I am exploring fifteen ways thoughtful believers saw the world before the Enlightenment, and how we see the world now. C. S. Lewis draws these distinctions masterfully in his writings. I believe this is one reason why his books and articles are so engaging and enduring. He is on to something, and we intuitively know it.
Leave a CommentDr. Stan W. Wallace Posts
C.S. Lewis, the brilliant Oxford and Cambridge professor, observed fifteen differences between the way we are conditioned to think in our modern times, and conflicting ideas, assumptions, and values that those of earlier periods believed to be true. As we identify these differences, it becomes clear that not all new ideas are better. In fact, in these fifteen cases, new certainly does not mean improved!
Leave a CommentDuring my recent sabbatical, I read more of C.S. Lewis’ fiction and non-fiction. Once again, I was mesmerized by his writing, and how clearly and forcefully, yet gently, he communicated vital truths. I think part of his appeal is that he is, in his own words, a “dinosaur.” I, for one, would like to more like him in this. Let me explain.
1 CommentIn this final post of the series, I’ll outline a third and final objection raised as an internal conceptual problem for Arminianism. If valid, it is an important problem faced by Arminian soteriology (doctrine of salvation). After offering three responses, I’ll summarize all five points of the argument in favor of the Arminian understanding of predestination and free will which I’ve covered in these 19 posts.
3 CommentsTwo potential internal conceptual problems remain for the Arminian understanding of salvation. If so, these are reasons to reconsider the strength of the other reasons I gave in favor of Arminianism. However, as I’ll argue today, at least the first of these remaining two objections turn out not to be an internal conceptual problem for Arminianism.
Leave a CommentWe have concluded our review of biblical data discussing Calvinism and Arminianism, as well as internal and external conceptual problems that arise for Calvinism. This seems to tip the scales in favor of the Arminian understanding. But Calvinists argue there are three internal conceptual problems for Arminianism that are sufficient to disqualify this view. In this case, the Calvinist understanding of predestination and free will is vindicated. I’ll discuss the first of these in this post.
2 Comments