The Great Divides

[Cathy]

While I was googling Hagee I was then diverted down a path googling Criswell and charismatics. That caused me to run into an exchange that I quite enjoyed. It was however very far from my original search. This could be in the CBF or SBC forum but since the event occurred in an SBC institution I post it here. It is 1 hour and 17 minutes but I enjoyed it.


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jtru1yMaXaE

[Cathy]

The video is of Roger Olson and Paige Patterson in a discussion that begins with Dr. Olson telling Paige Patterson why he believes Patterson is an Arminian. Calvinism is discussed alone with 5, 4, 2, and 1 points. Then with a question from the audience the discussion moved to the Trinity and eventually Patterson's pastor asks the inevitable inerrancy question. It was all pretty friendly. There was one point in the Trinity discussion that R. Olson said we will have to disagree (I believe this was Yarnell).

This is the first time I have seen a Truett professor speaking at SWBTS. Though no one else seems to find it noteworthy at BL I think there are those that will enjoy Dr. Olson and find the exchange refreshing considering the years since Truett was launched and the limited interaction between the two camps.

[Haruo]

The video is of Roger Olson and Paige Patterson in a discussion that begins with Dr. Olson telling Paige Patterson why he believes he is an Arminian. Calvinism is discussed alone with 5, 4, and 2 points. Then with a question from the audience the discussion moved to the Trinity and eventually Patterson's pastor asks the inevitable inerrancy question. It was all pretty friendly. There was one point in the Trinity discussion that R. Olson said we will after disagree.

First time I have seen a Criswell professor speaking even in a relatively casual setting and though no one else seems to find it note worthy at BL I think there are those that will enjoy Dr. Olson and find the exchange refreshing considering the years since Criswell was launched.

Cathy, are you dictating this into a sound-activated spelling machine? I'm trying to decipher "we will after disagree", and the only thing I can come up with is a misperception of the sound of "we will have to disagree". If you are not using such a machine, then I have to admit that I don't know how your mind spells things; mistyping "after" when I meant to type "have to" is just about impossible for me to imagine doing.

[Ed Pettibone]

The video is of Roger Olson and Paige Patterson in a discussion that begins with Dr. Olson telling Paige Patterson why he believes he is an Arminian. Calvinism is discussed alone with 5, 4, and 2 points. Then with a question from the audience the discussion moved to the Trinity and eventually Patterson's pastor asks the inevitable inerrancy question. It was all pretty friendly. There was one point in the Trinity discussion that R. Olson said we will after disagree.

First time I have seen a Criswell professor speaking even in a relatively casual setting and though no one else seems to find it note worthy at BL I think there are those that will enjoy Dr. Olson and find the exchange refreshing considering the years since Criswell was launched.

Cathy, are you dictating this into a sound-activated spelling machine? I'm trying to decipher "we will after disagree", and the only thing I can come up with is a misperception of the sound of "we will have to disagree". If you are not using such a machine, then I have to admit that I don't know how your mind spells things; mistyping "after" when I meant to type "have to" is just about impossible for me to imagine doing.

Ed: Haruo, I think you may be right about Olson saying "we will have to disagree". Although I think it may have been "We may have to agree to disagree". I would have to go back and re listen to be sure. I did find it interesting but I am not sure how Cathy identified any one other than Patterson and Olson, especially "Pattersons Pastor" and some one who was a "Criswell Professor". The last I knew Olson was at Baylor. I think perhaps Cathy's computer (word processing program) may have miss corrected what ever it was that she typed. I have almost given up in my word processor because it seems to have a mind of its own at times, and I confess I do not always proof trad what I post. I am not sure I have time in the next couple days but I am going to go back and listen to here if I can pick up on the root of Cathy's comments. It may help if I can get some time on Trudy's Computer which has better sound than does mine.

And Cathy, It is amazing to me if I ever come across something from Criswell College that I consider note worthy. I will say this discussion was the best that I have heard from Patterson. I believe that is because he was being very careful to present at least an illusion of a two sided academic discussion w/o Olson completely putting him in the shade. Patterson had a good mentor in the process of political discourse in the person of Judge Paul Pressler. I have heard both Olson and Patterson in person and I think Olson in this case was being kind.

[Tim Bonney]

Is Olsen the professor who has a pretty significant blog about arminianism? I think I have read his work on occasion.

[Ed Pettibone]

Ed: I have as promised gone back and listened to the entire discussion and I did not hear a part where Dr. Olson says something like " we will after disagree" . I could have missed it. If anyone finds it, I hope you will cite something to help me identify it.

But I am now convinced that Cathy is mistaken about there being any Criswell Professor involved. The session was held on the Campus of Southwestern Seminary where Patterson is President. This time, I did hear an individual who identified himself as Patterson's Pastor and Patterson present an unusual inerrancy argument saying we use the term inerrancy to refute the moderates claim that there are errors in the Bible. I am sorry the "discussion" ended there. I believe Patterson did meekly agree that "there may be a better word" . Which brought to mind that Al Mohler's hero in the faith Carl F. H. Henry A Calvinist a leading Calvinist said it even more clearly.

