What does consistent error look like?

[Iconoclast]

Here is our friend Roger Olson......at it again...:laugh::laugh::wavey:

In a recent post, Roger stirred up a hornet’s nest by suggesting that “Arminians should not pray to God to save their friends and loved ones.”


http://www.whitehorseinn.org/blog/2012/07/04/should-you-pray-for-god-to-save-your-loved-ones/

 

[humblethinker]

Here's the post of Roger Olson's linked in the above article.

http://www.patheos.com/blogs/rogere...ut-prayer-for-unsaved-loved-ones-and-friends/

Context is everything. Really nothing too controversial here.
"The issue is not the words prayed so much as the meaning intended."

 

[Iconoclast]

Here's the post of Roger Olson's linked in the above article.

http://www.patheos.com/blogs/rogere...ut-prayer-for-unsaved-loved-ones-and-friends/

Context is everything. Really nothing too controversial here.
"The issue is not the words prayed so much as the meaning intended."

It seems to me that “God, please save my friend” without qualifications normally means “God, break my friend’s will and force him to repent.” Perhaps not everyone who prays that prayer means that, but that’s what the words alone imply. That’s not consistent with Arminian belief. In my opinion, only a Calvinist (or maybe also a Lutheran) can pray that way consistently.

He really does grasp the issue as is in evidence here,,,,God does not FORCE... He makes His people willing.

he has a god of the potential...not actual!

 

[preachinjesus]

Reading the quote in its context clears up any concern. You'll notice in the linked piece, Olson's piece, and in the comments this is explained.

Note this from the link: Professor Olson is not being picky, going around telling fellow Arminians not to pray for folks; he just wants their prayer to be consistent with their theology.

If your post here is missing this I'd guess you didn't read the piece. Listen, I'm no fan of Olson, but he deserves an honest read.

 

[InTheLight]

From the article by Olson:
---------------

It seems to me that “God, please save my friend” without qualifications normally means “God, break my friend’s will and force him to repent.”

I will say “Well, that’s not what I think those words mean, but okay, if that’s what you mean, God knows what you mean and so go ahead and pray that way.”
--------------------

So really, Icon, how is that Olson saying, “Arminians should not pray to God to save their friends and loved ones” ??!!

 

[Alive in Christ]

What does consistent error look like

Calvinism.


Sorry, couldnt resist.


There is *some* good stuff in Calvinism.

 

[Skandelon]

Since the OP and title seem to be purposefully misleading I thought it best to post Roger's actual words for the discerning readers who may frequent this forum:

"It seems to me that “God, please save my friend” without qualifications normally means “God, break my friend’s will and force him to repent.” Perhaps not everyone who prays that prayer means that, but that’s what the words alone imply. That’s not consistent with Arminian belief. In my opinion, only a Calvinist (or maybe also a Lutheran) can pray that way consistently.

However, if the context is a lesson on prayer and the issue of praying for salvation of friends and loved ones comes up I will share my opinion.
And my opinion in this case is–it depends on what you mean because God always knows what you mean and you’re praying to God. And if you mean to ask God to violate someone’s free will and force them to be saved, then I don’t think that’s proper. If you mean to ask God to bring circumstances into a person’s life that will probably convince them of their need of salvation, then it’s proper. But why not pray with words that communicate what you mean?"

 

[MorseOp]

Since the OP and title seem to be purposefully misleading I thought it best to post Roger's actual words for the discerning readers who may frequent this forum:

"It seems to me that “God, please save my friend” without qualifications normally means “God, break my friend’s will and force him to repent.” Perhaps not everyone who prays that prayer means that, but that’s what the words alone imply. That’s not consistent with Arminian belief. In my opinion, only a Calvinist (or maybe also a Lutheran) can pray that way consistently.

However, if the context is a lesson on prayer and the issue of praying for salvation of friends and loved ones comes up I will share my opinion.
And my opinion in this case is–it depends on what you mean because God always knows what you mean and you’re praying to God. And if you mean to ask God to violate someone’s free will and force them to be saved, then I don’t think that’s proper. If you mean to ask God to bring circumstances into a person’s life that will probably convince them of their need of salvation, then it’s proper. But why not pray with words that communicate what you mean?"

The writer's idea still is that those who hold to Arminian soteriology should not be praying for God to actually save anyone so as not to violate their free will. This is not a new concept. Spurgeon even preached a sermon on it (although I am not on my main computer so I cannot do the requisite search). Personally I would not get hung up about it. The wonderful thing about our God is that He answers prayers the way they should be, if not always in the way we mean.

 

[Iconoclast]

Calvinism.


Sorry, couldnt resist.


There is *some* good stuff in Calvinism.

AIC

What good stuff do you see in calvinism????

 

[humblethinker]

The writer's idea still is that those who hold to Arminian soteriology should not be praying for God to actually save anyone so as not to violate their free will. This is not a new concept. Spurgeon even preached a sermon on it (although I am not on my main computer so I cannot do the requisite search). Personally I would not get hung up about it. The wonderful thing about our God is that He answers prayers the way they should be, if not always in the way we mean.

