Arminian Theology: Myths and Realities [Hardcover]

Roger E. Olson (Author)

Book Description

Publication Date: September 22, 2006

In this book, Roger Olson sets forth classical Arminian theology and addresses the myriad misunderstandings and misrepresentations of it through the ages. Irenic yet incisive, Olson argues that classical Arminian theology has a rightful place in the evangelical church because it maintains deep roots within Reformational theology, even though it maintains important differences from Calvinism.

Myths addressed include:
Myth 1: Arminian Theology Is the Opposite of Calvinist/Reformed Theology
Myth 2: A Hybrid of Calvinism and Arminianism Is Possible
Myth 3: Arminianism Is Not an Orthodox Evangelical Option
Myth 4: The Heart of Arminianism Is Belief in Free Will
Myth 5: Arminian Theology Denies the Sovereignty of God
Myth 6: Arminianism Is a Human-Centered Theology
Myth 7: Arminianism Is Not a Theology of Grace
Myth 8: Arminians Do Not Believe in Predestination
Myth 9: Arminian Theology Denies Justification by Grace Alone Through Faith Alone
Myth 10: All Arminians Believe in the Governmental Theory of the Atonement

Editorial Reviews

Review

"Roger Olson recaptures Arminianism's original focus: pointing us to God's goodness rather than man's 'freed will.' This refreshing reappraisal should pave the way for better synergy between Reformed evangelicals and classical Arminians." (David Neff, editor, Christianity Today)

"Although many of the personal and institutional animosities that used to mark relations between Calvinists and Arminians have become muted in recent years, the differences are still with us. The issues are alive because they concern matters of central importance to Christian faith. In this book Roger Olson gently and firmly corrects misunderstandings of Arminian theology that are often held by Calvinists--and Arminians! His deft expositions of the historical texts offer a significant contribution to the health of theological reflection and relationships. At the same time he demonstrates how to be irenic without adopting an empty tolerance that makes doctrine irrelevant to the church's life and mission." (Jonathan R. Wilson, Pioneer McDonald Professor of Theology, Carey Theological College)

"In this blockbuster of a book Roger Olson demonstrates that Arminian theology is faithfully Christian, faithfully Protestant and faithfully evangelical. He introduces his readers to a large world which many will never before have entered, the world of Arminian and Wesleyan theology, and even those familiar with this world will become more informed about it. In his contents page alone he provides more clarity on the contested issues in the Calvinism/Arminianism debate than many books on the subject. He methodically subverts many of the arguments that Calvinists routinely use against Arminian theology. This is Christian polemical theology at its best: massively informed, carefully and passionately argued, and friendly and courteous to the opposition. I recommend Arminian Theology enthusiastically, and I predict that, if it is read with the attentiveness it deserves, it will ratchet up the level of the American conversation on these issues." (Fisher Humphreys, Beeson Divinity School, Samford University)

"Roger Olson has done the church a great service with this clear explanation of the key tenets of the evangelical Arminianism taught by Arminius, Wesley, Wiley and others. His effort to correct common misperceptions is highly readable but well supported by thorough scholarly research. Calvinists should welcome this book for at least two reasons. First, it will help us not to misrepresent Arminianism and will thus enable both genuine dialogue and valid critique. Second, we can earnestly hope that Olson will succeed in converting to classic evangelical Arminianism the large number of evangelicals whom he recognizes to be semi-Pelagian rather than Arminian." (Terrance Tiessen, Professor Emeritus of Systematic Theology and Ethics, Providence Theological Seminary)

"Demonstrating that the recent offerings in the field of evangelical/Arminian scholarship constitute not a fad but a trend, Roger Olson has written a carefully researched work that aptly portrays Arminian theology at its best. Clearing away many of the stereotypes and half-truths that have remained much too long, Olson not only cogently argues that Arminian theology is nothing less than evangelical theology, but he also calls for Calvinists and Arminians to cooperate with one another in mutual recognition and respect under the broad tent of evangelicalism and for the larger good of the gospel. I heartily agree." (Kenneth J. Collins, Ph.D., Professor of Historical Theology and Wesley Studies, Asbury Theological Seminary, and author of The Evangelical Moment: The Promise of an American Religion)

