Monthly Archives For September 2010

God and Evil

, , No Comment

by Roger E. Olson Obviously, one posted message cannot begin to solve the problem(s) of God and evil. All I want to accomplish here is clear up some misconceptions about the Arminian view and ask…

Read Post →

On Omnitemporality

, , No Comment

One of the problems with attempting to discuss the issue of Foreknowledge as it relates to Free Will is that the term itself prejudices the discussion, bending it in a certain argumentative direction that the…

Read Post →

Why I am not an Open Theist

, , No Comment

by Roger E. Olson Someone asked me why I am not an open theist. I respect open theists for their dedication to biblical exegesis and for their determination to emphasize the personal nature of God.…

Read Post →

God’s Self-Limitation

, , No Comment

by Roger E. Olson Several readers seem to me to ignore an important presupposition of classical Arminian theology and of open theism. (I could probably list some other theologies that also affirm God’s self-limitation, but…

Read Post →

Arminian Teaching Regarding Original Sin

, , No Comment

by Roger E. Olson One of the purposes of my blog is to clarify Arminian theology and distinguish classical Arminianism from the all-too-common misrepresentations of it by some Calvinists, Lutherans and (ironically!) self-styled Arminians. One…

Read Post →

How Revelation 3:20 Creates a Dilemma for Calvinism

, , No Comment

In Revelation 1, 2, and 3 John prophesies to the seven churches in Asia. The last group he addresses is the church in Laodicea. After addressing the Ladocians, he concludes with the following prophesy:

    (Jesus speaking) Here I am! I stand at the door and knock. If anyone hears my voice and opens the door, I will come in and eat with him, and he with me. To him who overcomes, I will give the right to sit with me on my throne, just as I overcame and sat down with my Father on his throne. He who has an ear, let him hear what the Spirit says to the churches. Revelation 3:20-22

This passage can be interpreted in two ways, both of which present problems for Calvinism.

Read Post →