(short)
Book
Review: A book that may be of some interest....
(Review by JOTGES/ChristianBookPreviews)Why I Am Not an Arminian
By Robert A. Peterson and Michael D. Williams. Downers Grove:
InterVarsity Press, 2004. 224 pp.
Why I Am Not a Calvinist.
By Jerry L. Walls and Joseph R. Dongell. Downers Grove:
InterVarsity Press, 2004. 230 pp.
"Why I Am Not a Calvinist begins with a weak Introduction and then falters briefly before really getting into the problems of Calvinism. Walls and Dongell maintain in their Introduction that Calvinists err by framing the debate in terms of the concept of God’s sovereignty and man’s ability. They insist that the fundamental dispute should rather be about God’s character. Their aim is to prove that “Calvinism distorts the biblical picture of God and fails in other crucial ways that show its inadequacy as a theological system” (p. 8). I think they make a grave mistake by dismissing the
details of the historical dispute between Calvinism and Arminianism as “not our concern here” (p. 13). And in their much too brief overview of the Five Points of Calvinism, their claim that “recently a number of Calvinists have expressed reservations, and in some cases outright disagreement, with the traditional notion of limited atonement” (p. 11) is certainly incorrect. There is nothing recent about these reservations and disagreements at all.
The first chapter, “Approaching the Bible,” has some useful information, but can be skipped since it contains very little information about either Calvinism or Arminianism. The placement of this chapter is unfortunate because it has the potential of causing the reader to lose interest. The title of the second chapter, “Engaging the Bible,” looks at “the three strongest scriptural arguments for Calvinist theology: the sovereign nature of God, the gracious nature of salvation and the reality of divine election” (p. 47). The authors present the Calvinist perspective on these issues followed by an Arminian response. This chapter is really the only place in the book that contains any Scripture exegesis.
It is really chapters 3 and 4 that make this book worth reading and recommending. Chapter 3 (“Calvinism and the Nature of Human Freedom”) contains a solid philosophical discussion of hard determinism, libertarian freedom, and soft determinism (compatibilism). The authors argue that “there are large stretches of Scripture that are hard to make sense of if humans aren’t free in the libertarian sense of the word” (p. 117).
Chapter 4 (“Calvinism and Divine Sovereignty”) is likewise an examination of three views of sovereignty and foreknowledge: Calvinism, Molinism, and Openness. Calvinists, of course, believe that God knows every future event because he decreed every future event. Evil is explained away, however, by saying that God merely permits it.
Molinism, named after Luis de Molina (1535-1600), is the view that God has middle knowledge, that is, “what all possible created free wills would do in all possible circumstances and situations that are not and never will be” (p. 135). God knows everything that will be, might be, and could have been. The “open view of God,” as opposed to the traditional view, holds that “libertarian freedom and infallible foreknowledge are incompatible” (p. 143). Proponents of the Openness view (like, apparently, Joseph Dongell) “hold that it is impossible in principle for future undetermined free actions to be known with certainty” (p. 142). The authors conclude that although “God’s sovereignty and providential control of our world are surely matters that exceed our full understanding,” the Calvinist explanation “poses particularly severe difficulties, especially with respect to the problem of evil” (p. 152).
In the last two chapters, Walls and Dongell briefly explore a variety of topics like the genuineness of the offer of salvation, the sincerity of divine compassion, guilt and the Fall, evangelism, the fate of the unevangelized, assurance, and the problem of evil. They conclude in chapter 5 (“Calvinism and Consistency”) that in Calvinism can be found “inconsistency, confusion or misleading language where human freedom and responsibility are concerned” (p. 184), and in chapter 6 (“Calvinism and the Christian Life”) that “Calvinism is beset with practical inconsistencies that mirror its logical contradictions” (p. 215)."
"In their book, Why I am not an Arminian, Peterson and Williams attempt to provide a defense of
Dortian Calvinism by questioning the basic tenets of Arminian theology. Their study uses a two-pronged approach, sometimes discussing the controversy in the context of history, while at other times approaching the discussion on a topical basis.
The book begins with a historical study of the early church controversy between Augustine and Pelagius. Calvinism, they argue, is grounded firmly in Augustine. Many have argued that Arminianism is Pelagianism reborn. Peterson and Williams argue that though there are similarities, reducing Arminianism to Pelagianism is an extreme oversimplification. In the end, they argue, Arminianism is similar to the semi-Augustinian view that prevailed at the Synod of Orange. The book then moves to a discussion of the topics of predestination and perseverance.
In the next chapter, the authors give us an extended description of decretal theology as developed by Calvin, Beza, and others. They then move us into the Arminian debate that culminated at the Synod of Dort. This chapter is arguably the most revealing and marks a shift in the tone of the book. The last three chapters (Inability, Grace, and Atonement) take an unapologetic and polemical view. The tone is decidedly less winsome than the chapters that precede it."
In the next chapter, the authors give us an extended description of decretal theology as developed by Calvin, Beza, and others. They then move us into the Arminian debate that culminated at the Synod of Dort. This chapter is arguably the most revealing and marks a shift in the tone of the book. The last three chapters (Inability, Grace, and Atonement) take an unapologetic and polemical view. The tone is decidedly less winsome than the chapters that precede it."
--------------------------------------------------------
ARMINIANISM is a teaching regarding salvation associated with the Dutch theologian Jacob Arminius (1560-1609). The fundamental principle in Arminianism is the rejection of predestination, and a corresponding affirmation of the freedom of the human will.
...choose you this day whom ye will serve;
...choose you this day whom ye will serve;
Joshua 24:15 How long halt ye between two opinions?
if the LORD be God,
follow him:
but if Baal,
then follow him.
1 Kings 18:21
Calvinism (also called the Reformed tradition, Reformed Christianity or the Reformed faith) is a major branch of Protestantism that follows the theological tradition and forms of Christian practice of John Calvin....Reformed theologians teach that sin so affects human nature that they are unable even to exercise faith in Christ by their own will. While people are said to retain will, in that they willfully sin, they are unable to not sin because of the corruption of their nature due to original sin. To remedy this, Reformed Christians believe that God predestined some people to be saved. This choice by God to save some is held to be unconditional and not based on any characteristic or action on the part of the person chosen. This view is opposed to the Arminian view that God's choice of whom to save is conditional or based on his foreknowledge of who would respond positively to God.