I am not a proper philosopher. I work at being a theologian. This book is helpful in defining philosophical problems with Calvinism as the authors define it. They state the issues that they have with Calvinist theology clearly. Their solutions however pay more homage to the philosophical ideal of libertarian free will than to letting Scripture truly rule over their philosophical convictions.
My chief gripe with this book is that it is a theological book with a primarily philosophical argument. I wrote in the margins more times than I've bothered to count GIVE ME SCRIPTURE. At the risk of gross oversimplification, their argument tries to make God's sovereignty and man's responsibility too neatly defined. The fact of the matter is that the Bible affirms both and does not do it in a way that is neat and tidy. Bad versions of Calvinism are just as guilty in this regard. The point is, both sides can over rationalize both the aspects of God's sovereignty and man's responsibility and ignore parts of scripture that make their position difficult. This would have at least been a 3 star review if they had dome more exegesis and handled more scripture even if I disagreed with their conclusions (which is likely based on my understandings of soteriology and covenant theology).
God will absolutely hold individuals responsible for their sins.
God is absolutely the one who frees men from the bondage of sin.
God saves some and not all (from before all time, in the present, and in the future).
Any (and all) who persevere in faith in Christ have been / are / will be saved.
None of us knows who God has saved / is saving / will save so we preach salvation to all knowing that He will save and faith comes through hearing.
I don't see scripture spelling out an idea of libertarian free will as the authors define it. Show me scriptures that refute this and maybe I will no longer be a Calvinist either...but I doubt it. Jerry L. Walls I must state emphatically from the outset that I am neither Calvinist nor Arminian in my Christian beliefs because I believe that these are man-made constructs that limit the true nature of God. With that stated, I begin my review of Why I Am Not A Calvinist with the statement that I was pleasantly surprised by this book and also comforted by its content.
I was raised in an over religious, although decidedly not Godly, home that used Calvinistic thought to abuse and dominate me. Not surprisingly, I already had deep rooted animosity toward what I consider to be a grossly narcissistic system of belief toward the living God. My reason for reading this book in the first place was not to dispel what my heart had already defined as a deliberate distortion of the truth, but to answer questions authoritatively about my concerns with the erroneous doctrine. I was not disappointed.
Other works that I have read in past that dispute Calvinism did not clearly address the three distortions of Calvinism: God's sovereignty; the concept of unearned grace; and what many interpret as election as relates to the saved. Fortunately, this book addresses each issue clearly and without shredding scripture. I was evermore thankful as I read each chapter that my questions regarding the spiritual abusiveness of Calvinistic thought were clearly and concisely addressed by the authors.
Although, as previously stated, I do not consider myself Arminian I will concede that Arminian thought has scriptural validity much to the dislike of die-hard Tulip loving Calvinists. One of the best discussions within the book is found in the topic of free will which is something that Calvinists cannot seem to accept. Additionally, the authors address an issue which has bothered me for the duration of my thinking life and that is Calvin's inability to rationally understand the nature of evil even to the exclusion of being able to identify evil within himself.
Calvin was of the mind that salvation was entirely up to God Himself which reduces God to some human-dependent, glory lusting, and micromanaging being who cannot allow others to choose Him freely because of His inability to face rejection and that is NOT the God that I know. Coerced love and dependence are not Godly concepts but the creation of the selfish and controlling heart which are antithetical to the true nature of the living God.
Finally, Calvinism contains a critical flaw which it cannot reconcile that Why I Am Not A Calvinist so clearly points out which is: if salvation were entirely up to God then all of mankind would be saved(1 Timothy 2:4). Calvinists do not believe this and conveniently ignore this glaring hole in their self centered theological system of salvation making God dependent on mankind which I find untrue and absurd. For those willing to confront the errors of Calvinist thinking this is a good read but be willing to read it with an open mind. Jerry L. Walls Thoughtful, largely irenic, and mostly fair. Should be read by all Calvinists as it serves as a corrective against the worst among us. This book gives the benefit of the doubt and interacts with the most thoughtful, mature, and philosophically sound versions of Calvinism. A good Calvinist can stand alongside the authors and reject the outer fringe of Calvinism which is regrettably becoming more mainstream. Popular Calvinism will be the death of modern reformed theology although books like this can help correct the ship. Jerry L. Walls Walls and Dongell have written an excellent introduction in to the Calvinist/Arminian debate from the Arminian perspective. Reformed/Calvinist theology, of which I have grown up in, deservedly has taken a strong foothold in the church and therefore in my opinion needs to be evaluated for consistency and faithfulness to scripture. I am sure the founding theologians of the reformation themselves would agree with this premise.
