Restitutio 305 Foreknowledge and Free Will 3 (Leighton Flowers Introducing Arminianism)
We are now in part 3 of our Foreknowledge and Free Will series. We’ve considered Open Theism–the idea that God’s foreknowledge is limited to what he plans to do as well as what he can ascertain from past and present conditions. In a couple of weeks we’ll examine Calvinism, which holds that God not only foreknows but also predestines all who will be saved. But, for today, our focus is on the Arminian position.
Today, I’m happy to have Dr. Leighton Flowers the host of the Soteriology101 a podcast that puts forward an Arminian understanding of salvation as well as responds to prominent Calvinist thinkers. Flowers is also the Director of Evangelism and Apologetics for Texas Baptists. He has authored two books, including The Potter’s Promise, which rebuffed the theology found in James White’s The Potters Freedom. More recently, he came out with God’s Provision for All, which sets out a positive case for provisionalism, an understanding of salvation that teaches everyone is free to choose to believe the gospel. Flowers earned his PhD from New Orleans Baptist Theological Seminary where his dissertation focused on the rise of Calvinism in the Southern Baptist Convention.
In this episode, I ask Flowers to share about his background in Calvinism and how he changed his mind about it. We discuss his middle position that both affirms God’s exhaustive foreknowledge and our free will. Then we take a look at a couple of texts like Ephesians 1 and Romans 8 to hear his exegesis of them.
—— Books ——
- The Potter’s Promise by Leighton Flowers
- God’s Provision for All by Leighton Flowers
—— Links ——
- See other episodes in this series on Foreknowledge and Free Will
- Soteriology101 Podcast: YouTube, RSS, Apple, Stitcher
- YouTube debate: Romans 9, James White vs. Leighton Flowers
- Purchase Flowers’ class, “Tiptoeing through TULIP,” a six-week study on the doctrines of human responsibility and God’s saving grace ($39)
- Check out the affirmations and denials about the provisionalist soteriology