Given our current sensory experience, how can we justify inferences from them and from our records of the past, to the future and to the sorts of scientific laws and theories we seek?(Rosenberg 2013) Hume’s argument:A conclusion is justified either … Continue reading The Present Problem: Induction, Materialism, and the Illusion of Justification
I was recently reading an exchange between Dr. Bowen and Robert Rowe, and it struck me that the real issue was being overlooked. I won’t reproduce the entire dialogue, but here’s the link for reference. Rowe was defending Hugh Ross’s … Continue reading Out of Egypt: Hosea, Typology, and the Gospel According to Matthew
by Jimmy Stephens Yeah, I agree with @Spicy, this is intended as a hermeneutical problem of the criterion. So @Sachairi, we would all agree you should definitely look to the historical and cultural milieu of a work to interpret it. … Continue reading The Hermeneutical Problem of the Criterion
Co-written with Jimmy Stephens Introduction Tony Byrne recently offered an extensive reply to my vacuity objection against Hypothetical Universalism (HU). While I appreciate the theological depth and historical citations he brings to the conversation, his response ultimately fails to address … Continue reading Christ Died for Sins, Not Categories
“The rest” (Rom. 11:7) can be saved, so they’re not reprobate Juncker’s Argument:Calvinism teaches that “the rest” in Romans 11:7 refers to the reprobate—those eternally and irreversibly destined for hell. But Paul indicates in verses 11–14 and 23 that some … Continue reading Branches, Remnants, and Mercy: Election in Romans 11 in Light of Romans 9
In his response to Thomas Schreiner’s review of Paul’s Use of the Old Testament in Romans 9:10–18, Brian Abasciano critiques the Reformed interpretation of Romans 9, especially the notion that Paul teaches unconditional individual election. Abasciano argues instead for a … Continue reading Naming, Calling, and the Sovereignty of God: A Reformed Response to Brian Abasciano’s Critique of Schreiner on Romans 9
In a recent exchange, Dr. Theologician attempted to draw a strong distinction between Calvinism and metaphysical fatalism by appealing to the idea that the future is known by God with certainty but is not fixed. His assertion: “All events being … Continue reading Can God Know an Open Future with Certainty? A Response to Dr. Theologician
In my recent article, Not His Plan? A Reformed Response to a Common Prooftext Error, I critiqued a popular misuse of Hosea 8:4—especially among Open Theist Provisionists who argue that certain events occur outside of God’s knowledge or decree. But … Continue reading God’s Plan Includes Even This: A Response to a Provisionist Reading of Hosea
A popular anti-Calvinist tweet recently circulated, citing Hosea 8:4 (“They set up kings without my consent”) and Isaiah 30:1 (“They carry out plans—but not mine”) as supposed proof that some human actions fall outside of God’s will. The argument goes … Continue reading Not His Plan? A Reformed Response to a Common Prooftext Error
The recent discussion between Redeemed Zoomer and Ramos offered an insightful look into the ongoing Protestant–Catholic dialogue. Both came in with conviction and clarity on their respective positions. While Redeemed Zoomer clearly came out ahead in terms of argumentation—especially when … Continue reading Are Catholics Our Brothers?
The Council 
You must be logged in to post a comment.