Redeeming God

Liberating you from bad ideas about God

Learn the MOST ESSENTIAL truths for following Jesus.

Get FREE articles and audio teachings in my discipleship emails!


  • Join Us!
  • Scripture
  • Theology
  • My Books
  • About
  • Discipleship
  • Courses
    • What is Hell?
    • Skeleton Church
    • The Gospel According to Scripture
    • The Gospel Dictionary
    • The Re-Justification of God
    • What is Prayer?
    • Adventures in Fishing for Men
    • What are the Spiritual Gifts?
    • How to Study the Bible
    • Courses FAQ
  • Forum
    • Introduce Yourself
    • Old Testament
    • New Testament
    • Theology Questions
    • Life & Ministry

A Brief History of John Calvin

By Jeremy Myers
28 Comments

A Brief History of John Calvin

John Calvin
John Calvin was born in France in 1509 and was raised as a Roman Catholic. His father initially intended John to enter the priesthood, but realized later in life that there was more money to be made in law, and so in 1525, sent John to become a lawyer.

The Reformation

It was during this time that the ripple effects of Martin Luther’s 95 Theses (published in 1517) were beginning to be seen throughout all of Europe. In 1533 John Calvin experienced his conversion, and later that year, one of John Calvin’s close friends, Nicolas Cop, publicly sided with the Reformers in calling for changes in the Roman Catholic Church. As a result, Cop was condemned by the Catholic Church as a heretic, and was forced to flee for his life. Calvin was also implicated in the condemnation and was also forced to go into hiding.

Publishing and Pastoring

In 1536, Calvin published his first edition of the Institutes of the Christian Religion, which was initially intended to be a short explanation and defense of the teachings and ideas of the Reformers. The book went through numerous subsequent expansions over the course of John Calvin’s life.

A short time later, during one of his travels, John Calvin traveled to Geneva, and a man there named William Farel convinced John to stay and help reform the church in Geneva. He agreed, and in 1537 he was selected to be a pastor of the church.

However, by the end of the year, the church council forced Calvin to resign his position and leave Geneva because he wanted to force church members to sign his doctrinal statement and articles of church organization (which few people wanted to do), and because he refused to serve communion with unleavened bread on Easter Sunday.

Calvin traveled to Strasbourg, which was a city of refuge for Reformed people, and over the course of the next three years, preached and taught in three different churches. He also worked on an updated version of the Institutes, and published his Commentary on Romans.

John CalvinDuring the time, the church in Geneva dwindled in size, and was facing pressure by the Roman Catholic Church to return to Catholicism. By way of response, the Genevan church called upon Calvin to write a letter in their defense, which he gladly did. They were so pleased with his letter, they asked him to return to Geneva and take up the pastoral position once again.

In 1541, Calvin returned to Geneva under the condition that the church accept and adopt his proposed reforms. They agreed. Calvin ministered in Geneva for the rest of his life, until he died in 1564. The first few years of his ministry were busy and productive. He preached an average of five sermons a week, and wrote numerous books, tracts, as a well as a set of commentaries on almost every book of the Bible.

Opposition in Geneva

However, his ministry in Geneva was not without opposition.

Not all agreed with Calvin’s teaching and theology, and many accused Calvin of teaching false doctrine. From 1546 to 1553, Calvin’s power and influence steadily waned. There were frequent attempts by both sides of the debate to undermine, arrest, and even kill members of the other party.

As one example, a man named Jacques Gruet was arrested and, under torture, confessed to writing an anonymous letter in opposition to the church leaders. Gruet was beheaded in July of 1547.

Eventually, the opposition to Calvin became so fierce, that in July of 1553, Calvin offered to resign his position a second time. His request was refused, because those who opposed him knew that an uprising and church split would likely occur if they accepted Calvin’s resignation.

Michael Servetus – The Scapegoat Savior

One month later, in August of 1553, all of Calvin’s fortunes changed when a man by the name of Michael Servetus arrived in Geneva. Servetus also was a Protestant Reformer, but had been condemned as a heretic by both Catholic and Protestant church leaders for his writings against the Trinity and infant baptism.

