A description of this 3 part series from Pawson’s website followed by a link to each part:
Sovereignty of God
Dr. Olson’s Further Thoughts about Catastrophes and God
by Roger Olson This is a response to comments made in response to my previous post about John Piper’s blog entry about the recent tornado outbreak in the eastern U.S. True, in this particular blog…
Dr. Greg Boyd’s Response to John Piper’s Statements about God and Tornadoes
We here at SEA disagree with Dr. Boyd about certain aspects of his theology. Still, we felt that his statements on this topic were worth hearing: http://www.gregboyd.org/blog/did-god-send-a-tornado-to-warn-the-elca/
Are Natural Disasters The Will of God?
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
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.
A Very Brief Explanation of Jacobus Arminius’ Doctrine of the Twofold Will of God
Calvinism posits that in God there exists a distinction of wills; the will of revelation and the will of sovereignty (i.e. the revealed will and the secret or sovereign will). However, Arminians posit that the problem with this theory of two wills is that when one is put into effect then the other is put to naught. Let me make an example of this.
It is often said by Calvinists in Genesis 50:20 that God has commanded that it is unlawful to do ill to one’s family (in this instance, kidnapping). This is said to be the revealed will of God. And yet, allegedly in this Gen. 50:20 circumstance, Calvinists believe that you can also discern the operation of the sovereign or secret will of God working through the sin of Joseph’s brothers to a good and godly end.
Does God Repent? – The Bible Answer Man Clarifies
The classic King James Version of the Bible says, “It repented the Lord that he had made man on the earth, and it grieved him at his heart” (Genesis 6:6). Elsewhere, God says, “It repenteth me that I have set up Saul to be king for he is turned back from following me, and hath not performed my commandments” (1 Samuel 15:11). If God is perfect, how could he repent?
First, the Bible unequivocally teaches that God is perfectly good and thus incapable of doing evil (Psalm 5:4–5; James 1:13; 3 John 1:11). As such, God’s repentance must not be understood as entailing moral guilt. Indeed, the moral perfection of the Creator sets him apart from his sin–tainted creation (Leviticus 11:44–45; 19:2; 20:7; 1 Peter 1:15–16).
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…
Quotable Quotes – Steve Lemke, Does Human Choice Contribute Anything to Salvation?
Does human choice contribute anything to salvation? Steve Lemke answers:
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
Scot McKnight, “For and Against Calvinism 3”
Follow the link to view part 3 of distinguished NT scholar Scot McKnight’s review of the books For Calvinism (by Michael Horton) and Against Calvinism (by Roger Olson): “For and Against Calvinism 3”.
Book Review: Providence and the Problem of Evil by Richard Swinburne
Please follow the link to view J.W. Wartick’s review of Richard Swinburne’s Providence and the Problem of Evil at the “Apologetics 315” website: http://www.apologetics315.com/2011/11/book-review-providence-and-problem-of.html.
Please note that the comments on the review reveal that the author mistakenly stated that Swinburne rejects the doctrine of original sin, when he actually rejects the doctrine of original guilt. SEA affirms the doctrine of original sin, and allows for differences on the issue of original guilt. For information about Arminian thinking on original sin, see Roger Olson’s post here on SEA entitled, “Arminian Teaching Regarding Original Sin” (http://evangelicalarminians.org/olson.Arminian-Teaching-Regarding-Original-Sin). It is also worth noting that Swinburne is an open theist, a position rejected by SEA.
Sovereignty, not Determinism
Arminians have a high view of God’s sovereignty, contrary to the caricatures and lies spread of us to the contrary. As a matter of fact, we think Arminians hold to a higher view of God’s sovereignty than do Calvinists, as I was reminded recently from my Arminian brother Johnathan Pritchett. The reason our view is considered “higher” is due to the following. For an omnipotent God, strictly controlling all people is easy and effortless. Like moving chess pieces on a chessboard, the movements are swift and carefree. The pieces move wherever the overseer places them without the slightest challenge whatsoever.
Recent Posts
Video: Methodist Arminians & Wesley’s Arminianism: “Who Are the Arminians?” Part 4
How Do You Deal with Calvinist Arguments for Limited Atonement Based on Texts Like Colossians 2:14, Double Jeopardy, and a Commercial View of the Atonement?
Roy Ingle, “God and History”
Mark K. Olson: Famous Sermons of John Wesley 8: The Great Privilege of Those Born of God