What makes this book a worthwhile read is the the authors’ humility, their fair representation of Calvinism/Reformed theology, and their descriptions of the practical implications of this debate.
First, the book takes a tone of humility and reverence for scripture that I would hope to find in any theological discussion. The biggest example of this in my opinion is when the authors introduce idea that any reading of scripture will inevitably be skewed by our preconceived notions and theological preferences. This self awareness is one that I have found lacking in the Calvinist camp in my personal experience, and it was a breath of fresh air. Too easy is it for me to claim that other theologies must not care about scripture and write them off. After reading, I can neither make this claim about the authors nor do they make this claim about their opponents.
Second, I found the representation of the Calvinist side very accurate to my understanding from growing up in and around reformed theology. Many times I found myself objecting to the authors argument only to find them addressing this objection on the next page. Additionally they rightfully point out the attraction to Calvinism consistent with what I know about the Calvinists I grew up around. Namely it is comforting to think your sons or daughters are elect and cannot chose to leave the faith. It is also comforting to believe that everything happens according to God’s direct control when hardships come. The authors do well to address where these comforts are either not exclusive to Calvinism or have implications that are not supported by scripture.
Finally, I appreciated the clearly presented implications of this debate. Throughout the book, I was tempted to say, “what does this matter if it does not affect who or who is not ultimately a Christian?” Walls and Dongell effectively spell out the implications for theology as a whole as well as the implications Calvinism has for pastoral, community, and non believer relationships. How do you tell the unelected that Jesus loves them if God has not chosen them? Do we truly freely love God or are we just pre determined to do so? And how can one be responsible for their sin if they were destined to act in this way? These are a few of the questions any Calvinist is left to answer at the end of the authors’ work, and I hope they are addressed in the companion book.
Ultimately whether you are open to the authors’ conclusions or not, Why I am not a Calvinist is a great resource to understand the debate and challenge beliefs. Every Calvinist should read about and wrestle with the implications of their theology, and Dongell and Wells have presented an excellent resource to do so. If done in humility and honesty by Gods grace, despite what “side” you end on, the only result will be a refined view of the wonderful work of Jesus that is closer to truth and a renewed passion for his glory. Jerry L. Walls This was a book with which I could identify as these authors disagreements with and misunderstandings of Calvinism were similar to my own. Unlike the Williams/Peterson volume, Walls and Dongell seek to answer the question implied in the title by seeking to show how Calvinism is unacceptable instead of demonstrating why Arminianism is preferable. I would have much preferred the later approach as this book over emphasizes philosophy (seeking to show Calvinism is an incoherent system) and under emphasizes Scripture (building the case for Arminianism). I would have much preferred to read a Biblical defense of Arminianism rather than a philosophical polemic against Calvinism.
Unfortunately, while they quote Calvinist authors, it seems that they do not really understand the Calvinist system at all. Walls admits as much in chapter 3 when he claims that his understanding of Calvinism is largely informed by the secular philosophies of hard and soft determinism. Too often his analytic approach evaluates Calvinism using definitions of terms that are foreign to the system itself.
At the end of the day, what I was hoping to read was a strong Biblical defense of Arminianism (more similar to the sister volume), but that is not this book. One wonders if Williams and Peterson's book should have been more like this one. Still, it is often more beneficial to show how one's own system of doctrine is true before trying to show that another is false, and this would be a much a better book for one seeking to engage this issue if they had put forth a strong defense of Arminianism.
A couple other notes: The epistemology is interesting. It is strong on analytic philosophy and weak on revelation. The a priori commitment to libertarian free will is the primary assumption underlying their critique. On another note, the tone in this volume is a bit more desperate. I believe this is due to the growing influence of SBTS in the Baptist churches. This is a serious current issue for Walls and Dongell. It is much more likely that an Arminian in their circles will bolt to Calvinism than a Calvinist in Williams and Peterson's circles would do the opposite. This, I think, also influenced their approach to this volume. Jerry L. Walls
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. Why I Am Not a Calvinist
2.5 ⭐️ I really enjoyed the introduction. It helped me to see how theology has contributed to denominational differences in American Christianity. I understand why I have landed where I have landed.
The authors state that they are classic Arminians and acknowledge that extremes of Arminianism are problematic, as are extremes of Calvinism.
Many other reviews have already accurately stated the main problem with this book: Where is the biblical exegesis? The authors mostly employ philosophy and reason to make their arguments.
Despite the weak biblical exegesis, I do think they make some points worth considering in the last two chapters: Calvinism and Consistency, Calvinism and the Christian Life.