Though Calvin and Servetus had debated these issues by letter for many years, they had never met in person, yet when Servetus stopped in Geneva on his way to Italy, he was recognized and arrested. A trial ensued, in which Servetus was once again condemned as a heretic, and on October 27, 1553, was burned at the stake on top of a pile of his own books.

John Calvin – The Defender of Christianity

As a result of his involvement in the arrest, trial, and execution of Servetus, John Calvin was acclaimed across all of Europe as a defender of Christianity.

John CalvinOver the next two years, his power and fame grew as never before, and in 1555, all who had previously opposed John Calvin either fled Geneva or were rounded up and executed.

From 1555 until his death in 1564, Calvin’s position, power, and reputation went almost completely uncontested. He did experience some controversy with Martin Luther over the issue of consubstantiation, but even this controversy with Martin Luther—the “father” of the Reformation itself—only solidified Calvin’s position of prominence in the minds of many.

During these final years, he continued to write, preach, and teach, and he also founded several schools, including Calvin College (Collège Calvin) in Geneva, Switzerland in 1559.

In 1558, he finished his final edition of the Institutes, and he preached his last sermon on February 6, 1564, before dying on May 27, 1564.

After his death, Theodore Beza took over Calvin’s position in Geneva and helped carry on his work and ideas.

This is obviously a very short and summarized history of John Calvin’s life. For those of you who have studied John Calvin, do you have anything to add? For those who didn’t know much about Calvin, what are your initial impressions from this brief account? Let us know in the comments below.

God is z Bible & Theology Topics: Books by Jeremy Myers, Calvinism, John Calvin, Theology of Salvation

Advertisement

My personal history with Calvinism

By Jeremy Myers
129 Comments

My personal history with Calvinism

calvinism

I am not really sure when I fully embraced Calvinism, but I do know that by the time I was in my early 20s, I was a five-point Calvinist.

Since Calvinism was so inherently logical and apparently biblical, I was fully persuaded in my own mind that “Calvinism is the Gospel, and the Gospel is Calvinism” (as some Calvinists claim). I vividly remember debating Calvinism with many of my non-Calvinist friends, trying to convince them of what was eminently obvious to anyone with a working brain.

Losing Limited Atonement

However, it was not long after this that one of my Calvinistic friends declared that he was no longer a five-point Calvinist, but was now a four-point Calvinist. He no longer believed in “Limited Atonement.”

I told him that he had begun to slide down a slippery slope, for the five points of Calvinism are like five links on a chain: they stand or fall together and if one link in the chain breaks, it is only a matter of time before the whole system unravels. My friend assured me that nothing of the sort would happen to him, and he was still fully convinced of the other four points of Calvinism.

I was skeptical, but he and I talked about it, studied the Scriptures, and read numerous books.

It was not long before I too had given up on Limited Atonement as well. But I was convinced that I would remain a four-point Calvinist, just like my friend. As it happened, what I told him about the links in the Calvinistic chain turned out to be true—at least for me.

Shedding Perseverance of the Saints

Later that year, I sat through a Bible College class on the General Epistles in which the professor, Dr. John Hart, had us read numerous books which challenged the fifth point of Calvinism: the Perseverance of the Saints.

Among the books he had us read were two that really challenged my thinking and helped me see certain key texts in a new light: They are The Epistle of James by Zane Hodges and The Reign of the Servant Kings by Joseph Dillow (a revised and updated edition of the book is now titled Final Destiny).

There were numerous other books I read and the class lectures of Dr. John Hart were influential as well, so within a year I had abandoned my belief in the Perseverance of the Saints, and was now a three-point Calvinist.

Calvinist No More

I remained a three-point Calvinists for quite a while, until, after Seminary, I began my first pastorate in Montana. It was there, where the rubber of theology hits the road of life, where the final three points of Calvinism finally fell.

Calvinism 5 point

The sources of influence were numerous and varied.

