Showing posts with label Calvinism. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Calvinism. Show all posts

Wednesday, 15 June 2016

Is God the author of evil in this world?!

Recently we looked at the question of providence and evil in theology class... and here comes the disturbing question: Is God the author of sin?! Here are some notes on the topic of providence and evil!
(Photo taken in Jerusalem, Sept 2015. Armed police is normal everyday sight everywhere.)

·         The logical problem: [The Christian] God is all loving & all powerful; as all-loving, God would be willing to abolish evil; as all-powerful, God would be able to abolish evil; evil exists; therefore [this] God does not. The basic strategy for a response to the logical problem is that if God has a good reason to allow evil, then the existence of evil is not incompatible with the existence and nature of God. God allows evil to exist, but it’s not immediately caused by God. Church grows and gets purified as a result.

·         The evidential problem of evil: The existence of so much evil is incompatible with the probability of the existence of an all-loving and all-powerful God. The evidential problem admits that God and the existence of evil are not logically incompatible, yet considers if the amount or kinds of evil in the world count as probable evidence against the existence of God. This approach argues that the large amount of evil in the world and/or the existence of unjustified evil (variously called surd, superfluous, pointless, gratuitous) mitigate against a plausible belief in God because we assume God would not allow for the existence of evil that appears to have no good purpose. Sometimes even Christians don’t understand evil. For example, prosperity gospel, where people who gave very little substance to evil. There are also people who are on the other spectrum: everything is about evil spirit, how evil things are in the world, etc. Evil is irrational: why evil happens in the world is beyond our ability to reason. Otherwise, if we are smart enough, we can save ourselves. The cross is also not rational, it’s a mystery revealed to us. It doesn’t matter what good purpose/intention it’s supposed to bring out, the evil acts needed to achieve it can never be justified/synthesised/rationalised. Communism may be a good idea but in practicality we never seen any society benefiting from it. Utilitarianism is Nazi like (eg. a Japanese missions lecturer said that when Japanese uses comfort woman/forced labour: the act is wrong but the purpose is good…?! When people oppress people, these things cannot be justified.)

·         The existential problem of evil: As often called the "religious," "personal," or "pastoral" problem of evil, the existential problem is one that asks, "Why my suffering and/or evil at this time in this way in this place?" Why would I want to trust and love the God (who may or may not exist) who – if he exists – is responsible for all the evil in my world and in my life?

·         The problem of natural evil: Whatever may be said of moral evil, how can anyone but God be said to be to blame for the natural evils of the world?


What are three solutions to the problem of evil, and what is the response to these solutions?
Think about real world examples of big scale evils such as human trafficking.
1)      Finitism: Abandon the idea of God’s omnipotence.
Often takes the form of a dualism, two ultimate principles in the universe: God and the power of evil. This evil is uncreated, simply a force that has always been present. There is a struggle between God and this evil power, with no certainty as to the ultimate outcome.  For example, ying and yang in the Chinese culture.
2)      Modification of the concept of God’s goodness.
Determinism: Calvinism=God’s causing of all things, including human acts. The relationship of God to certain evil actions of human beings.
God hardening the heart of Pharaoh?
God is the ultimate cause of sin, not the immediate cause of it. God does not commit sin; human commit sin although God wills it decretively. It was Judas, not God, who betrayed Christ. God neither sins nor is responsible for sin.
3)      Denial of evil.
Pantheism. The only reality is God, infinite mind. Spirit is real and eternal; matter is unreal and temporal. Matter has no real existence even in the mind. One of the most serious evils, disease, is therefore an illusion; what is experienced as disease is caused by wrong belief; the cure for sickness is not to be achieved through medicine, but is to be found in knowledge of the truth that pain is imaginary. For example, Buddhism, Christian Science.
Three problems stand out: 1) Christian science has not fully banished evil. 2)The existence of the illusion must be explained, because it’s so widespread. 3) The theory does not work, Christian Scientists do become ill and die.
The first three options are not biblical. Evil doesn’t fit into anything, and can’t be resolved by any system. Some hard core determinist may agree with point two. Evil is bigger than us.

