Against Calvinism [Paperback]

Roger E. Olson (Author)

Book Description

Release date: October 25, 2011

Calvinist theology has been debated and promoted for centuries. But is it a theology that should last? Roger Olson suggests that Calvinism, also commonly known as Reformed theology, holds an unwarranted place in our list of accepted theologies. In Against Calvinism, readers will find scholarly arguments explaining why Calvinist theology is incorrect and how it affects God's reputation. Olson draws on a variety of sources, including Scripture, reason, tradition, and experience, to support his critique of Calvinism and the more historically rich, biblically faithful alternative theologies he proposes. Addressing what many evangelical Christians are concerned about today---so-called 'new Calvinism,' a movement embraced by a generation labeled as 'young, restless, Reformed' ---Against Calvinism is the only book of its kind to offer objections from a non-Calvinist perspective to the current wave of Calvinism among Christian youth. As a companion to Michael Horton's For Calvinism, readers will be able to compare contrasting perspectives and form their own opinions on the merits and weaknesses of Calvinism.

Editorial Reviews

About the Author

Roger E. Olson (PhD, Rice University) is professor of theology at George W. Truett Theological Seminary of Baylor University. He is the author of many books, including Questions to All Your Answers: The Journey from Folk Religion to Examined Faith, Reformed and Always Reforming: The Postconservative Approach to Evangelical Theology, and How to Be Evangelical without Being Conservative.

Product Details

• Paperback: 208 pages
• Publisher: Zondervan (October 25, 2011)
• Language: English
• ISBN-10: 031032467X
• ISBN-13: 978-0310324676
• Product Dimensions: 5.4 x 0.6 x 8.4 inches
• Shipping Weight: 8.8 ounces (View shipping rates and policies)
• Average Customer Review: 4.2 out of 5 stars  See all reviews (48 customer reviews)
• Amazon Best Sellers Rank: #239,003 in Books (See Top 100 in Books)

More About the Author

Roger E. Olson (Ph.D., Rice University) is professor of theology at George W. Truett Theological Seminary of Baylor University in Waco, Texas. He is the author of The Story of Christian Theology: Twenty Centuries of Tradition & Reform, The Mosaic of Christian Belief: Twenty Centuries of Unity & Diversity (both InterVarsity Press) and The Westminster Handbook to Evangelical Theology (Westminster John Knox). He is also coauthor of 20th-Century Theology: God & the World in a Transitional Age and Who Needs Theology? An Invitation to the Study of God (both with Stanley J. Grenz, InterVarsity Press), and of The Trinity (with Christopher A. Hall, Eerdmans).

Most Helpful Customer Reviews

108 of 115 people found the following review helpful

4.0 out of 5 stars A Fair Critique and must read for Calvinists October 22, 2011

By Jacob Sweeney

Format:Paperback

I am a self-identified member of the Young, Restless and Reformed movement. John Piper and Mark Driscoll were significant in my theological formation. I am a student at the Southern Baptist Theological Seminary in Louisville, Kentucky - a bastion of the YRR movement. You might assume that I would only review a book by Roger Olsen (an outspoken Arminian) that is against Calvinism so that I could give it a scathing review. Sadly, many other young people identified as YRR do respond with vitriol and contempt towards anyone who is not a Calvinist. I think that's wrong.

Olsen organizes his critique of Calvinism around the well-known summary acronym: TULIP. Despite it's intimate association with the doctrines which bear his name, the 17th century Genevan Reformer John Calvin had nothing to do with its formation. During a controversy between Arminians and Calvinists the Arminians published their five articles of Remonstrance. The Dutch Calvinists then responded with their five responses to the articles of the Remonstrants: the Total Depravity of Man; God's Unconditional Election; Limited Atonement; Irresistible Grace; Perseverance of the Saints.

By basing this book around the five points of Calvinism, Olsen is actually following a historical precedent. He is responding particularly to the "high-Calvinism" of the Young, Restless, Reformed movement which strongly emphasizes the sovereignty of God. Olsen's argument is three-fold: Calvinism is less-biblically faithful, Calvinism is in tension with the faith of the ancient church and that it is ultimately full of contradictions.

I think it goes without saying that I disagree with Olsen's conclusions about Calvinism. His book does not offer anything significantly new in the debate between these two systems.... However, he does model gracious and understanding disagreement. Why does this matter? Because it rarely happens between Calvinists and Arminians. This is usually a high-tension "discussion" (read: argument). But, he manages it with fairness. At times it appears that he is using loaded terms to help his argument, but based on the work as a whole I don't think that's the case.

I think every Calvinist (especially the YRR variety) needs to read this book. I should say, they need to read it and understand that someone can be an intelligent, committed Christian and not be a Calvinist. My generation of up-and-coming pastors and theologians needs to relax and learn how to have honest, frank and generous discussion with our brothers in Christ who disagree. Olson's book will help us accomplish that.

