Calvinist John Stark interviews a Wesleyan theologian he has great respect for, Fred Sanders: http://thegospelcoalition.org/blogs/tgc/2012/06/25/youre-a-calvinist-right/. Introducing the interview, Stark writes, “And so, I had to know: For a guy who loves, quotes, and depends upon…
As follow up to Roger Olson’s essay recently posted here (http://evangelicalarminians.org/Roger-Olson-My-Biggest-Problem-with-Calvin-Calvinism), it could be helpful to post some examples from Calvin (as a representative of Calvinism) that invite the sort of remonstration (= objection) made by Olson and other Arminians against Calvinism. Today we post a few examples of highly unbiblical and therefore objectionable doctrine from Calvin. Tomorrow, we plan to post comments from John Wesley in the same vein as Olson’s (but more forceful and fiery).
John Calvin not only taught that God willed the fall of Adam, but that He ordained it as well. Here are some quotes:
Again they object: were they not previously predestined by God’s
ordinance to that corruption which is now claimed as the cause of
condemnation? When, therefore, they perish in their corruption, they
but pay the penalties of that misery in which Adam fell by the
This post is from the blog of Roger E. Olson, PhD written by Austin Fischer Neo-Calvinism Preaching My Conversion…to Calvinism I was converted to Calvinism because of the preaching of John Piper. I was in…
New Research On the Level of Calvinism vs. Arminianism in the SBC: http://blog.christianitytoday.com/ctliveblog/archives/2012/06/new_research_su.html
A Christianity Today article: Weston Gentry, “As Baptists Prepare to Meet, Calvinism Debate Shifts to Heresy Accusation: Hundreds, including seminary presidents, have signed a statement on salvation criticized by both Reformed and Arminian theologians.” Here…
By Roger E. Olson, PhD The recent “dust up” over possible semi-Pelagianism among certain Baptists has given rise to the usual confusion about terms like “heresy” and “heretic.” So let’s clear things up a little…
A question that I was recently considering was whether or not God could truly love us if we did not have free will. Clearly He could care about us like I care about my grandfather’s jacket or my car, but could one really say that He loved us? I think the answer is both yes and no.
For context let us consider the kind of love that we are dealing with. In the Bible, it uses the analogy of marriage to define God’s love for His elect people. However, it uses the analogy of a parent and child to define His relationship with creation. When we are talking about free will, we are naturally talking about how God designed us. Therefore the parent/child relationship is at the forefront and so it is this kind of love that I am going to be addressing.
Related Fallacies:
Equivocation
Recent responses to Against Calvinism
By Roger E. Olson, PhD
Here I post two e-mails that typify responses I’ve received from individuals about Against Calvinism.
I’m not going to comment on them, just reproduced them here. I’ll let you, my faithful readers, decide what you think and comment on them. I’ve removed anything that would identify their authors.
Arminians and Calvinists define some theological terms differently. This has a tendency to cause us to talk past each other when discussing theological issues. Here are some of the words that Arminians and Calvinists have different meanings for:
Decree
Arminians – A plan of God to establish parameters for the way something will work. For example, God can decree for humans to have and make decisions.
Calvinists – A plan of God to cause things to happen in a predetermined way.
Election
Arminians – God chooses Christ. Those who follow Christ benefit from his election.1
Calvinists – God unconditionally chooses certain individuals to be saved. The chosen are elected.
Faith
Arminians – Faith means to trust God. Because of God’s drawing grace, it is possible for each person to trust God.
The following is from Dr. Jack Cottrell. While he is neither a member of SEA or a self-declared Arminian, his thoughts on Ephesians 1 are very insightful.
QUESTION: Calvinists say that Ephesians 1:1-11 clearly establishes the absolute and all-inclusive sovereignty of God, including the unconditional predestination of the elect to salvation. How do you interpret this text?
ANSWER: A right understanding of Ephesians 1:1-11 begins with the recognition that God’s purpose for Israel was from the beginning limited to preparing for the coming of the Messiah, namely, for the incarnation of God the Logos as the human person Jesus of Nazareth. Once the Messiah came, it was God’s eternal purpose to merge all believing Israelites and all believing Gentiles into one new body called the church. This is the main point of the book of Ephesians, and it is the key to understanding the often misused passage in Ephesians 1:1-11.
“Theology is the study of God and his ways. For all we know, dung beetles may study us and our ways and call it humanology. If so, we would probably be more touched and amused…
The purpose of this post is to define Arminian soteriology. Arminianism in general is the views of James Arminius. Of course, Arminius’ views span more then just salvation. They include the freewill of man, God’s…
Roger E. Olson, PhD writes: “Theodicy”–The attempt to justify the ways of God in the face of the problem of evil. A friendly correspondent sent me this URL to an article in today’s Chronicle of…
This question was once posed to Dr. Roger Olson, and I’ve been thinking it over: if I became convinced beyond a shadow of a doubt that God really did govern the way that Calvinists claim…
This is a brief snippet from Dr. Roger Olson’s post: “About judging God’s morality” Recently, an acquaintance asked me if I am guilty of “judging God’s morality.” He explained that his reason for asking is…
In the book Against Calvinism, Roger Olson asserts that Calvinism damages God’s reputation, and that it (unintentionally) turns God into a moral monster who is hardly distinguishable from the devil. Olson doesn’t argue that Calvinists affirm that God is like the devil. Rather, in his view it is the logical implication of Calvinism. It’s a strong assertion, but I agree. John Wesley did also.
This was written by SEA member Bob Anderson in response to John Piper’s recent post “What Made It OK for God to Kill Women, Children in Old Testament?” He gave us permission to post it…
Or “Say hello to my little friend!”</ What I mean by Proof-texting There are four different ways to interact with Scripture within a discussion: Exegesis: Carefully breaking down the meaning of a text through grammar,…
In Bavinck’s article on supralapsarian and infralapsarian predestination (link), he disagrees with supralapsarianism and infralapsarianism about 90% of the time, so we get very few glimpses of what he actually believes. I went through the article and pulled out all the positive statements by Bavinck about predestination. I came out with 10 statements. Upon examining the statements, I noted that the majority of them are either in tension with each other or leave a major term undefined.
Statements in tension with each other (i.e. that seem to move in opposite directions – although they don’t formally contradict each other, no reconciliation is provided):