One elder named Bob Weaver challenged me to view God differently than I had before. I read some books which were recommended to me by others. God’s Strategy in Human History was helpful, as were various books by Samuel Fisk, Harry Ironside, C. Gordon Olson, Laurence Vance, and Dave Hunt.

Also, I was preaching at this time through the book of Ephesians, and my research and study on Ephesians 1 helped me to see that this chapter does not teach Unconditional Election as many Calvinists claim. Somewhere during those first five years as a pastor, all three of the remaining points of Calvinism crumbled in my mind.

Coming to Terms with non-Calvinism

It was an exciting but scary time.

It was exciting because my theology was changing and I was discovering new vistas on about the grace of God and the role of faith and works in the life of believers.

But it was scary because I kept wondering how deep the rabbit hole went. I didn’t want to be an Arminian, but at the same time, I knew I could no longer be a Calvinist.

In an attempt to stay true to my quickly fading Calvinistic beliefs, I read every Calvinistic book I could get my hands on. Not only did I read John Calvin, I also read John MacArthur, John Piper, R. C. Sproul, James Montgomery Boice, Philip Graham Ryken, A. W. Pink, Edwin Palmer, and dozens of other such authors, all of whom vigorously defended Calvinism.

In the end, though, none of them wrote anything in their books which persuaded me that my new belief system was wrong.

In fact, it often seemed to me that these Calvinistic authors themselves had never heard of the views which I myself held. They kept arguing against non-Calvinistic beliefs which I, as a non-Calvinist, did not believe!

It seemed to me that they had not read any of the books I had read, or even knew anything about the way of reading Scripture which I had adopted. At the time, I did not know exactly if these Calvinistic authors were trying to refute Arminian beliefs (which I had not read much of), or if they had simply erected anti-Calvinistic straw-man beliefs which were then easily knocked down. Looking back now, and having read many books on Arminian theology, I have to say that it was the latter.

Most Calvinists, it seems, rarely read books or listen to teachers that are not Calvinistic.

It is exceedingly rare to find a defense of Calvinism which actually deals with the documented beliefs and ideas of Calvinistic opponents. A typical Calvinistic defense seems to consist of stating the Calvinistic beliefs, quoting numerous Calvinistic authors, and referencing several biblical texts which seem to support the Calvinistic perspectives.

This pretty much brings me up to the present day.

Over the past fifteen years, I have continued to read both Calvinistic and non-Calvinistic authors, and study biblical texts from the various perspectives. With every passing year, I am more and more convinced that Calvinism reads Scripture incorrectly, distorts the Gospel of Jesus Christ, and has ultimately abandoned the roots of the Reformation.

All this will be seen in later posts.

So what about you? What is your history with Calvinism? Are you Calvinist now? Have you ever been a Calvinist? Do you know what Calvinism is? Share your stories in the comment section below.

God is Uncategorized Bible & Theology Topics: Arminianism, Books by Jeremy Myers, Calvinism, John Calvin, Theology of Salvation

Advertisement

I believe in the Five Solas of the Reformation

By Jeremy Myers
22 Comments

I believe in the Five Solas of the Reformation

Last week I announced that I needed to take a break from my series on the violence of God, and that I was considering doing a series on Calvinism instead. I ran a survey to see if people were interested in this, and 98% of you said “Yes!” So here is the first post… (Some of these posts on Calvinism ended up in my book, The Re-Justification of God which can be found on Amazon.

I believe in the Five Solas

five solasThe rallying cry of the Reformation centers around five solas (or in proper Latin, the five solae): Sola Gratia, Sola Fide, Solus Christus, Sola Scriptura, and Soli Deo Gloria.

Though not actually stated in quite this fashion until the 20th century, these five statements summarize what the Reformation was about. The Reformation was about authority, tradition, and justification, and the leaders of the Reformation believed and taught that everything we have from God, is Sola Gratia, Sola Fide, Solus Christus, Sola Scriptura, and Soli Deo Gloria.

