Across my last five or so episodes I've put enormous weight on human agency in understanding a biblical theology. This cast O' the pod, following Reformed vs. Arminian constructions and the priority of prevenient grace, emphasizes both the 'that' and the 'why' of God's revelation (the Gospel) being the premise of salvation. We cannot save ourselves; cannot be compassionate enough; cannot be intelligent enough; cannot make ourselves live forever; cannot resurrect ourselves. God—alone—is the premise, the life giver, the source of salvation. In the show's opening I work through Jesus' warning to ..read more

The Reformed doctrine of Total Depravity rather necessitates their doctrine of Common Grace, or better, common graces. When I was in seminary I realized that most other Christians talked about life in terms of grace, whereas my tradition spoke about life in terms of God's Spirit. What are the benefits of each? What are important biblical frames for each? Against what was the Reformed doctrine of Grace reacting in the 16th century? Me? Because I reject the premises of Reformed theology I have other theological avenues by which to process life. Life is so magical! So personal! Why? Because of th ..read more

The P of TULIP is Perseverance of the Saints. And so the question rises, "can you lose your salvation?" Just asking that question will get you kicked out of many in-home bible studies! Nevertheless, the Reformed and the Arminian Protestants answer this in ways that we note and unpack. And then me? The UU? Who takes Trinity (and so personhood, and agency, and mission, and love) as my theological foundation, what do I say? What bible verses inform my thinking? What theological commitments inform my thinking? At the show's opening I make a couple cultural reflections (because the Lordship of Chri ..read more

Is the grace of God resistible? Can the Holy Spirit's efforts be frustrated? When does the new birth (regeneration, justification) happen in time? In their historical context, why do Protestants, both Reformed and Arminians, so resist having works be involved in salvation? Those questions are all plowed-through in this eighth episode in this series. Once having set up the R'n'A dispute, and their respective answers (and mutual critiques), I offer other categories for framing salvation and grace and works. Do I believe works are saving? No, of course not. Do I think that rules works out of our ..read more

Probably like me you hear it all the time, "everything happens for a reason." More than likely? Those who say that do not realize they are espousing Reformed theology, or drawing on Reformed sensibilities. But really, does the Bible teach that everything happens for a reason? And if so, doesn't that make God the author of evil, and so make him a moral monster? My essential problem with Reformed and Arminian theological framing is that they are not God-enough, not Trinitarian enough, not biblical enough. How so? Because the Lordship of Jesus does not stop at the boundary of culture I examine wh ..read more

The Reformed and Arminians agree that God predestined the elect, but they don't agree together who the elect are. They also don't agree on what God decreed about the reprobate (unbelievers). Frankly, they don't agree on several important things: God's power and whether He can (or does) limit himself; the levels of mystery at work in life; or the theological emphases that should guide the Christian perception of life. In this fifth episode I address, compare, and contrast all of those most consequential elements. And because the Lordship of Christ does not stop at the boundary of culture, a two ..read more

Predestination: it's a big topic of controversy. The Reformed and Arminians each emphasize predestination in varied ways. Why did God predestine? Whom did God predestine? I also explore the very common sentiment, "but, I only want to believe what the Bible says!" That sentiment has historic (and, gulp!, philosophic) roots that those who assert it do not realize. Still more, that "bible and me" sentiment only makes for worse problems. Then, in the cultural-reflection, I remark on the character of the recent Trump conviction. What does history clarify about such trials? What would it feel like i ..read more

The Reformed and Arminians (R'n'A) seldom agree. But they do agree on the doctrine of total depravity. In this episode I work through what that means, respectively, to the R'n'A. What did Sproul say about it? What did Wesley assert? Then I ask questions about what it means to be human: a) do we still, after the fall, exist as the image of God? b) does the doctrine of salvation eliminate or build on the doctrine of creation? c) where do I (do I?) agree with the doctrine of total depravity? In the cultural reflection I work through still more of how SCOTUS has, across 60+ years, enforced their r ..read more

"God seeks glory." That is critical and foundational to both a Reformed and an Arminian theological perspective. But the two camps diverge on how it is, principally, that God seeks glory. And it finally comes down to a matter of premises. It's sort of like when you go hiking: you get to the trail head and you have a choice between different trails. And even though each trail will involve walking in your boots, elevation changes, scenic views of creeks and ponds and lakes, the destination varies. The Reformed and Arminian each set up their tents every night in a camp named "Salvation and Glory ..read more

Because I taught college for 25 years I'm tracking the devolution of Pro-Hamas rallies on university campusi. But it wasn't that which provoked this show's one-off reflection. No, instead it was a couple articles in my denomination's quarterly ministers' magazine that smacked me upside the head. They accepted the premise. Accepted the definitions and premises of a progressive framing of reality. Uncritically, they took progressive (woke) terms and tried to run them through a Christian-coffee-filter in order to flavor (or baptize) those terms and make them Christian. In this episode I explain w ..read more