Product Description

What's wrong with Calvinism?Since the Reformation, Calvinism has dominated much of evangelical thought. It has been so well established that many Christians simply assume it to be the truest expression of Christian doctrine. But Calvinism has some serious biblical and theological weaknesses that unsettle laypeople, pastors and scholars alike.God is sovereign. All evangelical Christians--whether Arminians or Calvinists--have no doubt about this fundamental truth. But how does God express his sovereignty? Is God a master puppeteer, pulling our strings? Or has he graciously given his children freedom to respond to his love?In this eminently readable book, Jerry L. Walls and Joseph R. Dongell explore the flaws of Calvinist theology. Why I Am Not a Calvinist is a must-read for all who struggle with the limitations of this dominant perspective within evangelical theology.

Product Details

• Amazon Sales Rank: #79476 in Books
• Published on: 2004-05
• Original language: English
• Number of items: 1
• Binding: Paperback
• 240 pages

Customer Reviews

Why I am Not a Calvinist
Along with Peterson and Williams (_Why I am Not an Arminian_), Walls and Dongell write with an irenic style as they engage perhaps the most controversial theological issue to face the Christian Church: Arminianism versus Calvinism. And they are to be commended for their equanimity. Of course, the controversy extends beyond the walls of the Church. Free will and determinism are volatile subjects within many different disciplines across academia, even in Geography! In this set of books published by InterVarsity Press, however, the discussion is delimited to Christian Theology.

Walls and Dongell do a good job of representing the beliefs of their opposition: That of Calvinism. They quote Calvinist sources frequently and not only that, the references are of the mainstream variety (e.g. Drs. R.C. Sproul Sr., D.A. Carson, Paul Helm, John Feinberg, etc.), which tends toward the minimization of straw-man argumentation and caricature. Their use of _The Westminster Confession of Faith_ and John Calvin's _Institutes of the Christian Religion_ is even-handed as well.

By their own admission, Walls' and Dongell's thesis is as follows: "In a nutshell, our case against Calvinism is that it doesn't do justice to the character of God revealed in Scripture." (2004, p. 220) On the final page of their book, they say, "Our reasons [for not being Calvinists] are not merely biographical or personal, but rather they are theological, philosophical and most of all biblical." (2004, p. 221)

This second statement creates a problem for me, particularly where Walls and Dongell mention biblical reasons as the greatest impediment to their acceptance of Calvinism. The reason being that their book is minimally exegetical. Yes, there is a chapter called "Engaging the Bible," where Walls and Dongell present biblical texts that are favourable to the Arminian position, and where they engage passages that are Calvinist strongholds, such as John 6, Romans 8-9, and Ephesians 1. However, when you read the book as a whole, or even just peruse the table of contents for that matter, it becomes clear that Walls and Dongell spend a great deal of time - I would say the majority of their time - attempting to demonstrate the philosophical inconsistency of the Calvinist position. I would hazard a guess that Walls, a professor of philosophy of religion, wrote a great deal of this book himself.

Not that there is anything wrong with scrutinizing a theological position by the standard of the laws of logic and such. As Walls and Dongell state, to ignore the consistency of a theological position is simply to posture piety and no more (cf. p. 155). That said, I believe Walls and Dongell are being overly gratuitous when they claim biblical reasons as the greatest impediment to their acceptance of Calvinism. Simply put, as good as their book is, its claim to fame will not be the biblical exegesis contained therein.

On a more positive note, Walls and Dongell really offer a wake-up call to Calvinists. For example, they point out weaknesses and inconsistencies in the argumentation employed by such Calvinistic greats as Packer, Sproul Sr., Carson, and Piper. Sproul Sr., for instance, is shown to waffle back and forth between a compatibilist and libertarian view of human freedom as it suits his fancy, though in all fairness to Sproul Sr., he has probably done so inadvertently.

Also, Walls and Dongell clearly point out where the great divide exists between Arminians and Calvinists. An uninformed Calvinist may think his or her position differs from that of the Arminian because he or she affirms God's sovereignty over everything whereas his or her opponent does not. But this is not the case. The issue is not whether God is in control of everything - this is not distinctive to Calvinism but fundamental to Christian Theology in general - but how it works out in the details. As Walls and Dongell echo on more than one occasion, God is in control of everything "in some sense."

One of the strengths of Walls' and Dongell's book is the clarity with which they explain philosophical concepts and positions such as "hard" determinism, "soft" determinism (compatibilism), libertarian freedom, Molinism, the Openness view of God's sovereignty, contradiction, paradox, mystery, etc. This emphasis, however, may not go over well with readers who may be looking for a more biblically-backed defence of Arminianism and who have little or no interest in philosophy.