Do you mean to say that it is truly the case that he answers prayers from and in response to humans or does it just seem that way? Would she have an incorrect sentiment if a calvinist were to pray thinking that had she not prayed things might have been different?

 

[Iconoclast]

=Skandelon;1870508]Since the OP and title seem to be purposefully misleading I thought it best to post Roger's actual words for the discerning readers who may frequent this forum:

No....it was right on the money...just read the portions you yourself quote, read all of Olsons post.....it is outright error.The only misleading thing was when he twists what calvinists believe.....but you probably being in agreement with it did not notice:tongue3:

 

[Iconoclast]

From the article by Olson:
---------------

It seems to me that “God, please save my friend” without qualifications normally means “God, break my friend’s will and force him to repent.”

I will say “Well, that’s not what I think those words mean, but okay, if that’s what you mean, God knows what you mean and so go ahead and pray that way.”
--------------------

So really, Icon, how is that Olson saying, “Arminians should not pray to God to save their friends and loved ones” ??!!

ITL,
read his article on what he likes about calvinists....scroll down to his responses to the comments.....he says he explains that he tells people to prayer for God to bring circumstances into their life ,so THEY might see their need of Him. He does not believe God can directly do anything....he is saying God has done all that he can....in one of the quotes he says...only a calvinist can pray and ask God to save someone...

I thought I gave my suggestion for prayer for unbelieving friends and loved ones in the post, didn’t I? I pray for God to bring circumstances into their lives that will increase their awareness of their need of him

Very simply, “God please bring circumstances into their lives that will increase their awareness of their need of you and of your love and power to save them.” God can influence and persuade but cannot coerce repentance and faith

God makes himself dependent on our wills. That’s different than saying he is necessarily, in himself, for himself, dependent on our wills. He didn’t have to create us or any free creatures. Once he did, however, and gave us free will and desired a free relationship of love with us, he made his decision to save dependent on our decision.

 

[Benjamin]

What does consistent error look like?

What?!? No mirrors in your home Icon?


ROF-:laugh:

 

[HeirofSalvation]

The OP is an an example of the inevitable result of what one gets when one reads something (not in full, nor in overall context) by someone they disagree with and is in lieu of attempting to understand its author's intent as charitably as possible, is merely engaged in a witch-hunt.

If one wanted a reasoned response to Roger's article from an educated and charitable Calvinist perspective, there would be no better place to look than to consult Olson's friend Horton himself:

Having said that, I do think that Roger has consistency on his side when it comes to his own position. “‘Lord, save my friend’ (without qualification) normally reflects monergism, not synergism.” (Since Paul said that “my heart’s prayer to God for [fellow Jews] is that they may be saved” [Rom 10:1], I’m delighted now to find that this is yet another proof-text for monergism!)

But who would want reasoned exchange when we can BURN A WITCH!!

 

[HeirofSalvation]

He does not believe God can directly do anything....he is saying God has done all that he can....

That is either sheer ignorance or an out-right lie. You pick.

 

[Iconoclast]

What?!? No mirrors in your home Icon?


ROF-

Yes...I have mirrors in my home.When I look in the mirror I see a sinner who was elected before the world was...convicted and drawn by love to salvation by Gods working....regeneration.

If I want to see error...or what it looks like...I can just go to your profile and look at ALL POSTS by Benjamin:laugh:

recently I noticed you were boasting about being the resident "DOG WHISPERER" here on BB:laugh: stick to what you know:thumbs:

If a dog is not listening to your commands....you probably start going into a philosophical monologue until the dog goes into a coma:laugh:

 

[Iconoclast]

That is either sheer ignorance or an out-right lie. You pick.

Or....it is someone reading what he writes, and understanding what he is saying. The ignorance might be coming from your keyboard:wavey::wavey:

 

[HeirofSalvation]

Or....it is someone reading what he writes, and understanding what he is saying.

It is not, it simply is not. No one, who is familiar with either Arminianism or Olson's particular views thinks, for one second, that Olson maintains that God "cant" do anything. You are appealing to ignorance and your poor reading comprehension then. I will not argue with that.

 

[Iconoclast]

It is not, it simply is not. No one, who is familiar with either Arminianism or Olson's particular views thinks, for one second, that Olson maintains that God "cant" do anything. You are appealing to ignorance and your poor reading comprehension then. I will not argue with that.

Hos,,,

go to humbles link....then click on olsons article on what I like about calvinists.....then scroll down to him responding to comments. Read his own words....

 

[Alive in Christ]

AIC

What good stuff do you see in calvinism????

You guys hold to the doctrine of eternal security as I do.

We are in agreement concerning Christs atoning sacrifice, and the literal bodily resurrection of Christ.

You all are fairly good regarding justifcation through faith alone.

Your view of the church is not problamatic.

etc etc

you get the idea