Why I Am Not a Calvinist

by Joseph R. Dongell and Jerry L. Walls

Book Overview

Paying particular attention to the issue of God's sovereignty, Jerry L. Walls and Joseph R. Dongell critique biblical and theological weaknesses of Calvinist thought.

• Format: Paperback
• Language: English
• ISBN: 0830832491
• ISBN13: 9780830832491
• Release Date: March 2004
• Publisher: IVP
• Length: 232 Pages
• Weight: 0.67 lbs.
• Dimensions: 0.7" x 5.8" x 7.9"

Customer Reviews

A Serious Yet Respectful Challenge to Reformed Theology

As one who is neither a Calvinist nor an Arminian, I found Why I Am Not a Calvinist a serious yet respectful challenge to Reformed theology. The book's endorsements include a professor of philosophy at Calvin College, which itself is impressive given the usual acrimony associated with debates between these theological camps. Jerry Walls and Joseph Dongell, both seminary professors, quickly zero in on the central issues in this age-old debate: God's character, how He expresses His sovereignty and whether He makes a bona fide offer of salvation to everyone. They then proceed to make their case in a thoughtful, logical and biblical manner. A major criticism of Calvinism is that it goes beyond what scripture says. The result is a theology that requires speculation about hidden purposes and ingenious interpretations of scripture, so that whosoever will actually means whosoever can; all, any and everybody are code words for the elect; and the world, well, it really isn't the world. Throughout the Bible God calls on people to repent, yet according to Calvinists He withholds the grace from some that makes it possible for them to do so. "In other words," the authors write, "the true intentions of God cannot be discerned from his words" (p. 57). A scary thought, indeed. Walls and Dongell make a persuasive case that a truly sovereign God could have created the world in any way He wished, including giving man a free will, and still be sovereign over His creation. In fact, one could argue that non-Calvinists hold to a higher view of God's sovereignty because they understand that "Less control is not the same as less sovereignty if God chooses to have less control" (p. 145). Toward the end of the book, the authors address one of Calvin's more interesting teachings: that the reprobate may respond to the gospel, exercise faith in Christ and sincerely believe they are of the elect, when in fact they are not. Rather, "They are deluded by a false hope" (p. 201). The "proof" of one's election therefore becomes the production of holiness and perseverance until death, rather than the assurance that comes from faith in Jesus Christ as one's personal savior and acceptance of His gift of eternal life. As Walls and Dongell point out, Calvinists cannot know for certain they are part of the elect, and therefore know whether they are truly saved, until the day they die. "This dreadful possibility is what haunts Calvinists who struggle with the assurance and certainty of salvation" (p. 202). Put another way, believe on the Lord Jesus Christ and you may be saved. Even Calvin acknowledged that the question of whether one is truly elect is a crazy-maker: "But what proof have you of your election? When once this thought has taken possession of an individual, it keeps him perpetually miserable, subjects him to dire torment, or throws him into a state of complete stupor" (quoted in Elect in the Son, p. 210). Sure doesn't sound like the abundant life Jes

Fair and factual

The author is not in the attack mode although this book will make a 5 point calvinist hyper-ventilate. Facts about calvinism are presented in a fair and biblical way by a writer who writes like a genleman in presenting his views.I would recommend this book to anybody who is interested in calvinism pro or con since it is always nice to get a sane civil view on any subject.

GREAT Book!!!

This book is excellent! Not only are a number of compelling biblical reasons provided against Calvinism, a number of relevant philosophical arguments are raised against it as well. I've noticed that a number of the reviews impugn the value of such philosophical reflections, insisting that everything be settled on biblical exegetical grounds. Despite the high view of the Bible such an insistence demonstrates, I think that's a little simple-minded, in all honesty. Suppose the Bible told us to lie. Should our attitude in such a case be that lying is okay? Should we ignore our moral intuitions to the contrary just because the Bible said so? How would we ground our conviction in the truth of the Bible when it shows such disregard for the truth? On what principled grounds would we choose to believe in the Bible before some other piece of alleged revelation? God presumably gives us adequate evidence and philosophical resources to be justified to believe in scriptural authority. But if so, why not believe he can also help us interpret the Bible correctly by giving us the right philosophical assumptions to bring to our study? If exegesis reveals contradictions in scripture or teachings that stand at odds with inviolable moral intuitions, then either the exegesis is wrong or we have grounds for rejecting the veracity of the Bible. Calvinism is based on a bad reading of the Bible. Little wonder C.S. Lewis characterized it as sneaking a bad god in through the back door. And no mystery why Calvinism can be shown predicated on such bad philosophy as the following: continuing to call God "good" when he unconditionally elects some to hell; and such a "good God" COULD have saved everyone without violating anyone's free will on their view!; Calvinists call "biblical tensions" or paradoxes what are just the contradictory elements in their own faulty interpretations of scripture; Calvinists engage in the most egregious forms of equivocation, stretching language beyond its breaking point, by calling their conceptions of God good when there's nothing recognizably good about it; Calvinists say we deserve hell while at the same time casting God as the sufficient cause of all of our actions....in other words.....they embrace a compatibilist view of freedom, notoriously inadequate to undergird ascriptions of deep moral responsibility, yet they think it adequate for someone to be relegated to an eternal hell! Example after example of confusion, evasion, and dishonesty characterize Reformed theology. It's a shame that segments of the church refuse to see this and insist on embracing such a warped view of God. It's clear that Augustine overstated the implications of divine sovereignty in his debates with the Pelagians, yet his mistake has become virtually sacrosanct theology in the minds of Calvinists today. (And ironically, the Calvinist refusal to believe God has the prerogative to grant human beings real libertarian freedom LIMITS God's sovereignty!) What's at issue i

Unconvincing to Calvinists (of course)

The best book since Shank's books, Life in the Son and Elect in the Son --only this book is far better and shorter. This is one of those books I wish I'd written-but I couldn't have, even on my best day-they were the guys to write it. It is hard to convert a Calvinist away form their position. I was a five pointer in college and during half of seminary, but did convert-I switched for the reasons outlined in this book. Walls' philosophical approach is helpful, and Dongell is always strong in making biblical arguments. Sure, the book is not enough to persuade most Calvinists to switch (God Himself could not do that... well, er, I suppose, being sovereign, God might be able to do it, but it would be hard even for God). --Keith Drury Associate Professor of Religion, Indiana Wesleyan University

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.