In English we might say that what we have from God is “by grace alone, through faith alone, in Christ alone, according to the authority of Scripture alone, for the glory of God alone.”

I affirm all five statements. I consider myself to be a child of the Reformation.

I am Neither Calvinist nor Arminian

Yet I do not identify with either of the two main groups that came out of the Reformation; I am neither a Calvinist nor an Arminian. (I am not Lutheran either, for those Lutherans who see themselves as a group apart.)

Certainly, there are many things I appreciate about John Calvin, Jacobus Arminius, Martin Luther, and the other Reformers, but I have too many differences with the main theological arguments of each man to be comfortable identifying myself with the theological systems that bear their names.

Ironically, my main area of disagreement with Calvinism and Arminianism is that they do not take the five solas far enough.

That is, the Reformers and their followers stopped short of fully reforming their theology around the five solas. Having begun with the revolutionary truths of the five solas, they failed to follow through on the full theological ramifications of these five statements. As a result, the Reformation sputtered to a halt and—in my opinion—ultimately failed.

How can I say this?

The Failure of the Reformation

If you were to compare the typical writings of the average Calvinist, Arminian, Lutheran, and Catholic theologians, you would discover that when it comes to the issues of faith, grace, the accomplished work of Jesus Christ, the authority of tradition over Scripture, and the goal of glorifying God in all of life, there is very little distinguishable difference (See the journal article I wrote on this several years ago).

It is not just me saying this. There have been talks in recent decades between prominent leaders of these various groups to all reunite into one group. The primary sticking points, it seems, have nothing to do with the five solas, but center instead on issues like Mariology, the veneration of the Saints, and papal authority.

I believe that if the Reformers and their followers had resolutely held to the five solas, the spiritual landscape of the world today would be much different. The Reformation would have continued to do its work, so that grace, faith, love, and freedom would flow out of the church today in ways that have not been seen since the church began nearly 2000 years ago.

Of course, one cannot blame Luther, Calvin, Arminius, or any of the other Reformers for not fully following through on the ramifications of their own theological insights. Theological development is a multi-generational endeavor.

We can, however, challenge both the contemporary and historical followers of the Reformers to advance upon the teachings of their forebears. No Reformer, I believe, ever thought that his beliefs were perfect and that nobody could ever improve upon his teachings or take his ideas further.

The Reformers would agree, I think, with what some people say about the Reformation: “Always reforming; never reformed.” The reformation of church and theology is never over.

Just as the Reformers sought to reform the church of their day, so also, they would want those who came after them to continue the reforms “till we all come to the unity of the faith” (Ephesians 4:13).

five solas and faith alone

Let the Reforming Continue!

That is the purpose of this series on Calvinism. I hope that the information contained within these posts will build upon the reformations that began during the Reformation and will lead to further reformation in the future. Specifically, I want to provide Calvinists and non-Calvinists with a perspective on certain passages of Scripture which will hopefully allow people to see that there are viable alternatives to Calvinism and it’s theological opposite, Arminianism.

There is a balanced middle ground between Calvinism and Arminianism.

Though there are numerous avenues that one might take in seeking to provide a non-Calvinistic perspective on Scripture, the route I have chosen is to emphasize the biblical teaching on “faith alone” and contrast it with what is often taught in Calvinism. I want to show how Calvinism, though it claims to defend sola fide, actually undermines it with every point of its theological system.

Related to this, the book will also contain a heavy emphasis on radical, outrageous, shocking, scandalous grace. Of course, I cannot write about faith or grace without mentioning Jesus Christ. All of this discussion will revolve around what the Scripture says, rather than on human or religious tradition, and ultimately, the entire discussion is for the glory of God as I seek to help others see the radiating grace of God in the face of Jesus Christ as He died on the cross for the sins of the whole world.

Hopefully, as these posts progress, you can proclaim the five solas aloud with me: Sola Gratia! Sola Fide! Solus Christus! Sola Scriptura! Soli Deo Gloria!