Evil as a necessary accompaniment of the creation of humanity:
l   Mild Calvinism.
l   Humans would not be genuinely human without free will. God cannot create a genuinely free being and at the same time guarantee that this being will always do exactly what God desires of him. Apparently God felt, for reasons that were evident to him but that we can only partly understand, that it was better to make human beings than androids. And the possibility of evil was a necessary accompaniment of God’s good plan to make people fully human.
l   God has created us to love him. But love isn’t love if it is coerced. Genuine love requires free will.
l   Apparently, for humans to have a genuine moral choice with the possibility of genuine punishment for disobedience meant that they could die.
l   Argument against this view: Tsunami cannot be justified, even if it does good in the advancement of God’s kingdom.
l   The sustenance of life required conditions that could lead to death instead. For example, the same water we need for life can in other circumstances cause death by drowning. Under certain conditions, the very fire providing that warmth for the maintenance of life can kill us. If God was to have a world in which there would be genuine moral choices along with genuine punishment for disobedience and ultimately death, there would have to be warning signals of sufficient intensity to cause us to alter our behaviour. And this signal is pain.
l   If God could not create the world without the accompanying possibility of evil, why did he create at all, or why did he not create the world without human beings? We cannot answer that question since we are not God.

A re-evaluation of what constitutes good and evil:
l   Good is not defined in terms of what brings personal pleasure to humans in a direct fashion. Good is defined in relationship to the will and being of God. Good is what glorifies him, fulfils his will, conforms to his nature. Romans 8:28 (We know that in all things God works for the good of those who love him.)
l   God’s superior knowledge and wisdom: We may not be the best judges of what is good and what is harmful to our welfare. It may seem good to me to eat sweet, sticky candy. My dentist (unless simply interested in fees) may see it quite differently.
l   Dimension of time or duration: Some experienced evils are actually very disturbing on a short-term basis, but in the long term work a much larger good.
l   Extent of the evil: God has many persons to care for. The Saturday rainfall that spoils a family picnic or round of golf may seem like an evil to me, but be a much greater good to the farmers whose parched fields surround the golf course or park.
l   The danger of this view of “greater good” is that one may take on a consequentialist view of ethics to justify their evil actions.

God as the author of sin?
l   An important question that cannot be ignored is how sin could have happened in the first place. If humans were created good, or at least without any evil nature, made in the image of god, and if the creation God had made was “very good” (Genesis 1:31), then how could sin have occurred?
l   Example of a problematic passage: I form the light, and create darkness: I make peace, and create evil: I the Lord do all these things (KJV Isaiah 45:7). However, the KJV’s rendering of this word evil is inaccurate. This word ra’ah can also be translated “trouble,” “disaster”.
l   Reformed theologians typically shrink from ascribing the authorship of evil to God. Paul Helm says that while God “ordains moral evil, he is not the author of it.” John Frame says that while God is not the cause of evil, he is the ordainer of evil. Permission is not causation.
l   R. C. Sproul Jr., a hyper-Calvinist, in the pursuit of theological consistency, concludes that God must be the originator of evil. He lists the range of possible “suspects”: Adam, Eve, Satan, the environment, and God. God created a good environment and Adam, Eve and Satan were originally created good. That means none of these four candidates can be the source of sin and it is God himself who introduced evil into this world. Sproul Jr. thinks that the reason God wanted Adam and Eve to fall into sin was because of God’s eternal attribute of wrath, and “God is as delighted with his wrath as he is with all of his attributes.”
l   If God is accused of doing evil, Sproul Jr. would say “He’s God, he can do what he wants.” But what God does will be good and just, because we can’t rightly say, “God can break his promise or lie because ‘he’s God, and he can do what he wants.’” It’s impossible for God to lie (Hebrews 6:18). The Bible makes it clear that God is not the cause of sin: but each person is tempted when they are dragged away by their own evil desire and enticed (James 1:14). For everything in the world—the lust of the flesh, the lust of the eyes, and the pride of life—comes not from the Father but from the world (1 John 2:16).
l   Sproul Jr. acknowledges that God cannot sin but suggest that he created sin. Augustine would have denounced such dangerous theological notions. Evil is not a thing, but a corruption, defect and lack of what ought to be there (ie. an absence or corruption of goodness). Sproul Jr is opposing the Scriptures: “Everything God created is good.” (1Timothy 4:4).
l   Calvin himself confessed that he did not know how to account for the origin of evil.
l   God is not the author of sins, no more than John Watt (the inventor of the steam engine) is the author of all train accidents.
l   Sin is a corruption of God’s good creation: Goodness can exist without evil. Evil, however, requires reference to what is good. Evil is like counterfeit money: in order to detect the fake, we need to know what the genuine currency looks like.
l   The “germ theory” of sin, whereby one has to “catch” or “be infected by” sin is an incorrect understanding of the nature of sin. It is not necessary to come in contact with someone who has a fracture to fracture a bone; all that is needed is to twist a limb in the wrong way, and there is a broken bone! Similarly, sin results when a person’s will and relationship to God are twisted the wrong way, when the wrong one of two possibilities is actualised.
l   The first sin was voluntary. Augustine maintains that the first sin originated with finite moral agents. Though created without moral defect, they became the sinners. It was up to the creature to refrain from sinning. God created human being who possessed free will, but by the free will’s action, a radical, new occurrence broke into God’s good created order.
l   The serpent’s temptation appealed to desires that were not evil in themselves, but could be expressed and actualised in the wrong way (disobeying God). With this twist in relationship, sin has become a reality.
l   God, then, did not create sin. He merely provided the options necessary for human freedom, options that could result in sin.
l   The primal sin was a turning away from God (the greatest good) toward a lesser (created) good.