NOTE: In accordance with the regulations of the Federal Trade Commission I would like to state that I received a complementary copy of the aforementioned text for the purposes of review. I was not required to furnish a positive review. Read more ›

40 of 42 people found the following review helpful

5.0 out of 5 stars The Logical Implications of Calvinism December 7, 2011

By Tom Farr

Format:Paperback

Many of the writers, theologians, and pastors I follow most are Calvinists. Though I don't agree with their views of human freedom, the nature of God's sovereignty, how election works, the intent of the atonement, the location of faith in relation to regeneration, and probably a host of other things, I've learned much about Christ from men like Matt Chandler, John Piper, Michael Horton, and many others. We don't have to agree about how salvation works to agree that the message of Christ needs to be spread deep and wide, and I can tell these men love Christ deeply. All that to say, in reviewing Roger Olson's newest book AGAINST CALVINISM, I can affirm the intent of most Calvinists to paint a picture of God that is genuinely loving toward humanity, but, with Roger Olson, I agree that Calvinism, when consistently applied and followed to its logical conclusions, does more harm to the reputation of God than good. Since this is merely a review of AGAINST CALVINISM, I won't have the space to go into all the reasons why, but I'll be more than happy to interact in the comments.

Roger Olson is a Classical Arminian, and though I share more beliefs concerning soteriology with Olson than Horton, I don't agree enough with Arminianism enough to call myself an Arminian. However, one of the first things that I loved about this book was that it wasn't written as a defense of Classical Arminianism, but instead merely as a critique of the most controversial and biblically questionable points of Calvinism.

Some of the high points of the book:
* Olson points out that Reformed theology and Calvinism are not synonymous. In fact, it's possible to be Reformed and not hold to the five points of Calvinism. Olson describes those who are Reformed but not Calvinist as "revisionist Reformed...."

* While most Calvinists adhere to a singular election where God merely passes over the non-elect, Olson shows how singular predestination actually entails double predestination.

* Olson makes a clear distinction between what Calvinism logically leads to and what Calvinists actually teach.

* Calvinism's divine determinism and compatibalist version of human freedom logically lead to God being the author of evil. After all, if Adam followed his strongest desire to eat of the tree, who gave him the desire if he was created good?

* Olson quotes quite a few Reformed theologians throughout history that have also objected on the points he is objecting to. The book is clearly well researched from all sides of the debate.

* Olson points out that Calvinism's teaching about unconditional election doesn't work because if God's choice has nothing to do with the people he chooses to save but upon his good pleasure, it's hard to get away from the decision being merely arbitrary. After all, God created everyone. He had a reason for saving the ones he saves and rejecting the ones he doesn't, but if it had nothing to do with anything within the creatures themselves, saying it was based on his good pleasure doesn't solve the problem. What gives God pleasure to save some and reject others if they're all equal in his mind since he bases his choice on nothing in them? Nothing sets them apart. So, logically, we're left with a choice that was made at random in the Calvinist system.

* Olson's criticism of the atonement providing common grace to the non-elect, though not for salvation. This view of the atonement reveals God's grace to the non-elect as useless where grace really counts. Olson refers to this as God giving the non-elect a little bit of heaven to get them to hell.

That's just a sampling of the things I resonated with in the book. Olson clearly strives to critique Calvinism not to start a fight, but to defend God against what he believes to be a false representation. Michael Horton's foreword at the beginning also reveals the graciousness Calvinists and non-Calvinists can extend toward one another as they both wrestle with the nature of what God has revealed about himself in Scripture.

There wasn't much about the book I disagreed with, though I have many thoughts on the subject that could have been touched on or developed more. I don't see how Romans 9, for example, could be just about corporate election and not individual election when Paul states at the beginning of the chapter that he's distraught over his people not being saved.

As with most books I've read critiquing five point Calvinism, it probably won't convince everyone who reads it to abandon Calvinism. But it will help those wrestling with why they don't agree with Calvinism. As another defense against Calvinism, I'd also recommend reading SALVATION AND SOVEREIGNTY by Kenneth Keathley. Both books, as well as Horton's FOR CALVINISM should be read with a highlighter and pen in hand.

Above all, in the midst of disagreement between Calvinists and non-Calvinists, it's important to be at peace with everyone, as Paul said.

I received this book for free for review from Zondervan. Read more ›

64 of 72 people found the following review helpful

4.0 out of 5 stars More against TULIP than against Calvinism October 16, 2011

By Adam VINE™ VOICE

Format:Kindle Edition

Against Calvinism is part of a two book series that try to present the arguments For Calvinism and Against Calvinism with as much grace and humility possible. Roger Olson (Against) and Michael Horton (For) introduce one another's books and it seems have reviewed and commented on each other's books before publication. I appreciate Horton's introduction to this book that affirms Olson's Christianity and good faith and the attempt to bring more light than heat to the discussion.

