This is the second video in a fantastic series of lectures by Dr. Keith Stanglin and Dr. Thomas McCall on who Jacob Arminius was, and what he believed. McCall and Stranglin wrote the book Jacob…

This is the second video in a fantastic series of lectures by Dr. Keith Stanglin and Dr. Thomas McCall on who Jacob Arminius was, and what he believed. McCall and Stranglin wrote the book Jacob…
By Derek Ouellette in response to John Piper’s Oklahoma debacle By now you are probably aware of another tweet by John Piper which fired up an otherwise friendly Christian community (<– yes, facetious). For…
Evil: Sometimes the Human Explanation is Better than the Divine Explanation written by Ryan Ragozine “Everything happens for a reason.” How many times have you heard this short, pithy saying echoed in response to tragedy?…
Probably not, but this is SO MUCH FUN to say with a straight face. Let’s run with it a while and see how much mileage we get from it.
First, Calvinists claim that monergism is the only view of salvation that really glorifies God. Any non-Calvinist Christian knows this a lie, and since Satan is the Father of Lies …
Second, Calvinists claim that anyone who rejects monergism is a Pelagian at worst or a semi-Pelagian at best. Arminians know this is a false accusation, and since Satan is the Accuser of the Brethren …
Third, “Calvinism makes it difficult to recognize the difference between God and the devil except that the devil wants everyone to go to hell and God wants many to go to Hell.” (Roger Olson) Calvinists might whine they’re being misrepresented here, but Calvin himself said that election necessarily entails reprobation.
“But God isn’t sending people to Hell by withholding grace; he’s merely allowing them to go,” Calvinists might reply.
This video addresses the problem of evil in a clear, helpful, and succinct way. (See below for a caution.) It can also be viewed on YouTube here. At one point, this piece refers to the…
As I read Mark Talbot’s chapter on God and suffering in Suffering and the Sovereignty of God (edited by John Piper and Justin Taylor) a thought occurred to me: Since most Calvinists are harshly critical…
Calvinism and the God-as-author analogy written by Roger E Olson, PhD One of my faithful visitors here pointed me to the following recent essay posted to the Desiring God blog by one Joe Rigney (professor…
Michael Brown, “The Newtown Massacre and the Pain of God” — http://townhall.com/columnists/michaelbrown/2012/12/17/the-newtown-massacre-and-the-pain-of-god-n1468169/page/full/
Taken from: http://www.str.org/site/News2?page=NewsArticle&id=5093
A Good Reason for Evil
What is evil? Could it have a purpose? Here is a view of evil from an adult rather than a childish perspective.
By: Gregory Koukl
The first step in answering the problem of evil is this: We’ve got to get clear on what this thing “evil” actually is. It does seem to follow that if God created all things, and evil is a thing, then God created evil. This is a valid syllogism. If the premises are true, then the conclusion would be true as well.
The problem with that line of reasoning is that the second premise is not true. Evil is not a thing. The person who probably explained it best was St. Augustine, and then Thomas Aquinas picked up on his solution. Others since them have argued that evil has no ontological status in itself.
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/
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…
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.
A description of this 3 part series from Pawson’s website followed by a link to each part:
Answers from some of the faculty at Asbury Seminary to the question, “Are natural disasters the will of God?”: http://seedbed.com/feed/are-natural-disasters-the-will-of-god-
My Response to John Piper’s Recent Statements about God and Tornadoes
by Roger Olson, PhD
During the last week or two I have received numerous e-mails, some from journalists, asking my opinion about John Piper’s explanation of the recent rash of deadly tornadoes across the South. Apparently, he has at least implied that God sent them as judgments on particular communities and reminders of their need to repent.
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).
God, being free from necessity to establish the world in which we exist, freely entered into a covenant with the man and woman He created subsequent to their disobedience of the one command which He…
According to The Oxford American College Dictionary, the word reprehensible means “deserving censure or condemnation.” While there are aspects regarding Calvinism which are orthodox, overall I find its analysis of God’s character, and at times…
Dr. Kyle Roberts, “Tsunamis: Or, Why I’m No Longer a Calvinist” Kyle Roberts is Assistant Professor of Systematic Theology and Lead Faculty of Christian Thought, Bethel Seminary (St. Paul, MN).
Arminius comments:
What Arminius is trying to avoid is the constructing of his exegetical theology which is free from charging or making God the author of sin. What does it mean to make God the author of sin? First, let us define sin. The Larger Catechism states that sin is “any want [lack] of conformity unto, or transgression of, any law of God, given as a rule to the reasonable creature.”2 This definition works as well as any other.