Overall, I liked some of this book and thought other parts were just okay. I think it’s problematic if the Bible is not the highest authority when discussing the nature and character of God. I’m not sure if that’s unique to this book or inherent to Arminian theology. Jerry L. Walls Now obviously I disagree with the authors, so I can't just rate the book on what I think of their arguments. Otherwise it would be one star for sure. But I can rate them on how they go about their arguments. Not well. Basically, to them the Calvinist God is used-car salesman. They say as much. He cannot be trusted to mean what he says.
At one point they give a beautiful description of Calvinism, but then say, but no one actually believes this. John Piper might, but the rest of you are inconsistent. That may be true, but if anything that's an argument for the fact that we're fallen, that all of us are inconsistent. But that's not a fault with Calvinism itself.
Furthermore, when there is a facet of Calvinism that they don't quite understand, they assume the problem is thus with Calvinism's idea of God, not with our finite attempts to understand him. They assume that if you can't place everything the God of Calvinism is or does into your neat, logical boxes, then Calvinism must fail. I would say, you're too small!
They also fault D. A. Carson for not hammering with Calvinism someone who is mourning the death of a loved one. But if he DID do so, they'd probably fault him for that, too.
Although they fault Calvinism for 200 pages, there is no defense of what they believe. So it is a bit of a one-sided argument. Anyone can poke holes in you for 200 pages if you have nothing to attack yourself. May I suggest reading the companion volume?
Jerry L. Walls As far as pro-Arminian books go, this was one of the better written and argued cases for Arminianism that I've read. These guys are Classical Arminians, and so try to avoid the dangers they see in Open Theism, Molinism, etc. Dongell also does a decent job defending Arminianism from a biblical/exegetical point of view.
But all-in-all, I am more persuaded than ever that the central problem with Arminianism is it's denial that God is absolutely sovereign over His covenantal interactions with mankind. They get some of the covenantal issues, but then they fail to see all the way through the covenant and into God's eternal decrees. Basically, they stop short at the covenant, and then confuse God's covenantal interactions in created time and space with His eternal decrees before created time and space. For them, God's covenantal interactions end up being identified with His eternal decrees. So they end up losing the Creator-creature distinction and end up replacing this with their own version of the Creator-creature equality. Not quite as bad as Open Theists do, but it’s a stone’s throw away.
I'm also more convinced now than ever that the Arminian’s biggest beef is not with Classical Calvinism, but with Hyper-Calvinism. But that's not to say there's no beef with Historical Calvinism. There’s plenty of that, too. Jerry L. Walls Jerry Walls and Joseph Dongell delightfully poke holes in the Calvinist position in this small book. Inconsistencies such as the But I am not convinced on either side. I think God has yet to characterise a doctrine that completely satisfies. I do feel the emphasis placed on the will by Calvinists is a fickle one, as it is intrinsically logocentric (all about words) and not about the people. It embraces the concept and the words. The God of love is much grander than that! For us as humans, words and anything in creation changes. We can't depend on this doctrine as it isn't God focussed. It's not to the detriment of my Calvinist friends that I wish to undermine their position but I feel theirs is a perching post deficient in agape love. We profess not doctrine but that we know God's love for ourselves demonstrating this in all that we do. Neither am I an Arminian as typically caricatured. It cannot be simply demonstrated with a Calvinist or an Arminian in God's creative arch. God's canvas is more creative than that. This is why I feel we struggle with this. Perhaps I am moving towards JI Packer's position of it being a mystery, after all...Very open to hearing how people present this.
Not watertight, at the moment. I didn't expect to be either. I appreciate the authors demonstrating this with winsomeness and charity.
Further recommendations are welcome. Thanks. Jerry L. Walls I read this book out of curiosity, not because I am in agreement with Jerry Walls or even because I want to debate him. This review handles the book, not the doctrinal position. I gave it 4 stars out of appreciation for his kind, fair approach to this historically volatile subject. Walls stated in the introduction the direction he would take with this book: Calvinism does not represent the biblical picture of God's character. He spends much of the book trying to demonstrate the perceived inconsistencies with Calvinism. The title was well chosen because this is clearly not a biblical apologetic for Arminianism, but an attempt to rationally dismantle the incoherence of Calvinistic theologians throughout history. While Walls does give some proof texts for his position, he invests significantly more time in the dismantling of quotes & illustrative metaphors given by men like Augustine, Jonathan Edwards, JI Packer, RC Sproul, John Piper, Albert Moehler, John MacArthur, DA Carson, and others. I plan to read the counterpart to this book by Williams and Peterson.
Jerry L. Walls
Read & Download Why I Am Not a Calvinist