Olson takes a specific tack in this book, not to argue against Calvinism as a whole (he affirms many parts of Calvinism) but to argue against particular interpretation of Calvinism that he call 'High Calvinism'. This is very strong view of the set of ideas that are detailed in the acronym TULIP. After an introduction about the purpose of the book and a fairly long chapter on the diversity within the Reformed church, Olson works through each of the parts of TULIP and shows why he believes that the system is not the best method of understanding God and God's work in the lives of Christian. This leads to a lot of repetition; this book could easily have been 50 to 80 pages shorter and probably would have been a better book.

In Olson's defense, he is trying to show that his objections are not only possibilities, but that a number of prominent Reformed theologians/pastors of today and the past have believe things that he objects to. So there are strings of essentially the same thing being said over and over again because Olson wants to cite a variety of sources....

Olson also tries when possible to cite Reformed pastors/theologians that do not hold to doctrines that Olson finds inappropriate so that as much as possible it is Reformed theologians that object to particular understandings of other Reformed theologians. I believe that this method, while tedious at times, does make the discussion more civil (in spite of making a drier book.)

Reading this book makes me recall an analogy that Christians Smith uses in the book Bible Made Impossible. Smith says that often Christians treat the bible as puzzle pieces. I am shortening and paraphrasing.) There is not a picture of what the puzzle is supposed to be, so some try to make it into a beautiful girl, others a landscape, others something else. The problem is that in all cases, some pieces of the puzzle get left out and others are forced into place and end up damaging the piece.

I believe that this is a problem with all systems of Christian thought. It is easy to see the problems with this book (and I presume will be in the next) because what ends up happening is charges that because one person believes in A, it is assumed that they must then believe in B because B is a logical conclusion from A. The problem is that one person's logical conclusion is another person's dramatic leap.

However, I do not want to minimize Olson's problems with Calvinism. In general, Olson objects to assertions that God is the author of Evil (and he cites many Calvinist theologians that have explicitly said this. In their attempt to maintain God's sovereignty, some have created a system of determinism that places responsibility for all action (not just the good) on God.

Second, Olson is concerned that Calvinism places Sovereignty as God's highest virtue, above love, above grace, above goodness. I think this is a fair statement, but others do the same with other attributes of God and place love above justice or righteousness above grace. The reality is that scripture says that God has all of these aspects and trying to place them in some type of rank order to help us make sense of the theological system that we are creating does not do justice to the wholeness of scripture and God's revelation.

Third, Olson is concerned that the aspect of limited atonement undercuts our own human attempts at sharing the gospel in good faith. Can Calvinists honestly share the gospel (and here he might benefit from Scot McKnight's book King Jesus Gospel) and say that God has died for your sins, if we only believe that God has died for a few people's sins?

Fourth, Olson is concerned that TULIP is not internally consistent or the only way to interpret many difficult scriptures. Because we are often brought up in a theologically isolated system, many have no conception that you can be a Christian and not believe in a particular way. We saw this earlier this year when a number of theologians asserted that it was not possible to be a Christian and not believe in creationism in general and a physical Adam and Eve in particular. Olson does not use that example, but many others that are common in current Calvinism, but were not present in the actual John Calvin, or in standard Christian theology before Calvin. I am a bit reluctant to adopt this argument too strongly. There are many doctrines that have developed over time and while I agree we should be historically knowledgeable, I do not want to submit theology to some sort of theological/historical litmus test.

I am also a bit concerned about much of Olson's (and other's) appeals to logic. Christianity is a theology that is inherently paradoxical. 'My strength is shown in your weakness' is not a logical statement. Olson does comment on this, in part because both proponents and opponents of Calvinism cite human logic in their arguments, just not in the same areas. So Olson want to try to preserve what he call 'conundrums' without accepting logical inconsistencies (2+2=3, square pegs in round holes, etc. The problem is that it matters a lot who is doing the evaluating. Scot McKnight started a discussion on his blog about this book. And it is clear from the comments that given the same sets of facts, many people have quite different conclusions.

I want to be very careful in discussions like this, that when reasonable people of faith disagree, that we understand, primarily this is about something less than the other person's salvation. Olson attempted to do this and mostly succeeded. It is hard to have strong convictions and civil conversation. But I think if we are serious about our faith, we very much need to make every attempt.

_______

An ebook copy of this book was provided by the publisher through Netgalley for purposes of review. This review was originally posted on the Bookwi.se blog Read more ›