If you want to read more about Calvinism, check out other posts in this blog series: Words of Calvinism and the Word of God.

God is Redeeming Theology Bible & Theology Topics: Arminianism, Books by Jeremy Myers, Calvinism, five solas, Jacobus Arminius, John Calvin, Martin Luther, reformation, sola fide, sola gratia, Theology of Salvation

Advertisement

Do you want a blog series on Calvinism?

By Jeremy Myers
16 Comments

Do you want a blog series on Calvinism?

CalvinismMy series on the violence of God has exhausted me. I think I know where I want to go with it, but I now need to read about 20-30 more books and let my ideas congeal.

So in the meantime, I need a blog series to “fill the gap.”

Since I used to be a hyper 5-point Calvinist, but slowly rejected Calvinism over a period of about 15 years, I have always wanted to write a series of posts in which I take the passages used to support Calvinism and show how I understand these texts.

I would not write these posts to be contentious or to rile people up. That’s not my desire or goal. I know that lots of people have questions about Calvinism, and I want to do what I can to offer my perspective.

So I am asking you if a series on Calvinism is something you would find interesting. Let me know by taking this 10 second survey below.

Thanks!

God is Uncategorized Bible & Theology Topics: Blogging, Calvinism

Advertisement

Waving the White Flag Before the Onslought of God’s Violence

By Jeremy Myers
58 Comments

Waving the White Flag Before the Onslought of God’s Violence

RETREAT!!!!!

I give up.

I wave the white flag.

I surrender.

I hang my head in defeat.

I slink off into the woods with my tail between my legs.

waving the white flag

Over a year ago I set out to put a theory of mine down on paper about how to reconcile the violence of God with the self-sacrificial non-violence of Jesus Christ. The theory had been percolating in my mind for over a decade, and I finally decided to tackle the issue head on.

After 100,000 words, I give up.

If you read this blog much last year, it is almost the only thing I posted on… up until October 13. Then the posts stopped.

Why?

Because I hit a road block. A pot hole. A speed bump. A dead end.

What was the road block?

Only one little thing called…

…Scripture.

Most of what I had written was a hypothesis, a theory, about how to reconcile the violence of God in the Old Testament with the sacrificial love of Jesus in the New. My book was called When God Pled Guilty, and I was basically arguing that just as Jesus took the sins of the world upon Himself on the cross, so also, somehow, the violent portrayals of God in the Old Testament is God taking the sins of Israel upon Himself through the testimony of inspired Scripture.

In other words, to the outside observer, Jesus hanging on a cross looks guilty (even though He wasn’t). So also, a casual reading of the Old Testament makes God look guilty (even though He isn’t).

I thought that there were enough hints and clues scattered through the Bible to show that the violent portrayals of God in the Old Testament are really just Him taking the blame and shouldering the responsibility for the bad things that happen in this world which He does not prevent from happening.

I thought I had a pretty good theory going…. until I tried to get the theory to match with the violent portrayals of God in Scripture. I soon found that all my theorizing hadn’t gotten me past the 1 yard line… of my own side of the field. I still had 99 yards to go, and the defense was shutting me down faster than the Seahawks shut down Peyton Manning…. (sorry Bronco fans…. I wanted Manning to win too).

Sigh.

Honestly, I should have seen it coming. Want to know why?

My wife was never convinced.

My wife is the greatest theologian and Bible scholar I know.

She has what I call “intuitive theology.” She doesn’t read a lot of books or spend dozens of hours each week studying… but she always knows more theology than I do, and always asks penetrating questions which shoot holes through all my acadamagician ideas (Yes, I just coined that term… it’s a cross between academic and magician… because that’s what most theology is. We throw some verses in a pot, mix in some fancy Greek and Hebrew and a quote from Barth, mix it up, blow smoke in people’s faces, and then Voila! — A book that everyone must buy!)

Anyway, my wife was never convinced of my theory, and so I should have known it was doomed from the start.

