The LORD said to Moses, “When you return to Egypt, see that you perform before Pharaoh all the wonders I have given you the power to do. But I will harden his heart so that…
Providence
James Arminius On the One Will of God
There is a connection between the Understanding of God and His Will that is overlooked or neglected by those who hold to a two wills in God theory. In this post we will discover what Arminius believed about God’s Knowledge or Understanding, and its relation to the one Will of God, with its various distinctives.
THE UNDERSTANDING OF GOD
The Theological Fatalist’s Modal Fallacy
Theological fatalists posit that God’s foreknowledge of future events mean that it is not possible for anything other than what happens to happen. Since God knows every event that will happen, then aren’t those events…
Arminius on the Sovereignty and Providence of God concerning the Problem of Evil
Arminius comments:
- We have already said that in sin the act, or the cessation from action, and ‘the transgression of the law’ come under consideration: But the Efficiency of God about evil concerns both the act itself and its viciousness, and it does this whether we have regard to the beginning of sin, to its progress, or to its end and consummation.1
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.
The Arminian’s Doctrine of Divine Concurrence
Concurrence is the cooperation of agents or causes ~ a combined action or effort. When we speak of the doctrine of concurrence, we mean the cooperation of God and a person in a combined effort…
Pascal’s Wager Against Calvinism
Many of you have heard of Pascal’s Wager as a motivator to believe in God, but I think it also applies to the Calvinist/Arminian debate. Here is Pascal’s Wager: Belief in God, if God exists,…
God’s Sovereignty in the Crucifixion of Jesus
by Roger E. Olson One critic has argued against my maxim that, “God is in charge but not in control” by pointing to Acts 2:23, which says that Jesus was “delivered up according to the…
Paul Copan, “Divine Exasperation”
Please click on the link to view Paul Copan, “Divine Exasperation”, which surveys biblical passages that express God’s exasperation with sinful, human resistance to his grace, revealing “God’s legitimate expectation of spiritual fruitfulness, repentance, or obedience.…
Brian P. Irwin, “Yahweh’s Suspension of Free Will in the Old Testament: Divine Immorality or Sign-Act?”
Please click on the attachment to view Brian P. Irwin, “Yahweh’s Suspension of Free Will in the Old Testament: Divine Immorality or Sign-Act?” Tyndale Bulletin 54.2 (2003) 55-62.
The author’s summary:
Several passages in the Old Testament portray Yahweh as behaving in
ways that seem unfair or immoral. Two such narratives are the
episodes describing the hardening of Pharaoh’s heart and the spirit
dispatched to deceive Ahab. In each of these two cases, careful
attention to the literary context and the final form of the MT shows that
Yahweh’s behaviour is best understood as a sign-act directed toward a
specific end.
The First Fatal Flaw in the Calvinist System Revisited
by Roger E. Olson Recently I wrote about flaws and fatal flaws in theological systems. All have flaws. Some also have fatal flaws. One I mentioned that I see in the Calvinist system (as articulated…
Roger Olson, “Theological Flaws and Fatal Flaws”
by Roger E. Olson Recently I argued that every theological system has flaws that should be acknowledged so that the entire system is held somewhat lightly and open to revision. One problem is when a…
God and Evil
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…
God’s Self-Limitation
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…
John Piper on the Relationship between God’s Sovereignty and Tragedy
John Piper was asked by Cathy Grossman, from USA Today, what he would tell the children who lost their parents on 9/11. She understood Piper to be suggesting that a victim should concentrate on the…
John Wesley, A Dialogue Between a Predestinarian and His Friend
A Dialogue Between a Predestinarian and His Friend
Out of thine own mouth!
The Works of the Rev. John Wesley, A.M., Volume 10, 1872, pp. 259-266
TO ALL PREDESTINARIANS
1. I AM informed, some of you have said, that the following quotations are false; that these words were not spoken by these authors; others, that they were not spoken in this sense; and others, that neither you yourself, nor any true Predestinarian, ever did, or ever would, speak so.
2. My friends, the authors here quoted are well known, in whom you may read the words with your own eyes. And you who have read them know in your own conscience, they were spoken in this sense, and no other; nay, that this sense of them is professedly defended throughout the whole treatises whence they are taken.
Reinterpreting Cain and Abel: A Disturbing Satire
If Calvinism is true and God “influences the desires and decisions of people,”1 as Wayne Grudem and most Calvinists insist, then let us interpret Scripture accordingly. Adam and his wife, Eve, bore two sons: Cain…
Is Arminianism a Neo-Manichaeanism?
[THIS HAS BEEN EDITED. ALL REFERENCES TO THE ORIGINAL CALVINIST AUTHOR BEING RESPONDED TO HAVE BEEN REMOVED.] Bhagwan, Ishvara, Maheshvara, Parameshvara, Paramatman, Para Brahman, Adi Purusha, Vishnu, Krishna, Rama, Ek Onkar, Satnam, Nirankar, Shoghi Effendi,…
Friday Files: Benson on Proverbs 16:1
Benson’s comments on Proverbs 16:1 are short and sweet so here are his words: Proverbs 16:1 To man belong the plans of the heart, but from the LORD comes the reply of the tongue. That…
Another Middle Knowledge Passage
Middle knowledge is mostly an implication of the scriptural truths of God’s providential governance of the world and man’s choices. But there are some passages that do directly teach that God knows what we would…
Is There Trauma in Sovereignty? A Response to James Swan by Brennon Hartshorn
Arminians and other Libertarians are concerned with determinism, the proposition that all of our actions are made necessary by God in some way. We are concerned because determinism seems to make God the author of sin.
The compatibilist wants to show that we can still be free and responsible for our own actions and they can be determined. David Hume, a skeptic philosopher, tried to show this is the case on a naturalistic framework. Theist determinists adopt some of Hume’s arguments and augment them in order to argue that it is possible that all our actions have been pre-determined, but we freely do those actions and are therefore responsible for them. There have also been other attempts at trying to show that this is possible.
Recent Posts
Roy Ingle, “Calvinism and the Atonement”
Why Does God Deny the Opportunity of Choice for or Against Him to Young Children Who Die and the Mentally Impaired?
Mark K. Olson, “Wesley’s ‘Warmed Heart’ at Aldersgate – What Really Happened?”
Adam Roe, “The Crucial Thread of Prevenient Grace: A Wesleyan Perspective on Divine Drawing”