Though admittedly _Why I am Not a Calvinist_ should be more of an offensive, than defensive, book as indicated by the title alone, Walls and Dongell could have been perhaps more convincing if they had of offered a more "positive" presentation of Arminianism, not just an exposé of Calvinism's weaknesses. For example, Walls and Dongell feel that Calvinism, at the level of practical theology, is incapable of meeting the needs of a person wrestling with assurance of salvation due to the fact that it is difficult for the Calvinist to assure a person in that position that God loves him or her. However, the reader is not even introduced to the problem relating to assurance of salvation that is inherent in the Arminian schema, which is due to its denial of eternal security.

Overall, I enjoyed _Why I am Not a Calvinist_. But I would use discernment when recommending the book. If someone were looking for a book that offers primarily an exegetical challenge to Calvinism, then I would not recommend Walls and Dongell. However, if someone were looking for a philosophical critique of Calvinism, I would not hesitate to put this work forward.

Regardless of one's stance on the issue of Arminianism and Calvinism, it is refreshing to see two opposing sides engaging one another in a way that is consistent with Christian Theology regarding how fellow believers are to interact with one another in intramural matters.

Personally helpful, but a disappointment
Many reviewers here make excellent points.

As an Arminian, I read this book hoping to find a solid evangelical stance of Arminianism that made a strong defense of Biblical Arminianism. As pointed out below.. This book has two major problems--
1. The chapters on philosophy truly did help clarify the various highly confusing Calvinist positions, and possible alternatives, however, the case must be won in the Bible not by philosophy, and this book is more philosophy than Bible.
2. Though it is unclear if they hold this view, they show sympathy for the Openness position. This unbiblical view of God is dangerous to the Arminian worldview, dangerous to the church, etc. This could present a problem if you wanted to give this book to an astute Calvinist because it would tend to confirm their suspicions. These leanings show when they present three possible views of God's knowledge, they have critique for Both Calvinism and Molinism (which is probably most Arminian viewpoint as held by people like William Lane Craig), but only defend Openness. It's sad that two scholars from the flagship Arminian seminary (Asbury) show this sympathy.

On the other hand, this book does an excellent job at clarifying the philisophical issues, and the one long chapter focusing on the Bible text is actually quite good, and has the best treatment of Romans 8:29-30 that I've read. If the rest of the book had followed these lines, and had made at least one strong statement against Openness, it would have been a 5 star book.

In retrospect, while I was disappointed when I bought this book for the two reasons listed above, I'm very glad that this was published. Not only does it help sort out a lot of issues -- confusing and inconsistent Calvinist philosophy, and seemingly ironclad Scripture points, but more importantly it gives Arminians a publishing voice again. Calvinists, for whatever reason have dominated the publishing and popular mind so much in the past twenty years, that my entire generation is turning in that direction, almost for lack of a clear alternative. Hopefully Arminians are becoming more aware that they must "publish or perish" as the old adage goes.

Grace, Faith and Free Will by Picirilli is a solid Biblical defense of Reformed Arminianism. More Recently Roger Olson's "Arminian Theology" is setting the gold standard for academic treatment. This book is still best in the market as a first cut to give to a friend who is undecided, and not heavily theologically educated. Then follow up with further discussion, and maybe one of these other two.

Very articulate and fascinating!!
I agree with the last guy. I was highly impressed with this book! It examines the logic and philosophy of Calvinism. I think Calvinism needs to be engaged on a philosophical level as well as a Biblical one. The reason for saying this is my experiences with Calvinists are that they are highly philosophical (the ones that really understand their position), and appeal to philosophical arguments in addition to their Biblical arguments. Many have asserted that Augustine was heavily influenced by philosophy. This is why (I think anyway) Calvinists take the universal atonement texts and turn them into limited atonement texts to maintain philosophical consistency even though there exegesis of these verses is obvious to no one but themselves. If you find yourself debating philosophical issues instead of Biblical exegesis then this book is for you. I disagree with a previous reviewer suggesting that this would not be a good book to give Calvinists. The authors bring into the discussion some of the material from leading Calvinist scholars like Screiner/Ware (The Grace of God...), Paul Helm, D.A. Carson, Packer, R.C. Sproul etc. This was really insightful taking a close look at the logical consistency of their positions. This book was not a bashing Calvinism book. Very level headed.

It is certainly true that the books main focus was not biblical exegesis, devoting one chapter to this. But their exegesis of Romans 9 was hard to beat, and although I wished there was more detail on their discussion of John 6 they did make some good points.

As far as open theism goes the authors did not say what their views were on this topic. They simple looked at the different foreknowledge perspectives and looked at what are some of the problems raised by each view. Open theism I think fit naturally into the discussion without the authors promoting it.

Also as a reviewer noted there is a Calvinist who goes around to seemingly every non-Calvinist book and gives it a low rating. Looking at the comments would suggest this person has never read these books.