Featured Old Testament, New Testament

:thumbs::wavey::thumbs:....one heresy leads to another.....yet...they all say it is calvinism that is the problem. They will believe everything and anything but the truth

 

Anyone who reads...all the texts of the 66 books will find Him there.

If someone wants to cut out verses they do not like...they will find a different god. If anyone ....whosoever will....read all 66 books...they might find the God who is in control of whatsoever comes to pass....The God who always does what is right...Gen18:25

 

There is a lot I do not agree with Roger Olson about, but his view of the Scriptures is ostensibly as strong as yours or mine, I do think his artice was poorly written I do agree. Open Theism is not a necessary logical result of Arminianism. Olson is not an Open Theist either.

 

Heir......do you agree that those items I quoted from the article are misguided?

i do not understand why anyone would post such ideas

 

I disagree with you on the logical end of arminianism and so do many others, and many are theologians. So your intended dogmatic statement is purely subjective reason against the objective conclusions of others.

Why compare the acumen of Olson with yourself or me? It doesn't prove anything. Many heretical theologians could be construed as more brilliant.

In addition, when one gives credence to open theism their view of Scriptures then naturally takes a mighty fall. You know this, correct? I mean open theism by its very nature does this.

On your last statement, hopefully you're not saying I am naming Olson an open theist. If so, you're incorrect and it is unfounded.

By the way, I never stated his article was poorly written, to which you say you 'agree.' I've never stated this.

 

I think you misunderstood (quite reasonably) what he was trying to convey in many of them an example:

Olson says: "...Psalms, presumably inspired.."[/B]

Icon Hears: "...Psalms, allegedly inspired.."

 

The definitions of both are virtually synonymous.

 

If you will notice in post95...iquoted directly from the article;

There the Psalmist, presumably writing under the inspiration of the Holy Spirit, cries

 

Preacher, You need to look up the words "allegedly" and "presumably"

also how does the statement "Olson's view of the scriptures is ostensibly as strong as yours or mine" mean something to the effect of "Olson is really smart and his Theological acumen is utterly amazing... Olson is a genius"

To this you responded that a lot of Theologians (argument from authority) have stated OBJECTIVELY mind you, that Arminianism logically leads to Open Theism. oh, ok. I am willing to bet I can find a whole slew of Theologians Arminius himself too! that will disagree that it does.

I basically disagree with the thrust of his entire article, I just know he believes in the Scriptures 100% he does not need the Calvinists to immediately proceed consigning him to Hell.

 

Yes, I know, by that he is ASSUMING the inspiration of that Psalm. I promise you ask the guy about his view of the Scriptures, you will not find him wanting

 

Were is he...In Florida??? the whole article is very suspect....I have gone over it a few times....it is really bad.

If you know him..invite him to come online....I think this article is not defensible in any way.

 

Did you look at how you misrepresented me in your response? No need to do this. OK? Thanks.

Who's consigning him to hell? You?

Leave your strawman arguments out of this. This is the 3rd or 4th misrepresentation you've used on alleged cals in less replies.

Definitions? Oh yes, let's engage in the intellectual attack on a person and presume they don't what words mean. It's you who needs to go take a look at the two definitions and then you'll find they are virtually synonymous. And please, only address what is actually said, and stop putting words in others mouths, and, 'presuming' or 'alleging' they've said something they haven't. OK? Thanks.

If anyone said any scripture is presumed inspired, that raises a red flag. How you've concluded Icon seeing this as alleged/presumed is showing he holds an accurate assessment of this and bolsters his position. I'm certain that would be quite opposite of your intentions, yes? Moreover, your position stemming from your statement raises a little concern.

Of course those in error would ring their own bell theologically and say their error doesn't lead to more error. :laugh:

That's a given.

Things that are obvious shouldn't make a person feel bumptious.

 

It's not in what someone states what their beliefs are (i.e. 'I believe all of Sripture is _________ ) it's actually what one teaches that is telltale of their true beliefs.

:thumbsup:

 

Yah, the article is garbage.... And his choices of words do leave some serious room for misunderstanding, He is walking a very fine line at least. I do not know him personally, I have read a lot he says on his own website, and I occasionally read his MANY posts on evangelicalarminians.org I just know that despite this abbysmal article, He does fully believe in the inspiration of all 66 books of the Scriptures, well, that or he has taken a serious turn for the worse quite recently. I wouldnt try to defend this article though... blech.

 

:thumbs::thumbs: Thanks for the response:wavey:

 

You can find his other works on his own website and others, Read what he actually teaches ( I would not offer this article as a shining example ) You will be assured I think that he believes the Bible completely. Now it is entirely up to him to defend himself, I don't like the guys work that much

 

Whoa, sorry if my basically toungue-in -cheek smarminess rubbed you the wrong way, I was trying to be more funny than "bumptious" :tonofbricks: No need for a little concern there is no witch hunt called for here.

 

Oh, and this is where he was consigned to Hell Preacher. In answer to your question.