I will give a brief review of an article, written by Robert L. Hamilton that I found particularly helpful.In his article, Hamilton does an excellent job of biblically refuting the major Calvinist arguments from the Gospel of John, in particularly John 8:47 and 10:26. He answers the question in context of what it means "to be a child of God, to belong to the Father, and to be one of Christ's Sheep". Hamilton points out that in the Old Testament, that "belonging to God" etc. is used to mean the nation of Israel, but more importantly that it can more specifically refer to the Jews who were repentant and living in right covenant relationship with the Father.
It then makes sense that Jesus' Jewish audience did not believe him, because they did not believe the Father. Jesus' point is that there would not be any Jews still living rightly in the old covenant once the new covenant had been established. People would either accept or reject Jesus, so that there would not be any "third option". All the Jews who were truly repentant would believe Jesus, and God would ensure that none would be lost during this transition.
Hamilton also deals with Calvinist objections and other arguments used by Calvinists from the Gospel of John.
I found that article very helpful as well.
ReplyDeleteIt is too bad he skipped JOHN 6:39. It makes the rest of his arguement invalid since he did not deal with the sufficient condition found in this verse. The logic would lead him to cling to 2 different logical choices non of which bare unity with Arminian Theology.
ReplyDeleteHi "Anonymous",
ReplyDeletePerhaps you should read it again. He most certainly didn't skip over John 6:39. (But even so, at best you could argue for perseverance of the saints with this verse - which many Arminian accept.) The primary purpose of the article is addresing the ordo salutis.
Blessings