Discussion Questions

Calvin repeatedly argues that baptism replaces circumcision and therefore belongs to infants; what specific weaknesses does Finny point out in that analogy (New Testament order of repentance/belief/baptism, “boys only,” etc.), and what does this reveal about how Calvin is reading Scripture to protect a system? JumpstartAnother way to ask: Calvin says baptism replaces circumcision, so infants should be baptized. What problems does Finny see in that comparison (like the New Testament order of belief then baptism, and circumcision being only for boys), and what does that show about Calvin’s way of reading the Bible to support his system?

Finny describes how infant baptism “emerges in the late second, early third century” because people feared children might die unbaptized; what does that historical development suggest about early Christian assumptions regarding baptism, salvation, and pastoral fear—and how does it challenge the idea that “the church always” practiced infant baptism? JumpstartAnother way to ask: Finny says infant baptism started in the late 100s/early 200s because people feared children would die unbaptized. What does that history say about what early Christians believed about baptism and salvation, and how does it challenge the idea that the church “always” baptized babies?

Calvin argues that salvation is “passed down” to children through Abraham’s covenant line; how does Finny connect that to confusing “election to service” with “the condition of salvation,” and where do you see that same confusion showing up in modern Christian thinking? JumpstartAnother way to ask: Calvin says salvation is passed down through Abraham’s family line. How does Finny say this mixes up being chosen for a role (“service”) with being saved, and where do you see that same mix-up today?

In Acts 19, Finny calls Calvin’s handling of a “baptized twice” example an “amazing example of twisting the Scriptures”; what do you think is at stake for Calvin in denying a second water baptism, and what are the warning signs in ourselves that we might be doing the same kind of interpretive maneuvering? JumpstartAnother way to ask: In Acts 19, why does Finny think Calvin twists the story about people being baptized again? What does Calvin risk losing if he admits a second water baptism, and what signs show we might also be twisting Scripture to protect our own views?

Finny says Calvinism “impedes the character of God” and turns people away from God; when you compare the “grumpy old man…disappointed in me” picture with Jesus’ “prodigal son father…running to grab you,” what concrete differences would those two pictures produce in prayer, repentance, and daily obedience? JumpstartAnother way to ask: Finny says Calvinism can make God seem harsh and push people away. If you picture God as a “grumpy old man” versus the father in the prodigal son story, how would those pictures change your prayer, repentance, and everyday obedience?

Finny claims “from Genesis… the devil has engaged in a campaign to make you question the character of God”; where have you personally felt that suspicion toward God’s intentions, and how did theology (either Calvinistic or anti-Calvinistic) reinforce or heal it? JumpstartAnother way to ask: Finny says the devil tries to make us doubt God’s character. Where have you felt suspicious of God’s motives, and did your theology (Calvinist or not) make that suspicion worse or help heal it?

Listening to Megan Bell’s struggle with Romans 9, she concludes that the Calvinistic reading makes God seem “evil” and that the reply is essentially “you don’t get to ask that question”; what do you think a faithful, non-evasive approach to Romans 9 must accomplish in order to preserve both God’s justice and God’s goodness? JumpstartAnother way to ask: Megan Bell says the Calvinist reading of Romans 9 makes God seem evil, and the answer is basically “don’t question it.” What should a careful and honest reading of Romans 9 do to show both God’s justice and God’s goodness?

Derek Webb describes himself as “in the grave next to Lazarus waiting for my name,” concluding, “maybe it’s all real and I’m just not chosen”; how does that mindset reshape evangelism, repentance, assurance, and the emotional tone of the Christian life—and what would early Christians have assumed a seeker should do instead of “wait”? JumpstartAnother way to ask: Derek Webb feels like he’s “waiting” to see if he is chosen. How would that way of thinking affect evangelism, repentance, and assurance, and what would early Christians have told a seeker to do instead of just wait?

Finny quotes Austin Fischer that meaning depends on choice (flowers, the cross, “what do you do with your will?”) and says Calvinism leaves you on a “treadmill” pretending your choices matter; where do you see that “suspending your theology in order to live faithfully” temptation in church culture, and what changes if you actually believe your will genuinely matters? JumpstartAnother way to ask: Finny says choices give things meaning, but Calvinism can make you feel like your choices don’t really matter. Where do you see people acting like they must ignore their theology just to live faithfully, and what changes if you truly believe your will matters?

Finny connects the problem of evil to “delegation of power,” spiritual warfare, and the claim that Calvinism makes God the direct cause of tragedies (e.g., Piper on 9/11); how does a warfare-and-delegation framework change how you interpret suffering, pray against evil, take responsibility for sin, and resist passivity in discipleship? JumpstartAnother way to ask: Finny links evil and suffering to God sharing power with others and to spiritual warfare, and says Calvinism makes God the direct cause of tragedies. How would a warfare-and-delegation view change how you understand suffering, pray against evil, take responsibility for sin, and avoid being passive in following Jesus?