Specific evil as the result of specific sins:
l   Traps: AIDS as a punishment from God. Although this could be possible, but then who is not a sinner?
l   Some of the evil occurrences in life are caused by the sinful action of others. However, tragedy is not always the result of specific sin. The question “Why?” often reflects the mistaken idea that God sends each event as a direct response to our actions.
l   People are very ready to attribute sin when people are suffering. However, misfortune may also fall on the just and unjust alike.
l   But having given this caveat, we need to note that there are instances of sin bringing unfortunate results on the individual sinner. Much of the evil recounted in Scripture came upon people as a result of their own sin, or that of someone close to them.

God as the victim of evil:
l   God took sin and its evil effects on himself is a unique contribution by Christian doctrine to the solution of the problem of evil.
l   It is remarkable that, while knowing that he himself would become the major victim of the evil resulting from sin, God allowed sin to occur anyway.
l   Through incarnation, God is a fellow sufferer with us of the evil in this world, and consequently is able to deliver us from evil.

The life hereafter:
l   If this life were all that there is, then surely the problem of evil would be unresolvable.
l   Hell, the absence of God, is God’s simply giving that person at last what he or she has always asked for. It is not God, but one’s own choice that sends a person to hell.

Resources:
Theology lectures at Morling with Miyon Chung
Erikson, Millard J. Christian Theology.
God and Evil. Edited by Chad Meister and James K. Dew Jr.


Condolences to the talented young singer, Christina Grimme, and the 100+ shooting victims in the Orlando massacre. Video of Christina singing In Christ Alone.
https://youtu.be/luWazAbFvMY
Sometimes God allows terrible things to happen in your life and you don't know why. But that doesn't mean you should stop trusting Him. Christina Grimme, twitter 22 Feb 2013.

In Christ alone my hope is found,
He is my light, my strength, my song;
This Cornerstone, this solid Ground,
Firm through the fiercest drought and storm.
What heights of love, what depths of peace,
When fears are stilled, when strivings cease!
My Comforter, my All in All,
Here in the love of Christ I stand.

In Christ alone! - who took on flesh,
Fullness of God in helpless babe.
This gift of love and righteousness,
Scorned by the ones He came to save:
Till on that cross as Jesus died,
The wrath of God was satisfied -
For every sin on Him was laid;
Here in the death of Christ I live.

There in the ground His body lay,
Light of the world by darkness slain:
Then bursting forth in glorious day
Up from the grave He rose again!
And as He stands in victory
Sin's curse has lost its grip on me,
For I am His and He is mine -
Bought with the precious blood of Christ.

No guilt in life, no fear in death,
This is the power of Christ in me;
From life's first cry to final breath,
Jesus commands my destiny.
No power of hell, no scheme of man,
Can ever pluck me from His hand:
Till He returns or calls me home,

Here in the power of Christ I'll stand.

Saturday, 13 June 2015

Calvinism (Predestination) vs Arminianism (Free will)

Predestination is the decision of God choosing who will be saved and who will be lost.


