Dr. James Emery White considers God’s relationship to evil in light of the deadly shooting that took place at a showing of The Dark Knight Rises in Aurora, Colorado: http://www.christianity.com/blogs/JWhite/11674264/?utm_source=Christian%20Living%20Connection%20-%20Christianity.com&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=07/24/2012/
Determinism
Blog Post About the Aurora Shooting
This believer and her children were at the Batman movie in Aurora, Colorado, where the recent shootings took place. She has some good thoughts to share, especially regarding the character of God. So You Still…
Jerry Walls, “Does God Love Everyone? Clarifying Calvinism”
[From Dr. Walls’ Facebook page, and posted with his consent] Several days ago, we had a rather energetic discussion on this page in response to classic Calvinist theologian Arthur Pink’s forthright claim that God does…
Allowing is not commanding
This reprint of a blog post by Randal Rauser, PhD is placed here due to his accurate reflection of the Arminian position on the allowing vs commanding controversy. Note that Dr. Rauser is not a member of SEA and does not necessarily claim an Arminian stance.
Over the last week I have heard on at least three different occasions claims made to the moral equivalency of God allowing x and God commanding x. The argument has been made by Christians to demonstrate that if I accept that God providentially allows evils like genocide and infant sacrifice, I should have no problem if God also commands genocide and infant sacrifice. The argument has also been made by non-Christians to argue that if I have a problem with God commanding genocide and infant sacrifice, I should also have a problem with God allowing genocide and infant sacrifice.
Why Does One Person Accept Christ, While Another Rejects Him?
Why does one person accept Christ, while another rejects Him?
Notwithstanding God’s prevenient, enabling and intervening grace, free will is reasonably the cause of the aforementioned divergence, and which certainly requires greater explanation, and I believe that there is one. However, the first thing that Arminians point out is Adam and Eve, because the equation of total depravity no longer applies in their situation, and which begs the question: Why did they choose the way that they did? Arminians argue that God presented them with the opportunity to choose well, and by choosing well, to form good moral character. The same matter of free choice also applies to the angels as well, pre-Fall. No issues of depravity applies to their equation either. It is to this point that Calvinists, even such as R.C. Sproul, state the following:
Free Will in Heaven?
Due to the contradictory and confusing nature of Calvinism, Calvinists often struggle to articulate their own arguments. So Arminians with whom they are in dialogue, are often found having to first unscramble their own logic…
Book Review: Abasciano on Paul’s Use of the Old Testament in Romans 9:10-18
This book follows “Paul’s Use of the Old Testament in Romans 9:1-9: An Intertextual and Theological Exegesis” as Dr. Abasciano dives deeper into Romans 9 by examining 9:10-18. (link to Amazon) The work is organized,…
Playing With Dolls
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.
Origins: What comes from God vs. what comes from man
Regarding origins…in other of whether something comes from God or from man, note what John Calvin said about the *origin* of Paul’s expression of emotion towards his fellow Jews at Romans 9:1-3: John Calvin comments:…
Another Round in the Theodicy Debate (This Time Involving Bob Dylan!)
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…
An Explanation of Simple Foreknowledge
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.
Arminianism Overthrows Biblical Inerrancy?
Calvinists have put out a DVD called “Amazing Grace,” which makes the following charge against Arminianism: One Calvinist explains: “Arminianism has real implications for the doctrine of Scripture. How can God superintend men’s words so…
Calvinist Prayer (and many other things) Explained
Application 2: God ordains means as well as ends. God is the Author. This is his story. We are his characters. Therefore, Be a faithful character in God’s story.* Taken from a sermon by Joe…
John Piper on God Ordaining All Sin and Evil Part 1: An Arminian Response to Piper’s First “Question”
John Piper preached a sermon on God’s sovereign control over all things. In this sermon, Piper highly praises the works of Jonathan Edwards and relies heavily on his accounting of sovereignty to explain how God…
Roger Olson, “Strong Meat, Not Milk: Are Some Things Impossible to Believe?”
Are Some Things Impossible to Believe?
written by Roger E. Olson, PhD
Lewis Carroll’s White Queen tells Alice that sometimes she has believed six impossible things before breakfast. That led some later wits to quip that faith is believing six impossible things before breakfast.
Lately I’ve been re-reading Charles Hodge’s Systematic Theology (having read it many years ago).The first volume was first published in the early 1870s. I wonder if Hodge had read Through the Looking Glass which was published in 1871?
Or perhaps Dodgson (Carroll’s real name) and Hodge had read the same source? Perhaps someone associated with the Scottish Common Sense Philosophy?
In any case, interestingly, and I dare say surprisingly to many of his admirers, Hodge believed there are things it is impossible to believe.
Ephesians 1 Chosen “In Him”
Introduction The central theme of the passage is that our blessings and salvation are in Christ Jesus. This is clear because the phrase “in Christ” (or equivalent expression) takes place a dozen times in verse…
The Transfer of Nonsense Principle
A concept that’s gained some popularity among Determinists is that God’s foreknowledge is incompatible with libertarian free will. One proponent of this idea is Dr. Linda Zagzebski, who has published works arguing this concept based upon the ‘Transfer of Necessity Principle’ (TNP)
Necessarily Non-Transferrable
The basic argument can be understood from a determinist dilemma by Diodorus Cronus, which I provide {translation} for where appropriate.
Let S = the proposition that there will be a sea battle tomorrow.
Roger Olson, Some Thoughts about My Conversation with Michael Horton
Posted on February 4, 2012 by rogereolson
Some Thoughts about My Conversation with Michael Horton
I spoke about why I am “Against Calvinism” for about 15 minutes focusing on the goodness of God and how classical, “high Calvinism” is inconsistent with any meaning of “good” and “love” known to us. Then Mike spoke for about 15 minutes focusing on humanity’s depravity and God’s mercy in electing some to salvation. In other words, he also said that God is good even if not in terms of our “fairness” (because he doesn’t save everyone).
Where I Have a Problem with Calvinism
Posted on February 1, 2012 by rogereolson
One commenter has raised a question about my statement that I have no problem with Calvinism in confessionally Reformed circles (churches, denominations, etc.). I made that statement in my previous post about my public conversation with Mike Horton.
So, let me clarify that.
First, by “no problem with” I don’t mean “agree with!” What I mean is, I don’t object to Reformed folks holding to their Calvinism within their own ecclesiastical settings that are confessionally bound. The same is true of many other doctrines with which I disagree in other confessional traditions (or non-confessional but with unwritten or supposedly non-binding statements of faith).
Appalling Examples of Evil that Imply the Incoherence of Calvinism # 3: The Satanic Power of Pornography
Here is a quote from Calvinist Al Mohler provided by Calvinist Justin Taylor on “The Satanic Power of Porn”(http://thegospelcoalition.org/blogs/justintaylor/2012/01/23/the-satanic-power-of-porn/). Russell Moore ( http://www.russellmoore.com/2012/01/23/should-i-marry-a-man-with-pornography-struggles-my-response/ ): Pornography is a universal temptation precisely because it does exactly what…