Another nail in the coffin though, was when I was recently interviewed by Drew Marshall (listen to the audio) and when I briefly mentioned this idea to him, he asked if I had been smoking marijuana. Ha!

But aside from my wife and Drew, there are a few other reasons I am abandoning this theory.

1. Occam’s Razor

No, this is not a new razor put out by Gillette (Now with 8 Blades!!!).

Occam’s razor is a principle used in science and other problem-solving fields which states the simplest solution is often right. Specifically (according to Wikipedia), Occam’s razor states that among competing hypotheses, the hypothesis with the fewest assumptions should be selected.

If you did any reading of my hypothesis, you know that it was not simple. It is not a hypothesis with the fewest assumptions. To the contrary, my hypothesis was so complex, so difficult to grasp, and so full of details, I myself had trouble keeping it all straight in my own head!

Heck, I had already written 100,000 words on the topic, and was only about half-way done. (A typical 200 page book is about 60,000 words.)

2. Modern Disasters

A second reason I am giving up is because ultimately, I had no good explanation for the most difficult question of all… which is why bad things happen today. My hypothesis did very little to provide an explanation for this.

In my (abandoned) theory, I argued that the Old Testament portrays God holding back disasters upon people until, as a result of their great evil, they departed from God’s protective hand. I think that this can actually be seen time and time again in Scripture.

But then, what does this mean for the victims of Hurricane Katrina, or the December 26, 2004 tsunami that killed almost 250,000 people? How does my theory explain people like Hitler and Mussolini getting to live so long while they brought incredible amounts of evil upon the world? How comes they seemingly hadn’t departed from God’s protective hand? 

What did my theory have to say to the millions and millions of little girls who are sold into sex slavery to be raped by as many as 40 or 50 men every single day?

Nothing.

Other than that “God didn’t do it,” my hypothesis could say nothing helpful, loving, kind, or hopeful to such situations or such people caught in a living hell.

3. Couldn’t Even Refute the Calvinists

I am actually not that interested in “refuting” Calvinists, but one area of Calvinistic theology which has always troubled me is the insistence by some that since God is sovereign, He is the cause of everything. If you press them, some will say that while God is not the “author” of evil, He is the primary cause behind all evil, sin, and suffering in the world. (For examples, see John Piper’s quotes here and here.)

John Piper slaughter women and children

Calvinists say that everything that happens in the world is because God’s wills it to happen.

So when a family gets in a car accident and the husband and wife escape, but their children die in a ball of flame when the car explodes, their Calvinistic pastor says that while we don’t understand why such things are God’s will, we must trust that God knows what He is doing because everything happens is according to His will. (This really happened, by the way).

The same argument is applied to Katrina, tsunamis, Hitler, and the raping of little girls.

In my opinion, such a god is monstrous, and is not worthy of worship.

But in the hypothesis I was presenting, I was saying that God “inspired” human authors to write negatively about Him in Scripture so that He could take responsibility for the bad things which happened on earth which He did not prevent from happening.

If that is true, then why I am upset at Calvinists for saying that God caused the bad things that they were ascribing to Him? If my hypothesis is true, isn’t saying “God willed your children to die in a burning car while you watched” the same thing as saying, “God sent a flood upon the earth so that everything which had breath died a horrible death by drowning”?

In my view, of course, God didn’t actually do either thing, but also in my view, God is willing to take the blame for that which He does not prevent, so I shouldn’t get too upset when people blame God for the evil things that happen in the world. After all, God apparently inspired some biblical authors to say the very same things about Him!

If God takes the blame for that which He does not prevent, then it is not wrong to blame God for the horrible events which happen in the world which He does not prevent.

This I could not accept.

4. Back to Ignorance

ignoranceLast month I spent several days reading, editing, revising, and arguing with myself about the 100,000 words I had written.

I got the end (which was actually the middle, because the second half hadn’t been written yet), I realized I could have saved myself 99,997 words, and just written, “I don’t know.”

