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:…
Determinism
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…
Calvinist Doctrine Leads to the Conclusion that There Is No Sin in the World
Thomas Taylor (1738-1816) writes, in his seminal work, “A Solemn Caution Against the Ten Horns of Calvinism” (1819): “There is no such thing as sin in the world. Everything is just going on as he…
The Westminster Confession of Faith: Handwaving
Randolph Sinks Foster, in his book, Objections to Calvinism (1852) writes:
[The Confession of Faith states,] “God, from all eternity, did, by the most wise and holy counsel of his own will, freely and unchangeably ordain whatsoever comes to pass; [and now your disclaimer,] yet so as thereby neither is God the author of sin, nor is violence offered to the will of the creature.”
But this disclaimer [God is not the author of sin] by no means relieves my embarrassment — it greatly increases it, by placing you [Calvinist brother] in the attitude, to my mind, of believing a palpable contradiction, namely, that God did cause all things, sin included, yet in such a way that he did not cause sin.”
Scot McKnight, Roger Olson on The Five Conundrums of Calvinism
Follow the link to view Scot McKnight’s description of Roger Olson on “The Five Conundrums of Calvinism” (http://www.patheos.com/blogs/jesuscreed/2011/12/26/the-five-conundrums-of-calvinism/)
Another Appalling Example of Evil that Implies the Incoherence of Calvinism
Here is another post from Calvinist leader Justin Taylor that leaves one baffled at how Calvinists can hold to exhaustive determinism: ‘The 200 Million “Missing” Girls’: A new documentary, “It’s a Girl! The Three Deadliest…
Calvinist Santa: The Movie
[Humor]
View here for original script
For comments, view here.
Calvinism and the Evil of Kim Jong-Il
After the passing of Kim Jong-Il (our font makes it look like “Jong the Second,” but it is really the capital letter i followed by the lowercase letter L), Justin Taylor did a brief post highlighting how diabolical he was:
http://thegospelcoalition.org/blogs/justintaylor/2011/12/19/inside-kim-jong-ils-diabolical-world/
It is simply baffling that Calvinists can decry the diabolical, heinous actions of Kim Jong-Il (and others like him), and yet they hold that God first conceived in his own divine heart every one of the man’s wicked actions, thought them up without any influence outside of himself, and unconditionally and irresistibly decreed them without any influence outside of himself, resulting in the man doing them all without any chance, power, or ability to do anything else. It’s madness I tell you! Madness!!
If Calvinism Were True
I very much appreciate Olson’s book Arminian Theology: Myths and Realities, and I wholeheartedly recommend it to everyone who asks me for a brief defense of Classical Arminian theology.1 Neither this book nor his latest is in any way meant to be an exhaustive, exegetically detailed theology textbook in defense of Classical Arminianism. These are popular books meant for the populace, like many of John Piper’s books. In Dr.
Steve W. Lemke, Agent Causation, or, How to Be a Soft Libertarian
Steve W. Lemke explains and argues for agent causation as both logical and biblical, an Arminian view of free will. Here is the attachment: libertarian agent causation