"Roger Olson's new book, Arminian Theology, provides the definitive defense of Arminian theology to date. This winsome and well-crafted work dispels chapter by chapter the ten major misconceptions or myths about Arminian theology perpetuated by foes and friends alike. While intended for a wide and general readership, this well-researched and documented text is really a profound essay in historical theology in which Olson gives voice to leading Arminian theologians past and present, allowing them to speak for themselves and define what Arminianism really stands for. Thus, not an exercise in defense, Arminian Theology is the most lucid and effective book-length restatement of true Arminianism in print today. Olson's gracious and irenic spirit shines through the text even while his scholarly documentation of point after point shreds the many misperceptions of Arminian theology so prevalent today. This is a must-read book for educated laypersons, pastors, and scholars interested in, and concerned about, the current and historic debates between Calvinists and Arminians. Arminian Theology certainly raises the theological bar against those who want to theologically discredit Arminianism and relegate it to the backwaters of history and the life of the church." (Rev. Dr. Elmer M. Colyer, Professor of Historical Theology, Stanley Professor of Wesley Studies, University of Dubuque Theological Seminary)

From the Publisher

Features & Benefits

* Written by a respected and accomplished Arminian theologian

* Benefits those wanting clarity about classical Arminian theology, whether they are detractors, promoters or trying to make up their own minds

* As readable as Olson's Story of Christian Theology and Mosaic of Christian Belief

* A major voice to be heard in the middle of the current controversy between Calvinists and Arminians

See all Editorial Reviews

Product Details

• Hardcover: 250 pages
• Publisher: IVP Academic (September 22, 2006)
• Language: English
• ISBN-10: 0830828419
• ISBN-13: 978-0830828418
• Product Dimensions: 6.3 x 1 x 9.3 inches
• Shipping Weight: 1.2 pounds (View shipping rates and policies)
• Average Customer Review: 4.4 out of 5 stars  See all reviews (38 customer reviews)
• Amazon Best Sellers Rank: #98,265 in Books (See Top 100 in Books)
  • #9 in Books > Christian Books & Bibles > Other Denominations & Sects

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

102 of 102 people found the following review helpful

5.0 out of 5 stars 5 Stars and I'm a Calvinist... April 7, 2007

By Seth McBee

Format:Hardcover|Amazon Verified Purchase

I didn't know what to expect when I picked up this book. I actually tried to stay away from reading any reviews beforehand so that I could give it a good, honest, unbiased opinion as I read through it. I will tell you this, I think Roger Olson is very fair and very honest about the Arminian theological system. I was expecting to get attacked as a Calvinist, but I truly found just the opposite. I have seen reviews since I started the book that call out Dr. Olson as being angry and hateful, but I found just the opposite. I expected to be "railed against" but really just found an honest dissertation of some of the myths of the Arminian theology.

What I did find was that the crux of the difference between the two theologies really lies in the manner in which God chooses men to be saved. The Calvinist states that we as dirty, sinful, godless humans should be grateful to see that God is gracious to choose any to go to heaven, instead of allowing us all to go to hell. Arminians, on the other hand, believe that God is so loving that He would choose everyone to heaven if He could, but He leaves the choice in salvation to the libertarian free will of man through prevenient grace.

The Calvinist cannot see God ever giving up any of His sovereignty, even in the choice of who goes to heaven and who goes to hell. The Arminian cannot see God, being loving, to ever control humans in their choices, or this results in God being the author and creator of sin. This chasm, as Dr. Olson plainly states, will never be brought together between the two sides. Which I completely agree.

The one place that I saw Dr. Olson arguing for over and over in the book is that Arminianism is not Semi-Pelagian because it is not that good was left in man after the fall, but that God, in His grace gave all men prevenient grace. Here is my issue with this argument. Did not God allow the good to be humans before the fall? So, whether you believe that a little good was left over (Semi-Pelagian) or that God, after the fall, gave all men prevenient grace (Arminianism), which is also good, how is this different? It's just a matter of timing, in my opinion. Dr. Olson also goes into a little dissertation on Open Theism where he does not really try and disprove, but says simply that some Arminians are going "that way" and some are undecided. This is where Arminianism gets real dangerous, in my opinion.

I did enjoy the book and Dr. Olson's thoroughness in it. Do not expect the book to be one that tries to "convince" you of the Arminian position, for this was not the intent (this is also the reason why there was very little biblical references). The intent was to clear up some misconceptions of Arminian theology. Which for me, it did the job that Dr. Olson was trying to do, but that does not mean that I agree with him. I would recommend this book to anyone and everyone looking for an honest assessment of Arminianism.