Arminianism
Calvinism
Moderate Calvinism
Definition
Prevenient grace (which is given to all indiscriminately) is universal and essential for conversion. The conditional choice of God by which he determined who would believe based on his foreknowledge of who will exercise faith. It is the result of Man’s faith. Grace is not irresistible.[1]
The unconditional and loving choice of God by which he determines who must believe. It is the cause of man’s faith.
The unconditional and loving choice of God by which he determines who will believe. It is the cause of man’s faith.
Scriptural evidence
1Timothy 2:3-4
This is good, and pleases God our Saviour, who wants all people to be saved and to come to a knowledge of the truth.
Romans 9:6-24
Ephesians 1:3-6

Total Depravity
Although human nature was seriously affected by the fall, man has not been left in a state of total spiritual helplessness. God does not interfere with man’s freedom. Each sinner possesses a free will, and his eternal destiny depends on how he uses it. Faith is the sinner’s gift to God.
Because of the fall, the sinner is dead, blind, and deaf to the things of God. He cannot choose good over evil in the spiritual realm. Consequently it takes much more than the Spirit’s assistance to bring a sinner to Christ. It takes regeneration by which the Spirit makes the sinner alive and gives him a new nature. Salvation is God’s gift to the sinner.
Being “dead” in sin does not mean that unsaved people cannot understand and receive the truth of the gospel as the Spirit of God works on their hearts.[2]
Unconditional Election
God’s choice of certain individuals to salvation before the foundation of the world was based on his foreseeing that they would respond to his call. The faith God foresaw resulted from man’s free will, cooperating the Spirit’s working.
God’s choice of certain individuals to salvation rested solely in his own sovereign will, not based on any foreseen response or obedience on their part, such as faith, repentance etc. Thus God’s choice of the sinner, not the sinner’s choice of Christ, is the ultimate cause of salvation.
It is unconditional from the standpoint of the Giver, even though there is one condition for the receiver – faith.[3]
Limited Atonement
Christ’s redeeming work made it possible for everyone to be saved but did not secure the salvation of anyone. Only those who believe in him are saved.
Christ’s redeeming work was intended to save the elect only and actually secured salvation for them. The gift of faith is infallibly applied by the Spirit to all for whom Christ died, therefore guaranteeing their salvation.
Extremist view is limited in extent (only for elect), while moderate view is limited in result (but for all men). Another words, although redemption was purchased for all and available to all, it will only be applied to those whom God chose from all eternity – the elect. [4]
Irresistible Grace
Man is free and can successfully resist the Spirit’s call.
In addition to the outward general call to salvation, which is made to everyone who hears the Gospel, the Holy Spirit extends to the elect a special inward call that inevitably brings them to salvation. God’s grace, therefore, is invincible.
Extreme Calvinism: irresistible grace happens in a compulsive sense (against man’s will). Moderate Calvinism: in a persuasive sense (in accordance with man’s will).[5]
Perseverance of the Saints
Those who believe and are truly saved can lose their salvation by failing to keep up their faith.
All who are chosen by God are eternally saved.
Extreme Calvinism: no saint will die in sin. Moderate Calvinism: No saint will ever be lost (even if he dies in sin).[6]
Salvation “once saved, always saved”
Possible for the saved to lose salvation. Colossian 1:23 is often used in connection with this: “if you continue in your faith, established and firm, not moved from the hope held out in the gospel.”
Strong scriptural evidence, eg. John 10:27-28. However weakened by sin, true believers endure in their faith to the end.[7]


The seemingly endless debate between Calvinism and Arminianism continues on today, and polarised beliefs have created division in the church. 

If God is in control of everything, then why should we be blamed for anything? Some believers have been known to excuse their sin, claiming: “The devil made me do it!” But the problem here is even greater, because logically one cannot stop at this point. For if God is in sovereign control of all things, then instead it would appear that, ultimately, “God made me do it!”[8] And who made the devil do it? God cannot be good and not good. He cannot be for His own essential good and be against it by giving Lucifer the desire to sin against him![9] The bible affirms that God made only good creatures. After almost every day of Creation it says, “and it was good”. But God gave free choice to good creatures, as God said to Adam: “You are free…” (Genesis 2:16). The power of moral free choice entails the ability either to choose the good God designed for us or to reject it. The latter is called evil. It is good to be free, but freedom makes evil possible. Free will is good in itself, but entailed in that good is the ability to choose the opposite of good, which then makes evil possible. Then the origin of evil is in the misuse of freedom.[10]

Staunch Calvinist Jonathan Edwards “solved” the problem of predestination and free will by claiming that, 1) free will is doing what we desire; 2) but God gives us the desire to do good. What about the desire to do evil? That comes from our fallen nature, which desires only evil. However, this does not solve the issue of where Lucifer and Adam got the desire for their first sin, as 1) God cannot give anyone the desire to sin; 2) originally neither Lucifer nor Adam had a sinful nature; 3) the will does not move unless given a desire by God or by its own nature.[11] Then here’s the unmistakable conclusion: both Lucifer Adam sinned because God gave them the desire to sin!![12]

