When I was a young boy, there was a little sapling in my parent’s front yard.  One day, I broke off the top of that sapling while hitting my cousin with it. You see, he was chasing me and I saw the sapling so I jumped over it (that's how small it was).  Then I reached back and pulled it as far as I could, and just as he reached me I let go of it, flipping the trunk up and hitting him, breaking off the top of the tree. That was forty years ago and now that tree is about fifty feet tall!  If you could have stood in our yard for a day or a whole week waiting for it to grow, you would have thought, “This tree is not growing one bit!” And yet over the course of 40 years it has grown to be a tall strong tree.  The life of a Christian is like that tree. We may grow very slowly, but “He who began a good work in you will bring it to completion at the day of Jesus Christ.”  Phil. 1:6 ESV 

Abraham is not an example of sudden spiritual success - he was a real work in progress. He had some rough edges. In fact, Abraham’s story is just a little embarrassing. He does not look like a great giant of the faith when we meet him in Genesis 12. But God was just beginning a work of faith in Abraham. In fact, God uses Abraham’s failures to teach him (and us) what it means to truly trust God and walk by faith. Abraham often takes two steps forward and then one step back, but he does keep moving forward. Conversion or regeneration is just the start of the magnificent, glorious work of salvation. It is not merely a matter of you being dedicated to God. God is dedicated to you!  God is going to do a very thorough work of grace in each and every one of us who are saved by His grace. 

An excerpt from Dr. Keathley’s sermon series entitled “Two Steps Forward, One Step Back: Lessons from the Life of Abraham”.
 
 
Let me ask those of you who confess to be followers of Christ a few questions. 
When you accepted Christ as your Savior, did you suddenly become a smarter person?  Did you look in the mirror and find that you are better looking?  Were you suddenly more prone to eat right and exercise every day?  Was it easier to find a parking place at the football game?  If we answer honestly, all of us would have to say “no - of course not!”  Becoming a Christian does not mean our lives are suddenly on easy street, and everything is turning out rosy.  
 So, what does it literally mean to walk with Christ or to walk the walk of faith?  What do John 8, Romans 4, Galatians 3, Hebrews 11 and James 2 all have in common in teaching us about the walk of faith? They all present the quintessential example of the walk of faith through the story of the life of Abraham. What is faith according to Abraham?

Faith is trusting God enough to obey him.

What does God want you to do?  He wants you to believe the gospel enough to trust it; enough to act on it; enough to respond to it. It is not enough to believe about the gospel, my friend. It is time for you to obey the gospel.  Bow the knee to the Lord Jesus Christ in repentance and faith - receive him as Lord and Savior.  Have you done that? Will you do that?

An excerpt from Dr. Keathley’s sermon series entitled “ Two Steps Forward, One Step Back: Lessons from the Life of Abraham”
 
 
Sola Paul--Ok, I’m not endorsing this approach to theological debate….but I confess I enjoyed this blog post much more than I should have. 

"This man was no moderate."  Al Mohler has posted a must read for all Baptists.

William Lane Craig lists five problems with determinism as advocated by many Calvinists.

This is a very cool math teacher.
 
 
On June 28 - July 2, Southeastern Seminary is offering "Contemporary Theological Issues: Molinism." We will survey Freddoso's translation of Book IV of Molina's Concordia; we will look at the objections to Molinism by post-reformation theologians such as Francis Turretin; and we will cover the works of current Molinists such as Alvin Plantinga, William Lane Craig, and Thomas Flint. I hope to see you there!
 
 
Because, like the Calvinist, I am convinced the Bible teaches that (1) God is sovereign and his control is meticulous; that (2) man is incapable of contributing to his salvation or of even desiring to be saved; that (3) God through Christ, is Author, Accomplisher, and Completer of salvation (i.e., salvation is a work of grace from beginning to end); that (4) individual election is unconditional; and that (5) the believer is secure in Christ. 
However, like the Arminian, I am also convinced the Bible teaches (6) God is not the Author, Origin, or Cause of sin (and to say that he is, is not just hyper-Calvinism, but blasphemy); that (7) God genuinely desires the salvation of all humanity; that (8) Christ genuinely died for all people; that (9) God’s grace is resistible (this means that regeneration does not precede conversion); and that (10) humans genuinely choose, are causal agents, and are responsible for the sin of rejecting Christ (this means that the alternative of accepting salvation was genuinely available to the unbeliever).  There is only one position that coherently holds to all ten affirmations, and that is Molinism.  From Salvation and Sovereignty, pp. 7.
 