My fancy 100,000 word answer turned out to be little more than a long way of saying, “I have no idea how to reconcile the violence of God in the Old Testament with the self-sacrificial love of Jesus Christ in the New while still maintaining a conservative view of inspiration and inerrancy.”

Yes, I know. Many of you think I should just abandon inerrancy.

I would really hate to do that.

Pray for Me, Please?

Believe it nor not, this is a crisis of faith for me.

I cannot, CANNOT believe that the God revealed in Jesus Christ is the same God who drowns millions, burns cities, and commands His people to slaughter women, children, and animals.

Something else is going on in the text, but I just cannot figure out what.

My wife, with her intuitive theology, says it is something that cannot ever be figured out.

But my brain, which God gave me, cannot live with the tension. Something must give.

I seem to be left with only two options: Either Jesus truly is violent like God and He was hiding this dark side from us during His ministry, or Jesus truly revealed God to us and the violent portrayals of God in the Old Testament are in error.


The day after writing that post, when I was at work, a new thought occurred to me. A key, I’ll call it. It allowed much of the original hypothesis to remain intact, but organized it all around a central thesis which simplified and clarified the entire idea. 

Although… just as I am writing this paragraph… a new thought has occurred to me…. what if? No. It can’t be.

Hmmm….

A brand new theory has just presented itself…

It seems simple…

Memorable…

Elegant…

…Heretical.

Hmm. I better run it by my wife…

If I decide to share it, you’ll be the first to know!

As a side note, many who read my blog tell me that Greg Boyd is coming out with a book later this year that sounds similar to what I was arguing. When I first heard this, I read some of his blog posts and listened to some of his sermons, and honestly, I cannot tell if he is arguing the same thing or not. I guess we will see. Apparently, if the ideas are similar, he has not hit the same road blocks I have… I look forward to reading his book… I think it is called The Crucifixion of the Warrior God.


Note: I wrote the preceding post last Saturday. As you see at the end, in the process of writing the post, a new idea occurred to me. I thought more about it on Sunday, prayed about it, looked at some key biblical texts, and (maybe most important of all – ha!) talked to my wife. She is still not convinced, but she sees promise in the idea. So, I’m back in the saddle again. Hopefully some new posts on understanding the violence of God will be published soon… I am still not sure my new approach has adequate answers to the four problems I stated above, but I think it is a move in the right direction.

God is Uncategorized Bible & Theology Topics: Calvinism, evil, Greg Boyd, Jesus, John Piper, suffering, Theology of Jesus, violence of God, When God Pled Guilty

Advertisement

  • « Previous Page
  • 1
  • …
  • 17
  • 18
  • 19
  • 20
  • Next Page »
Join the discipleship group
Learn about the gospel and how to share it

Take my new course:

The Gospel According to Scripture
Best Books Every Christian Should Read
Study Scripture with me
Subscribe to my Podcast on iTunes
Subscribe to my Podcast on Amazon

Do you like my blog?
Try one of my books:

Click the image below to see what books are available.

Books by Jeremy Myers

Theological Study Archives

  • Theology – General
  • Theology Introduction
  • Theology of the Bible
  • Theology of God
  • Theology of Man
  • Theology of Sin
  • Theology of Jesus
  • Theology of Salvation
  • Theology of the Holy Spirit
  • Theology of the Church
  • Theology of Angels
  • Theology of the End Times
  • Theology Q&A

Bible Study Archives

  • Bible Studies on Genesis
  • Bible Studies on Esther
  • Bible Studies on Psalms
  • Bible Studies on Jonah
  • Bible Studies on Matthew
  • Bible Studies on Luke
  • Bible Studies on Romans
  • Bible Studies on Ephesians
  • Miscellaneous Bible Studies

Advertise or Donate

  • Advertise on RedeemingGod.com
  • Donate to Jeremy Myers

Search (and you Shall Find)

Get Books by Jeremy Myers

Books by Jeremy Myers

Schedule Jeremy for an interview

Click here to Contact Me!

© 2025 Redeeming God · All Rights Reserved · Powered by Knownhost and the Genesis Framework