What Calvinism I oppose and why

[Hans Deventer]

Man, I'm starting to like this guy more and more. Only wish I could have half of his irenic spirit. God help me.

http://www.rogereolson.com/2010/10/1...ppose-and-why/

[Gina Stevenson]

Thanks. It began to seem long [but then who's 100% awake @ this hour ... not me!], but I felt "obligated" to finish reading it, living in quite a Calvinistic/TULIP area.

[John Brickley]

I have to say that if I believed that the 5 point Calvinism that Dr. Olson's article referrenced and George Wallace represents were true, then I would conciously choose atheism. Such a god is reprehensible and not worthy of worship. He would be as Wesley phrased it: "worse than the devil."

[Dennis M. Scott]

At NTS in the nineteen seventies, Dallas Theological Seminary professor Howard Hendricks was guest lecturing, and said, "To be on the faculty at Dallas, you have to sign a statement saying you adhere to all five points of Calvin. I don't know a single faculty member who does."

His point was that neither Arminians nor Calvinists are willing to stand totally on one side or the other, because neither position adequately describes the God of the scriptures.

[Hans Deventer]

At NTS in the nineteen seventies, Dallas Theological Seminary professor Howard Hendricks was guest lecturing, and said, "To be on the faculty at Dallas, you have to sign a statement saying you adhere to all five points of Calvin. I don't know a single faculty member who does."

Well, if I understand Dr. Olson properly, that has changed.

His point was that neither Arminians nor Calvinists are willing to stand totally on one side or the other, because neither position adequately describes the God of the scriptures.

No position does. But some are better than others.

[Billie Goodson]

Thanks for posting this Hans. I too have read Olson's blog on and off. I have had a few friends that ask me about the differences between Calvinism and Nazarene theology and it is most often a painful discussion. I have too great of a respect for the theologians from both systems to really voice the attack that comes to my mind when comparing/contrasting the differences. What I have noted is that the Reformed group is far more likely to take the opinion that it is not an intra-Nicene discussion and place security of salvation in the balance. However, there are statements by the other side such as John's above that are just as scary to me.

[Billy Cox]

Well, if I understand Dr. Olson properly, that has changed.



No position does. But some are better than others.

Some time back, I posted a thread about whether inerrancy matters. A Roger Olson blog post was the point of reference. In short, he said that inerrancy has become a shibboleth and even prominent academic inerrantists don't comply 100% with the points of agreement.

[John Brickley]

Thanks for posting this Hans. I too have read Olson's blog on and off. I have had a few friends that ask me about the differences between Calvinism and Nazarene theology and it is most often a painful discussion. I have too great of a respect for the theologians from both systems to really voice the attack that comes to my mind when comparing/contrasting the differences. What I have noted is that the Reformed group is far more likely to take the opinion that it is not an intra-Nicene discussion and place security of salvation in the balance. However, there are statements by the other side such as John's above that are just as scary to me.

Billie,

I am curious what you find scary about my statement above. Please understand I don't say that in a defensive way at all, I am just curious what you find scary about it? I would love to hear you expand on that.

Thanks,

John

[Billie Goodson]

Billie,

I am curious what you find scary about my statement above. Please understand I don't say that in a defensive way at all, I am just curious what you find scary about it? I would love to hear you expand on that.

Thanks,

John

The word I keyed on in you post was 'atheism' -- the belief that God does not exist. A comment that I often get from atheist is that they can't believe in a God as cruel as the one they read about in the Old Testament. The problem I have with their statement is that the issue of whether God is loving or a capriciously malevolent bully does not speak to his existence but rather to his character. If one can only believe in a god because they want the idea of a loving fatherly image, then I am curious how real God is to them.

If God was a capricious malevolent bully, then I would join with you and consider him unworthy of worship, but I would still believe in the existence of a transcendent creator. Either God exists or he does not, that is independent of my feelings for him.

Another scary thing is that if God was not as He is described by the majority of current Wesleyan theologians (loving), then we would all really be screwed. That would honestly be the scariest (except for maybe five-point Calvinism as expressed in the harshest of Reformed theology).

[John Brickley]

The word I keyed on in you post was 'atheism' -- the belief that God does not exist. A comment that I often get from atheist is that they can't believe in a God as cruel as the one they read about in the Old Testament. The problem I have with their statement is that the issue of whether God is loving or a capriciously malevolent bully does not speak to his existence but rather to his character. If one can only believe in a god because they want the idea of a loving fatherly image, then I am curious how real God is to them.

If God was a capricious malevolent bully, then I would join with you and consider him unworthy of worship, but I would still believe in the existence of a transcendent creator. Either God exists or he does not, that is independent of my feelings for him.

Another scary thing is that if God was not as He is described by the majority of current Wesleyan theologians (loving), then we would all really be screwed. That would honestly be the scariest (except for maybe five-point Calvinism as expressed in the harshest of Reformed theology).

I agree with what you are saying. Even as I used the word atheism I knew it was not the right word to use, because as you point out I would not be denying his existence just refusing to worship Him. I just was not sure what the appropriate word was in that case, I guess it is just enough to say that I would reject Him if I believed the kind of supralapsarian Calvinism that seems to be enjoying a resurgence were true. Thank you for the clarification. Having said that, I expect that we will all be surprised by God when we meet Him, but I do not believe that He will be inconsistent with what He revealed Himself to be in Jesus Christ and I believe the veiw of God in 5 point Calvinism is completly inconsistent with the God as revealed in Jesus Christ.

[Billie Goodson]

I agree with what you are saying. Even as I used the word atheism I knew it was not the right word to use, because as you point out I would not be denying his existence just refusing to worship Him. I just was not sure what the appropriate word was in that case, I guess it is just enough to say that I would reject Him if I believed the kind of supralapsarian Calvinism that seems to be enjoying a resurgence were true. Thank you for the clarification. Having said that, I expect that we will all be surprised by God when we meet Him, but I do not believe that He will be inconsistent with what He revealed Himself to be in Jesus Christ and I believe the veiw of God in 5 point Calvinism is completly inconsistent with the God as revealed in Jesus Christ.

The reassuring thing to me, I really don't know of any theologians that are true five point Calvinists, even Calvin seems to not be an adherent to that school of thought. I think it does come from some of the practitioners of the faith, but not the true students of theological scholarship.

The comical part of that to me is that those who follow the teachings of the "reformed pastoral school of theology", like Piper (possibly one of the more moderate in some respects of that type) reject Wesley because he was not a theologian, but practical. Really an odd valuation system to me. It is kind of why I found it odd for Spurgeon to be listed as a free-will baptist. Still haven't had time to dig into that yet.

I don't find five point Calvinism inconsistent with scripture, but like you I find it inconsistent with the revelation of God through Christ. However, that revelation is recorded in scripture so it causes an odd dichotomy because it seems to pit scripture against scripture. That causes me to think the error is in how we read scripture which seems consistent with the more I learn about scripture. However, if I want to ignore certain verses, I can see how five point Calvinism emerges. Of course they say the same about Wesleyan theology. So, like you pointed out, I think we will all be a little shocked in the life-after-life-after death. Personally, I don't think we will spend any time sorting it out, there will be better things to do. For now, I am happy to call them Brother if they will accept me as the same.

[Kevin Jackson]

Man, I'm starting to like this guy more and more. Only wish I could have half of his irenic spirit. God help me.

http://www.rogereolson.com/2010/10/1...ppose-and-why/

Thanks for the link. Excellent stuff.