We run our website the way we wished the whole internet worked: we provide high quality original content with no ads. We are funded by your direct support for ReKnew and our vision. Please consider supporting this project.
A Calvinist and an Arminian walk into a bar…
Roger Olson posted A Conversation between a Calvinist and an Arminian about God’s Sovereignty that we thought was dead on. In fact, we kind of wonder if Roger is bugging some of the conversations we’ve had. Déjà vu much? And since Roger has argued that Open Theism should be included under the broader umbrella of Arminianism, you can just substitute “Open Theist” where you see “Arminian” and it won’t make a bit of difference.
Here’s a snippet of the conversation from Roger’s post:
Arminian: “How does God love those he predestined, foreordained, to hell?”
Calvinist: “He gives them many temporal blessings.”
Arminian: “You mean he gives them a little bit of heaven to go to hell in.”
Calvinist: “Well, I wouldn’t put it that way.”
Arminian: “That’s what it sounds like to me.”
Calvinist: “That’s because you don’t understand God correctly. God is infinite and beyond our comprehension. So God’s love is not the same as our love. It transcends it.”
Arminian: “How is that different from saying God is ‘supercalifragilisticexpialadocious’?”
Category: General
Tags: Arminianism, Calvinism, God's Love, God's Sovereignty, Open Theism, Roger Olson
Related Reading
How do you respond to Acts 13:48?
“When the Gentiles heard this, they were glad and praised the word of the Lord; and as many as had been destined for eternal life became believers.” If the individual Gentiles who believed were “destined for eternal life” before they “became believers,” some may argue, they obviously were foreknown by God before they became believers.…
What is the significance of Jeremiah 26:19?
“Did [Hezekiah] not fear the Lord and entreat the favor of the Lord, and did not the Lord change his mind about the disaster that he had pronounced against [Israel]?” As in 2 Kings 20:1–6 and Isaiah 38:1–5, if the future is exhaustive settled, it seems God could not have been forthright when he told…
Arbitrary Election
Micah J. Murray wrote a blog entitled Five Reasons I Reject Unconditional Election, which was a response to John Piper’s recent arguments for embracing unconditional election. If you’re looking for Scripture-based argumentation, you would do well to look elsewhere (as Micah freely suggests) but if you’re looking for the deep down, intuitive and honest gut stuff,…
What is the significance of Exodus 13:17?
The Lord didn’t lead Israel along the shortest route to Canaan because Israel would have had to fight the Philistines. The Lord wanted to avoid this, “Lest the people change their minds when they see war, and they return to Egypt.” [NIV: “If they face war they might change their minds and return to Egypt”].…
Does Prayer Really Change Things?
Many people operate out of a blueprint model where God is viewed as absolutely unchanging, and all that occurs in the world is the unfolding of an eternal divine plan. If this is the case, then the purpose of prayer is to change us, not to change things. While prayer does change us, the Bible…
What is the “classical view of God” and what about it do you find objectionable?
The “classical view of God” refers to the view of God that has dominated Christian theology since the earliest Church fathers. According to this theology, God is completely “immutable.” This means that God’s being and experience never change in any respect. God is therefore pure actuality (actus purus), having no potentiality whatsoever, for potentiality is…