Michael Horton (For Calvinism) and Dr. Roger Olson (Against Calvinism) as they engage in conversational theological discussions over the ongoing Arminian/Calvinist debate.  Dr. Olson admits that he is no debater but rather he and Michael Horton engage in a conversation which is somewhat different from a debate.  I enjoy this type of theological discussions as well where we are seeking to learn from one another and not merely to try to build up straw men and tear them down.  The point of the conversation is not to declare a winner or to try to put together better arguments than your opponent but to just engage in meaningful and friendly discussions over theology.  That is my cup of tea.

The program is Dr. Horton’s so the first edition of the podcast seems to me to more bent toward giving Mr. Horton more time than Dr. Olson but I am okay with that since it is Dr. Horton’s program and perhaps they will give more time to Dr. Olson the next program.

You can find the program here.