 
Named after its first proponent, Luis Molina (1535–1600), a sixteenth-century Jesuit priest, Molinism holds to a strong notion of God’s control and an equally firm affirmation of human freedom. In other words Molinism simultaneously holds to a Calvinistic view of a comprehensive divine sovereignty and to a version of free will (called libertarianism) generally associated with Arminianism. As Doug Geivett argues, the fact that Molinism is the one proposal that tries to hold simultaneously to both is a point in its favor, since both “are prima facie true.”

Molinism teaches that God exercises his sovereignty primarily through his omniscience, and that he infallibly knows what free creatures would do in any given situation. In this way God sovereignly controls all things while humans are also genuinely free. God is able to accomplish his will through the use of what Molinists label his middle knowledge.  We will look at the Molinist model of God’s knowledge and providence in the next chapter and in the chapter on sovereign election.    

So Molinism formulates a radical “compatibilism,”—a “Calvinist” view of divine sovereignty and an “Arminian” view of human freedom—and for this reason is often attacked from both sides of the aisle. Calvinists such as Bruce Ware and Richard Muller consider Molinism to be a type of Arminianism, while Roger Olsen and Robert Picirilli (both card-carrying Arminians) reject Molinism for being too Calvinistic. However, Molinism is attractive to many leading Christian philosophers of our day, such as Alvin Plantinga, Thomas Flint, and William Lane Craig.  One of the main reasons is that it demonstrates it is logically possible to affirm divine sovereignty and human freedom in a consistent manner.  Even open theist William Hasker, who is no friend to Molinism, admits, “If you are committed to a ‘strong’ view of providence, according to which, down to the smallest detail, ‘things are as they are because God knowingly decided to create such a world,’ and yet you also wish to maintain a libertarian conception of free will—if this is what you want, then Molinism is the only game in town.”

As a matter of fact, that is exactly what I want because I believe Molinism is faithful to the biblical witness. The Molinist model is the only game in town for anyone who wishes to affirm a high view of God’s sovereignty while holding to a genuine definition of human choice, freedom and responsibility.  William Lane Craig goes so far as to describe the Molinist notion of middle knowledge as “the single most fruitful theological concept I have ever encountered.”  When we apply Molinism to the vexing questions of predestination and election, the reasons for his enthusiasm become evident.  

From Salvation & Sovereignty pp. 5-6

 
 
   Calvinism has at least three dilemmas: (1) reconciling God’s sovereign election of individuals with his genuine desire for the salvation of all; (2) adhering to a deterministic view of sovereignty without blaming God for the Fall of Adam; and (3) adhering to limited atonement and irresistible grace while also affirming that the Gospel is genuinely offered to everyone.  There is an alternative to Calvinism—called Molinism—which provides answers to these three quandaries that are both biblical and logically consistent.    

Most Christians have heard about Calvinism, but not as many are familiar with Molinism. I suspect some who embrace Calvinism do so because they recognize the Bible teaches that God is sovereign and Calvinism is the only theological system of which they are aware that attempts to do justice to God’s sovereignty. Calvinism often wins by default, especially when Arminianism is understood to be the alternative.  Simply put, Molinism argues that God perfectly accomplishes his will in free creatures through the use of his omniscience.  It reconciles two crucial biblical truths: (1) God exercises sovereign control over all his creation, and (2) human beings make free choices and decisions for which they must give account.   

From Salvation and Sovereignty (pp. 4-5)

 
ROSES vs TULIP 04/01/2010
 
What are the tenets of ROSES, in contrast to TULIP?

Radical depravity: The old term, total depravity, gives the impression that fallen humanity always is as bad as it possibly can be.  The new term, radical depravity, more correctly emphasizes that every aspect of our being is affected by the Fall and renders us incapable of saving ourselves. 

Overcoming grace: The old term, irresistible grace, seems to imply that God saves a person against his will.  The new term, overcoming grace, highlights that it is God’s persistent beckoning that overcomes our wicked obstinacy. 

Sovereign election: Often the term unconditional election is presented in such as way as to give the impression that those who die without receiving Christ did so because God never desired their salvation in the first place.  The replacement label, sovereign election, affirms that God desires the salvation of all, yet accentuates that our salvation is not based on us choosing God, but on God choosing us.

Eternal life: The old term, perseverance of the saints, leads to the notion that a believer’s assurance is based on his ability to persevere rather than on the fact he is declared righteous in Christ.  The purpose of the new term, eternal life, is to stress that believers enjoy a transformed life that is preserved and we are given a faith which will remain. 

Singular redemption:  A particularly unfortunate concept, limited atonement, teaches that Christ died only for the elect and gives the impression that there is something lacking in the Atonement.  The new term, singular redemption, emphasizes that Christ died sufficiently for every person, but efficiently only for those who believe.


From Salvation and Sovereignty (pp. 3-4)