I want to thank Cathy for bring this event to my attention. I still prefer not to identify as either an Arminian or a Calvinist but as a Christian. In fairness I think the same can be said of Patterson although he and I do not sing out of the hymn book.

I wonder if perhaps some one could persuade Dr. Olsen to give BL.com participants as a group, some time at the upcoming 25h anniversary of CBF in June.

Yes Tim This was/is the Same Roger Olson. He and I where raised in the same Wesleyan tradition and both became Baptist.

[John Sneed]

This is the second thread in which Cathy mentions Calvinism. I suspect she finds it distasteful.

And this is the Roger Olsen who said he could not tell the difference between the God Calvinists worship and Satan. Nuff said there.

John

[Ed Pettibone]

This is the second thread in which Cathy mentions Calvinism. I suspect she finds it distasteful.

And this is the Roger Olsen who said he could not tell the difference between the God Calvinists worship and Satan. Nuff said there.

John

Ed: John could you give me a source for the comment you attribute to Olson?

[William Thornton]

A sound bite or short paraphrase is not quite "Nuff said," John. This is one of Olsen's articles that explains more:

Do Arminians and Calvinists Worship the Same God?

Do Arminians and Calvinists Worship the Same God?
This question never dies. While most Christians on both sides of the divide say yes, some on both sides say no. Because I have openly admitted here that consistent Calvinism turns God into a monster and makes it difficult to tell the difference between God and the devil, some have assumed I believe the answer must be no. However, I have never said that Arminians and Calvinists worship different Gods.

When I say that Calvinism makes God monstrous and makes it difficult to tell the difference between God and the devil I am talking about from my perspective—not what all Calvinists actually believe. I am talking about the logical implications of Calvinism.

[Tim Bonney]

Yes Tim This was/is the Same Roger Olson. He and I where raised in the same Wesleyan tradition and both became Baptist.

Thanks Ed. I was unaware that he had previously been a Wesleyan. While his arminianism doesn't seem specifically Wesleyan, I can see how there might be an influence.

[Tim Bonney]

A sound bite or short paraphrase is not quite "Nuff said," John. This is one of Olsen's articles that explains more:

Do Arminians and Calvinists Worship the Same God?

Good quotes. And I'd agree that if Calvinism is taken to its ultimate conclusion (which many Calvinist never do by the way) it creates a God that many of us would see as "monstrous."

[Sandy]

Yeah, have to say that I don't find much about which to disagree with Roger Olson.

[Tim Bonney]

Yeah, have to say that I don't find much about which to disagree with Roger Olson.

Not of what I've read so far either. As a Baptist he and I probably disagree on something. But it doesn't sound like any disagreement over how we feel about Calvinism.

[Cathy]

I'm sorry for my mistakes in my reply to my own post. I actually asked to have it removed so I could go back and fix it. I couldn't figure out how to delete it myself. I did indeed mean Truett but I guess because of the source of my original google search I had the other name on my mind. No Truett is not Criswell and given the home in which I was raised and the city I spent most of my adult life I am aware of that. I have now edited that. But really, isn't all that discussion of my errors dull and kind of old fashion nitpicking. I am often multitasking and should pay a bit more attention. I have had my punishment and I will try to do better. The amount of time trying to decipher my comments instead of going to the link and commenting makes me wonder what you all are thinking. I only put in the (too quick) reply to my own post because the link went unnoticed.

My illusion to the divides were...
SBC and CBF,
Truett and SWBTS,
Arminians and Calvinists,
the Trinity as doctrine vs a construct of our faith (and that is probably a poor statement of the mini divide, I'm no theologian)
"inerrancy" and refusing to accept the word inerrancy,

I believe a careful listen will reveal that Patterson mentions Yarnell's name when he acknowledges him before the Trinity question is asked. Patterson introduces his pastor followed by a bit of joking and then his pastor asks the inerrancy question (this is very near the end). However someone may have entered the discussion and Dr. Olson may be referring to him.

John, I have no memory of my posting on Calvinism. I'll have to look it up. I am not a Calvinist. While I enjoyed Dr. Olson's discussion It was not my intent to post a mostly calvinist vs arminian discussion but to highlight a pleasant exchange between the two baptist seminaries in Texas. The content of the discussion is however interesting to me and surprisingly enjoyable.

[Cathy]

Ed

And Cathy, It is amazing to me if I ever come across something from Criswell College that I consider note worthy. I will say this discussion was the best that I have heard from Patterson. I believe that is because he was being very careful to present at least an illusion of a two sided academic discussion w/o Olson completely putting him in the shade. Patterson had a good mentor in the process of political discourse in the person of Judge Paul Pressler. I have heard both Olson and Patterson in person and I think Olson in this case was being kind.

