'25 SUMMER READING LIST, #6 - "FOUR VIEWS ON ETERNAL SECURITY" EDITED BY J. MATTHEW PINSON

I've read several of Zondervan's Counterpoints series. This wasn't my first (that one was on Apologetics), but it's my favorite. I enjoyed reading the authors' talking about our great and wonderful salvation. The four views dealt with were Classical Calvinism by Michael S. Horton, Moderate Calvinism by Norman Geisler, Reformed Arminianism (yes, that exists) by Stephen M. Ashby, and Wesleyan Arminianism by J. Steven Harper. 

One of the reviewers were unhappy that the two Arminians didn't rip the two who believed in eternal security in purposes. Actually, that's a plus in the book. I shook my head when Geisler divided the views into Strong Calvinist, Moderate Calvinist, and Arminian, putting oneself in the happy medium view while aligning with Calvin and assuming Arminians can be put in one box (fellow Moderate Calvinist Ron Rhodes takes a similar approach. For me, this book convinced me of what I believed, which is that neither Calvinism nor Arminianism are without variation, as well as both are trusting in Christ alone for salvation.

BOOK REVIEW - "ARE MIRACULOUS GIFTS FOR TODAY?: FOUR VIEWS" (COUNTERPOINT SERIES), EDITED BY WAYNE GRUDEM

 "Are Miraculous Gifts for Today?: Four Views (Counterpoints Series)" is one of my favorites from the Counterpoints series. The basic format is to have authors write an essay on their view, with responses from each of the other authors. This book follows that format, but then takes another step: Editor Wayne Grudem asked the authors to meet for two days and discuss the issues and misrepresentations of the writers, with each of the four writers and the editor writing concluding comments. The four views are Cessationist (Richard B. Gaffin), Open but Cautious (Robert L. Saucy), Third Wave (C. Samuel Storms), and Pentecostal/Charismatic (Douglas A. Oss).

I normally would consider my view on the gifts to be Calvinist: that God is sovereign, and He is free to cause a gift to cease and to restore a gift that has disappeared. (That's with my tongue in cheek - no, Calvinism doesn't directly deal with spiritual gifts.) The designation "Open but cautious" is more accurate.

Why do I like the book? Because the authors talk about the views as a family squabble between true believers indwelt by the Holy Spirit. That civility is not typical in the age of social media.

I highly recommend this book.

DUELING APOLOGETICS PART 2 OF 2: FIVE VIEWS ON APOLOGETICS - ZONDERVAN COUNTERPOINTS SERIES.

 

Apologetics is an extremely important and yet overlooked aspect of Christianity. We are ready to give an answer to every man for the hope that is in us (1 Pet. 3:15), and to contend earnestly for the faith (Jude 3). But how do we do this? Leave it to human beings to come up with organized systems to approach this, and this book introduces us to five different styles to accomplish this.

Let me explain the five views as I would define them:

1. Classical, represented by William Lane Craig: One should start off proving the existence of God before moving to miracles, the resurrection of Christ, etc.
2. Evidential, represented by Gary Habernas: One does not need to prove God's existence before addressing miracles/the resurrection of Christ.
3. Cumulative Case, represented by Paul Feinberg: One cannot prove God's existence or other things by formal argument, but one can informally show Christian theism to be the best alternative.
4. Presuppositional, represented by John Frame: One needs to address people's presuppositions as they are making the case for Christianity.
5. Reformed Epistomology, represented by Kelly James Clark: One cannot prove any argument rational, but one can believe without any evidence.

There can be some variation between the approaches. Most of these authors have been accused of others at not really representing their views. Steven Cowan, the book's editor, pointed out that in the past some of these methodologies acted like you could do it their way or you can do it wrong, particularly Classical, Evidential, and Presuppositional.

This actually is a strength for the book. One reason people avoid apologetics is because it is divisive. These authors come across as if they're aware they're co-soldiers, on the same side. I believe this is the way it should be in the Body of Christ.

To be honest, like evangelism methodologies, I would say the answer to the question "Which is the correct methodology?" is "Yes." God designed each person differently. Some people work better with a certain methodology. And different people would respond to different methodologies.

If you compare the 8 types of Apologetics in Contend Earnestly For The Faith by Phil Fernandes with the 5 approaches here, you will not find three different approaches that Fernandes covers and this book doesn't - you'll find seven, with only one common technique (that being presuppositional). However, the reason is that Five Views deals with five lines of argumentation apologists use, while Contend Earnestly looks at the tools in their toolbox. 

I recommend both books, but I would suggest starting with Fernandes and then going to this volume.