If neither the devil nor God made me do it, then who did? I did! Extreme Calvinists object to this reasoning, claiming that every event has a cause, even our actions. And to claim that God did not cause our actions would mean there is an effect without a cause, which is absurd.[13]

However, several things should be noted. First, every event does have a cause, but not every cause has a cause. Every painting has a painter, but every painter is not painted. Further, if every cause had a cause, then God could not be the first Uncaused Cause that He is. “Who made God?” Likewise, if the creature, by means of the good power of free choice, is the first cause of evil, then no cause of evil action should be sought other than the person who caused it. Secondly, if evil actions have no cause, then no one can be held responsible for them. But both good moral reason and Scripture inform us that free creatures are held morally responsible for their choices. Lucifer, Adam and Eve were condemned for their actions. If our actions are not uncaused, then is not the extreme Calvinist’s view correct that they must be cause by another? There are three possibilities: My actions are 1) uncaused; 2) caused by someone (or something) else; or 3) caused by my Self.[14]

A self-caused being is impossible but this is not true for a self-caused action. It is true that we cannot exist before we exists or be before we have being. But we can and must be before we can do. That is, we must exist before we can act. Therefore, self-caused actions are not impossible. If they were, then even God, who cannot do what is impossible, would not have been able to create the world.[15]

Contrary to the extreme Calvinist view, faith is not a gift that God offers only to some. All are responsible to believe and “whoever” decides to believe can believe (John 3:16). While all truly free acts are self-determined and could have been otherwise, nonetheless, it is also true that no free human act can move toward God or do any spiritual good without the aid of God’s grace, as evident from the scriptures: “No one can come to me unless the Father who sent me draws him, and I will raise him up at the last day” (John 6:44).

Sovereignty and free will. Is it one or the other, or is it both one and the other? The Bible says both. God is sovereign over all things, including human events and free choices. Nothing catches God by surprise. But human beings, even in their fallen state, have the God-given power of free choice, as the Scriptures stresses that moral responsibility for moral actions rest squarely with free moral agents and not with God. This applies to many earthly things here “below” as it does to heavenly things from “above,” namely, with regard to receiving God’s gift of salvation. Unfortunately, the extreme Calvinists have sacrificed human responsibility in order to preserve divine sovereignty, and the extreme Arminians have sacrificed God’s sovereignty in order to hold on to man’s free will. I believe both of these alternatives are wrong and lead to inordinately extreme actions.[16]

One of the most powerful indications that the Bible sees no contradiction between God’s predetermination and human free choice is found in Acts 2:23. On the one hand, it declares that Jesus’ death was determined “by God’s set purpose and foreknowledge.”[17] Nonetheless, Jesus says He did it freely: “I lay down my life, only to take it up again. No one takes it from me, but I lay it down of my own accord.” (John 10:17-18).[18]

One final illustration of the congruency between predetermination and free choice is found in the shipwreck recorded by Luke in Acts 27. Paul assured his fellow travelers in advance that “not one of you will be lost; only the ship will be destroyed”. Yet he warned them, “Unless these men stay with the ship, you cannot be saved”. Both are true. God knew in advance and had revealed to Paul that none would drown. But He also knew it would be through their free choice to stay on the ship that this would be accomplished.[19]

Extreme Calvinist view: It involves a denial of human free choice. But there are a few problems with this view. Free choice is supported by both Scripture and reason. “Irresistible grace” on the unwilling is a violation of free choice. For God is love (1John 4:16), and true love is persuasive but never coercive.[20] John Calvin faced honestly the biblical teaching that the Holy Spirit can be resisted. He recognized that Stephen said of the Jews, “You stiff-necked people, with uncircumcised hearts and ears! You are just like your fathers: You always resist the Holy Spirit!” (Acts 7:51). Calvin remarked, “Finally, they are said to be resisting the Spirit, when they stubbornly reject what He says by the prophets.” But if God’s grace can be resisted, then it is not irresistible![21]

Arminianism: The conditional choice of God by which he determined who would believe based on his foreknowledge of who will exercise faith. It is the result of man’s faith. Prevenient grace is universal and essential for conversion. The fallen human will is free and able to choose to repent and believe in response to the call of the gospel. Grace is not irresistible.[22] In terms of the role of foreknowledge, God unconditionally willed that salvation would be received on the condition of faith. Consequently, on the basis of their foreknown free choice of accept Christ, God chooses (elects) to save them. However, the difficulty with the Arminian view is that scriptures seem to say more than God simply knew what was going to happen. It appears God actually determined what would happen. God’s sovereignty means He is in control of all that happens, even the free acts of human beings. Another problem is, if God’s choice to save was based on those who choose Him, then it would not be based on divine grace but would be based on human decisions.[23]  In fact, it would suggest that God’s foreknowledge is dependent on our free choices. Finally, the whole idea of there being a chronological or even logical sequence in God’s thoughts is highly problematic for evangelical theology. God’s attention does not pass form thought to thought, for His knowledge embraces everything in a single spiritual co-intuition.[24]

Moderate Calvinism: The unconditional and loving choice of God by which he determines who will believe. It is the cause of man’s faith. Thus God works His sovereign will through the will of the elect.

