WHI-1085 | For or Against Calvinism? (Part 2)
Jan.22, 2012 by
in
2012 Show Archive, White Horse Inn
On this edition of White Horse Inn we’re airing the conclusion of our conversation between Michael Horton and Roger Olson on the role of God’s grace versus human freedom in salvation. This event was inspired by two books recently published by Zondervan: For Calvinism, by Michael Horton, and Against Calvinism, by Roger Olson.
RELATED ARTICLES
Grace: How Strange the Sound
Michael Horton
Michael Horton
Is God Unfair
J.I. Packer
J.I. Packer
Am I Predestined?
Shane Rosenthal
Shane Rosenthal
WHI Discussion Group Questions
PDF Document
PDF Document
MUSIC SELECTION
None
PROGRAM AUDIO
Audio clip: Adobe Flash Player (version 9 or above) is required to play this audio clip. Download the latest version here. You also need to have JavaScript enabled in your browser.
RECOMMENDED BOOKS
For Calvinism
Michael Horton
Michael Horton
Against Calvinism
Roger Olson
Roger Olson
Chosen by God
R.C. Sproul
R.C. Sproul
RECOMMENDED AUDIO
Guilt, Grace & Gratitude
WHI-208
WHI-208
The Courage to be Protestant
WHI-913
WHI-913
Click here to purchase the audio of this entire conversation
January 23rd, 2012 at 11:08 am
This guy Olsen guy’s argument seems pretty weak. He basically says “I don’t like what the scripture says. I refuse to believe it says what it says because that would not jive with my personal image of God.”
I mean, I can relate, 20 years ago someone on Christian radio presented the concept and it stressed me out. Made me angry, scared, insecure. But the doctrine was it was too clear and I just had to put my hands up and surrender to reality.
January 23rd, 2012 at 5:41 pm
I agree, lack of Scripture references to support what he supposed believes.
January 24th, 2012 at 10:39 am
really enjoyed the debate. I was introduced to the “Doctrine of Election” about a year ago by Dr. John MacArthur. My reaction was similar to Dr Horton’s response to Romans 9, but as I continued to read the Word of God, I discovered the reality of God’s sovereignty in choosing whom He will save. I have a real problem w/ Dr Olsen’s arguments that seem to elevate his own opinion and judgment of what is “good” and “evil” to that above what God has revealed to us about Himself. To say that believing that if God chooses to leave some behind makes Him evil and not loving is scary to me because it seems to be standing in judgment of God. I think that he is missing the point that ultimately salvation is to bring glory to God.
January 24th, 2012 at 7:32 pm
Great debate(conversation) format! I liked the graciousness and friendly banter between the two.
A couple of examples where I thought Dr. Olsen’s understanding of God seemed unloving: Sending people to hell when their sins have already been paid for; Partially renewing fallen men’s hearts but then leaving them to do the rest on their own.
The more I hear the Arminian arguments against Calvinism the more convinced I am that the God of the Calvinists is a lot closer to what Scripture describes, and the more glorious God becomes to me. It seems like Arminians always use their own understanding of what God should be like rather than the Bible as their best defense of what they believe. Yes, there are difficulties with Calvinism, but I believe the difficulties lie with our fallen understanding of God’s attributes.
January 24th, 2012 at 9:33 pm
Like many Arminians, it is Olson’s view of what constitutes a loving God that drives his understanding of Scripture. He argues like, “If the Calvinists are right God would be a monster, and because we know that God is not a monster that Calvinism is wrong.” The whole approach seems rather subjective and rationalistic in my opinion.
Olson does admit that our presuppositions do play a part in how we interpret Scripture which I think is true. What he fails to say is that even our presuppositions must be subject to the Bible … which I believe, is the fundamental difference between how Horton and he argue thus far. Olson starts with an assertion and from there reads the Bible so as to validate it. Horton starts with the Bible, asserting what it clearly states admitting that there is some profound mystery to which God has not seen fit to make known to us regarding the problem of evil, election, etc….
As an aside, I kind of find it ironic that we never hear Arminians start with the presupposition that God is holy and just, and from there interpret Scripture. God is as much just as He is loving, why then is “love” given the priority in their arguments? Why not argue from the primacy of justice and ask why God saves anyone or why if He was just He would make/allow one man, Jesus, to suffer for the offenses of others?
February 27th, 2012 at 5:09 pm
I think one of the fundamental misconceptions of Arminians is their understanding of the totality of the fall of man. Its just a hunch, but I think what they hear Calvinists saying is that someone might desire to come to faith in Christ but be turned away because they are not one of the elect. It would be interesting to hear that question posed to them.
April 18th, 2013 at 10:13 am
[...] E. Olsen, For or Against Calvinism? (Part two), podcast audio, White Horse Inn, MP3, WHI:1085, http://www.whitehorseinn.org/blog/2012/01/22/whi-1085-for-or-against-calvinism-part-2/, (accessed: April 14, [...]
April 27th, 2013 at 2:25 pm
[...] White Horse Inn Blog : “A favor o en contra calvinismo?” Parte 1 y Parte 2 . Enero de [...]