I agree with your assessments. And I was in error (as above). This conversation took place at SWBTS.

[Tim Bonney]

Thanks for the clarification Cathy.

I'm sure the Arminianism discussion came about largely because one of the participants is a strong proponent.

As to inerrancy, we've gone around that mountain quite a few times here. Yet outside of the SBC and former SBC related folks, it doesn't seem to be a topic of discussion.

[Cathy]

This is the second thread in which Cathy mentions Calvinism. I suspect she finds it distasteful.

And this is the Roger Olsen who said he could not tell the difference between the God Calvinists worship and Satan. Nuff said there.

John

In the company of Olson I've been sNuffed out by sNeed. s'Nuff of a compliment, indeed!

[Sandy]

I'm sure the Arminianism discussion came about largely because one of the participants is a strong proponent.

Do you mean a strong proponent of Arminianism? Or of Calvinism?

Dr. Olson is one of those guys from the moderate side of the Baptist institutional divide following the conservative resurgence in the SBC who is really just in the mainstream of Baptist preaching and teaching. Set his work along side most anyone from the current SBC seminary leadership or faculties on a similar subject, and take away the names and identities of the authors, and you'd be hard pressed to tell the difference.

[Tim Bonney]

I've not read it recently Sandy. But Dr. Olsen spends a lot more time talking about Arminianism that most Baptists I've run into since Dale Moody argued for the possibility of apostasy. I think Dr. Oslen is gutsy for swimming against the current stream of Calvinism in the SBC. I'd say that focus makes him a little different than the average SBCer. Give the man credit where credit is due.

[Ed Pettibone]

I've not read it recently Sandy. But Dr. Olsen spends a lot more time talking about Arminianism that most Baptists I've run into since Dale Moody argued for the possibility of apostasy. I think Dr. Oslen is gutsy for swimming against the current stream of Calvinism in the SBC. I'd say that focus makes him a little different than the average SBCer. Give the man credit where credit is due.

Ed: Tim, I agree that Olson talks a lot more about Arminianism than most Baptists but then I am not sure that most Baptists, or other Christians, including those who claim Calvinism give much thought to Historical Theology. Keep in mind Olson primarily earns his sustenance in academia not a local church. Nor does he make any pretense of being an average SBCer or at all being dependent on them. While I appreciate much of what Olson contributes, I am not at all persuaded that choosing to identify as either as a disciple of Arminius, or of Calvin, is crucial to ones relationship to Christ.

[Tim Bonney]

Ed: Tim, I agree that Olson talks a lot more about Arminianism than most Baptists but then I am not sure that most Baptists, or other Christians, including those who claim Calvinism give much thought to Historical Theology.

I'd agree with that. But they should. But they don't because, largely, not one teaches them. And the current trend of de-emphasizing denominational theology and connection doesn't help.

I agree with you that understanding Calvinism/Arminianism is certainly not a salvation issue. But many of a denominations are effective positively or negatively by the two theological schools of thought even when don't know it. Even down to things like my Grandmother believing that everyone has a "time to die" because the calvinist leaning Baptist church she grew up in taught that.

I've had more than one conversation with someone who is mad at God because they bought the Calvinist idea that God makes everything happen so they assume God is responsible for their loved on dying. After all God picked their death die. It was "their time to die." Or it was "part of God's plan" or whatever. Populist Calvinism I think has chased a fair number of people out of the Christian faith because of the kind of God it creates.

It may not have effected their salvation but it helped trash their daily relationship with God. Bad theology. Bad consequences.

[Haruo]

My apologies to Cathy for not getting back to her on the request for deletion. I didn't see her message till the thread had been up for a couple days and already had a dozen comments (including my own on the "have to = after" controversy and I was reluctant to delete the thread. Meant to tell her that in a PM but forgot to before I got home (I can't do much moderatorially from my phone).

[Cathy]

My apologies to Cathy for not getting back to her on the request for deletion. I didn't see her message till the thread had been up for a couple days and already had a dozen comments (including my own on the "have to = after" controversy and I was reluctant to delete the thread. Meant to tell her that in a PM but forgot to before I got home (I can't do much moderatorially from my phone).

I forgive you, Haruo. By the way I have a daughter in college in Bellingham. I told her to visit Fremont Baptist if she spends the weekend in Seattle. We have a couple of friends there that she likes to visit.

[Haruo]

It's been several months since I last made it to Fremont Baptist. I've done most of my recent church at the UMC-affiliated, German-language Friedenskirche and online Saturday mornings at the Facebook prayer group (Esperanto-language, Catholic-affiliated, Prague-based) Komunumo de Preĝantaj Kristanoj. Sorry about the Fox-like lack of links, Ed.

[Haruo]

Friedenskirche
Komunumo de Preĝantaj Kristanoj

There.