Another illustration of the harmony of predetermination and free choice: Suppose you cannot watch your favourite sports event live on TV, so you videotape it. When you watch it later, the entire game and every play in it are absolutely determined and can never changed. No matter how many times you rerun it, it will always be the same. Yet when the game happened, every event was freely chosen. One may object that this is so only because the event has already occurred. In response, we only need to point out that if God is all knowing (omniscient), then from the standpoint of His foreknowledge the game was predetermined, for He knew eternally exactly how it was going to turn out, even though we did not. Therefore, God knew how we are going to use our freedom.[25]

Geisler concludes that there is no contradiction in God knowingly predetermining and predeterminately knowing from all eternity precisely what we would do with our free acts. He did not determine that they would be forced to perform free acts. What is forced is not free, and what is free is not forced. In brief, we are chosen but free.[26]

Calvinism
Strengths/ arguments for
Weaknesses/ arguments against
Romans 9:20-21. God is sovereign in all He does.

Limited atonement necessarily means God has limited His love only to some. He loves only the elect, and does not really love all sinners and desire them to be saved.[27] Extreme Calvinism is in practice a denial of the omnibenevolence of God. God cannot be all-loving if He does not love all.[28] And it would not be fair to choose only some to eternal life and passing over others. We see from the scriptures God desires everyone to be saved (1Timothy 2:3-4).
John 6. The whole human race is lost in sin. God has chosen certain people for his special grace, irrespective of their physical descent, character, or good deeds.
Free choice is supported by both Scripture and reason. “Irresistible grace” on the unwilling is a violation of free choice. For God is love (1John 4:16), and true love is persuasive but never coercive.[29] Irresistible love is forced love, and forced “love” is not love at all.[30]
Matthew 13:10-16: God has selected some to be saved, not all; and he even chosen not to reveal some truths to some people.
There is the possibility that those who have come to faith may fall from grace and lose their salvation.

References:

Clifford, Ross. “Grace and Order of Salvation.” Lecture Notes, Morling College, May 5, 2015.

Erickson, Millard J. Christian Theology. Grand Rapids: Baker Academic, 2013.

Geisler, Norman. Chosen but free: A balanced view of divine election. Minneapolis: Bethany House Publishers, 2001.



[1] Ross Clifford, “Grace and Order of Salvation,” (Lecture Notes, Morling College, May 5, 2015), 6.
[2] Norman Geisler, Chosen but free: A balanced view of divine election, (Minneapolis: Bethany House Publishers, 2001), 120.
[3] Geisler, Chosen but free, 120.
[4] Geisler, Chosen but free, 121.
[5] Geisler, Chosen but free, 121.
[6] Geisler, Chosen but free, 120.
[7] Geisler, Chosen but free, 125.
[8] Geisler, Chosen but free, 19.
[9] Geisler, Chosen but free, 21.
[10] Geisler, Chosen but free, 22.
[11] Geisler, Chosen but free, 23.
[12] Geisler, Chosen but free, 24.
[13] Geisler, Chosen but free, 24.
[14] Geisler, Chosen but free, 25.
[15] Geisler, Chosen but free, 26.
[16] Geisler, Chosen but free, 37.
[17] Geisler, Chosen but free, 38.
[18] Geisler, Chosen but free, 39.
[19] Geisler, Chosen but free, 42.
[20] Geisler, Chosen but free, 48.
[21] Geisler, Chosen but free, 49.
[22] Clifford, “Grace and Order of Salvation,” 6.
[23] Geisler, Chosen but free, 51.
[24] Geisler, Chosen but free, 52.
[25] Geisler, Chosen but free, 45.
[26] Geisler, Chosen but free, 55.
[27] Geisler, Chosen but free, 88.
[28] Geisler, Chosen but free, 89.
[29] Geisler, Chosen but free, 48.
[30] Geisler, Chosen but free, 100.