Papers by Randall Whitman Jr.
The paper traces the historical development of justification doctrine from the Early Church throu... more The paper traces the historical development of justification doctrine from the Early Church through the Reformation to contemporary challenges, including the New Perspective on Paul, Christian Universalism, and ongoing Roman Catholic opposition. Through examination of key biblical passages (Romans 3:21-26, 4:1-5, 4:22-5:1, Galatians 2:15-17, 2 Corinthians 5:21, and James 2:12-14, 24), the study demonstrates that forensic justification best explains the biblical data regarding righteousness, imputation, and the role of faith.
The research identifies five critical areas where forensic justification serves as the theological foundation for Free Grace theology: (1) the distinction between aspects of salvation (justification, sanctification, glorification), (2) the doctrine of eternal security, (3) conceptions of Christian assurance based on God's work rather than subjective experience, (4) the separation of believer judgment (Bema seat) from final judgment (Great White Throne), emphasizing rewards rather than salvation, and (5) pastoral motivation techniques that emphasize reward-based encouragement rather than fear-based "fruit inspection."
The paper concludes that without the Reformation understanding of forensic justification as a punctiliar, declarative act of God imputing Christ's righteousness to believers, Free Grace theological distinctives would either transform into works-based systems or dissolve entirely. The doctrine provides the necessary foundation for objective assurance, eternal security, and a coherent understanding of Christian motivation based on rewards rather than threats of damnation. Contemporary challenges to forensic justification therefore represent not merely doctrinal adjustments but fundamental threats to the Protestant Reformation itself.
This paper provides a examination and critique of Christian Universalism, the theological positio... more This paper provides a examination and critique of Christian Universalism, the theological position that all humanity will ultimately be reconciled to God through Christ. The study traces the historical development of Universalist thought from its early church origins through contemporary expressions, surveying key figures including Origen, Gregory of Nyssa, Friedrich Schleiermacher, Karl Barth, and modern advocates like David Bentley Hart and Rob Bell.
The analysis categorizes and examines the primary arguments supporting Christian Universalism across three domains: philosophical/moral arguments (including Thomas Talbott's inconsistency argument and Hart's finitude-based objections to eternal punishment), theological arguments (such as Douglas Campbell's cosmic liberation view of justification and claims that God's victory requires universal salvation), and biblical arguments (focusing on universalist interpretations of passages containing "all" language and alternative understandings of hell's nature and duration).
Through exegetical, theological, and philosophical engagement, the article identifies significant weaknesses in each category of Universalist argumentation. The study finds that contextual limitations in biblical texts preclude universalist interpretations, that philosophical arguments rest on problematic assumptions about divine justice and human culpability, and that theological claims fail to account for the full scope of biblical teaching on judgment and retribution.
The paper concludes with pastoral recommendations for engaging Christian Universalism within church contexts, emphasizing the need for exegetical supremacy in preaching, humble submission to divine sovereignty, and recognition of the spiritual battle against theological deception. While acknowledging the sincere motivations of many Universalist advocates, the study argues that Christian Universalism ultimately fails to provide a biblically sustainable alternative to traditional understandings of eternal judgment and divine justice.
Utilizing scalable shared memory multiprocessors for computer graphics
Fast solutions for generating three-dimensional computer synthetic imagery are needed to view com... more Fast solutions for generating three-dimensional computer synthetic imagery are needed to view complex data in such diverse fields as medicine, architecture, entertainment, and engineering. If efficient algorithms are developed to take advantage of advanced architecture computers, the ability to render this data quickly will greatly aid specialists in these subject areas. This dissertation is concerned with investigating, developing, and analyzing computer graphics rendering algorithms which take full advantage of a massively parallel computer. By characterizing various algorithmic approaches according to: task grain size, load balancing method, and data pattern, it is possible to theoretically evaluate expected performance. The most promising approaches, all based on a sequential scanline z-buffer algorithm, are implemented on a commercial shared memory multiprocessor where their realized performance is compared. Due to the relative recent availability of such machines, most prior w...
Uploads
Papers by Randall Whitman Jr.
The research identifies five critical areas where forensic justification serves as the theological foundation for Free Grace theology: (1) the distinction between aspects of salvation (justification, sanctification, glorification), (2) the doctrine of eternal security, (3) conceptions of Christian assurance based on God's work rather than subjective experience, (4) the separation of believer judgment (Bema seat) from final judgment (Great White Throne), emphasizing rewards rather than salvation, and (5) pastoral motivation techniques that emphasize reward-based encouragement rather than fear-based "fruit inspection."
The paper concludes that without the Reformation understanding of forensic justification as a punctiliar, declarative act of God imputing Christ's righteousness to believers, Free Grace theological distinctives would either transform into works-based systems or dissolve entirely. The doctrine provides the necessary foundation for objective assurance, eternal security, and a coherent understanding of Christian motivation based on rewards rather than threats of damnation. Contemporary challenges to forensic justification therefore represent not merely doctrinal adjustments but fundamental threats to the Protestant Reformation itself.
The analysis categorizes and examines the primary arguments supporting Christian Universalism across three domains: philosophical/moral arguments (including Thomas Talbott's inconsistency argument and Hart's finitude-based objections to eternal punishment), theological arguments (such as Douglas Campbell's cosmic liberation view of justification and claims that God's victory requires universal salvation), and biblical arguments (focusing on universalist interpretations of passages containing "all" language and alternative understandings of hell's nature and duration).
Through exegetical, theological, and philosophical engagement, the article identifies significant weaknesses in each category of Universalist argumentation. The study finds that contextual limitations in biblical texts preclude universalist interpretations, that philosophical arguments rest on problematic assumptions about divine justice and human culpability, and that theological claims fail to account for the full scope of biblical teaching on judgment and retribution.
The paper concludes with pastoral recommendations for engaging Christian Universalism within church contexts, emphasizing the need for exegetical supremacy in preaching, humble submission to divine sovereignty, and recognition of the spiritual battle against theological deception. While acknowledging the sincere motivations of many Universalist advocates, the study argues that Christian Universalism ultimately fails to provide a biblically sustainable alternative to traditional understandings of eternal judgment and divine justice.