I also appreciate Dr. Olson's heart in wanting the two sides to be able to serve with one another and to proclaim the gospel together. I found this a place where a lot of my Calvinist friends could learn from.

49 of 51 people found the following review helpful

5.0 out of 5 stars A Widely-Appreciated Contemporary Statement of Classical Arminian Theology March 13, 2007

By Cameron B. Clark VINE™ VOICE

Format:Hardcover|Amazon Verified Purchase

I am deeply grateful for Olson's book. It helped me clarify my own position in relation to Arminianism and Calvinism and provided resources for further study. Although I'm not an Arminian, I definitely share the heart of Arminian theology which embraces and defends God's loving and just character. In company with them, I reject Calvinism because I think it logically leads to the unconditional divine damnation of some which impugns God's character. Olson considers himself a "classical Arminian," a follower of the teachings of Protestant theologian Jacob (or James) Arminius (1560 - 1609). The term "Arminianism" derives from his name and theology. However, as Olson points out, there are many who use that term that do not have a clear understanding of Arminius' theology. This is true not only of many who claim to oppose it but also of many who claim to support it. There are also, according to Olson, theologians such as Henry Thiessen and Thomas Oden who embrace and teach Arminian theology although they don't consider themselves Arminians.

One reason Arminianism is misunderstood is the failure to distinguish between what Olson calls "Arminianism of the heart" and "Arminianism of the head". Both use the term, but the former is considered true, classical Arminianism in terms of Reformed, conservative theology. The latter, on the other hand, incorporates some naturalistic, liberal theology that's influenced by Enlightenment rationalism and has more in common with the older, rejected theologies of Pelagianism and semi-Pelagianism. The term "Pelagianism" is derived from the theology of Pelagius (c. 354 - c. 420/440), an ascetic monk who affirmed human freedom but denied original sin, an inherited sinful nature from Adam. Semi-Pelagians don't deny original sin as Pelagians do, but they generally define it in such a way that denies the bondage of the will (integral to the doctrine of total depravity) to allow for a natural human freedom to obey God. According to Olson, semi-Pelagianism was a theology condemned by the Second Council of Orange in A.D. 529 because "it affirmed human ability to exercise a good will toward God apart from special assistance of divine grace; it places the initiative in salvation on the human side, but Scripture places it on the divine side" (pg. 81). Olson reveals that unlike semi-Pelagianism, classical Arminianism embraces the doctrine of total depravity (including the bondage of the will). However, it is mitigated by God's supernatural prevenient grace and, therefore, includes the doctrine of the "freed will," a will that is libertarian in nature (i.e., it is free to resist God).

Philip Limborch (1633 - 1712) is used by Olson as an early, prime example of a defector of classical Arminianism, one who embraced a type of semi-Pelagianism while associating himself with the Arminians. Charles Finney (1792 - 1875), the influential revivalist-theologian, is also given as an example of "a vulgarized version of Arminianism that is closer to semi-Pelagianism" (pg. 27). Classical Arminianism is often erroneously associated with Pelagianism or semi-Pelagianism by opponents, usually Calvinists (those who embrace, in some form, the theology of John Calvin [1509 - 1564]). This is one reason why many Christians don't want to wear the Arminian label. Olson wrote his book as an attempt to define the orthodox parameters of true Arminianism to distinguish it from the counterfeits while also allowing for variety among Arminians within those parameters. He deserves respect for the effort.

Although Olson provided clarity on some issues, his book raises questions regarding others. One issue involves the Arminian idea of two types of redemption through Christ's atonement: "one universal for all people and one especially for all who believe" (pg. 33). According to Olson, "Arminians believe that Christ's death on the cross provided a universal remedy for the guilt of inherited sin so that it is not imputed to infants for Christ's sake." Therefore, "all children who die before reaching the age of awakening of conscience and falling into actual sin (as opposed to inbred sin) are considered innocent by God and are taken to paradise." How does this doctrine of universal redemption from the guilt of original/inherited sin which results in infant salvation relate to the doctrines of divine election and grace? Olson does not clearly answer this. Arminians are adamant about their rejection of the Calvinistic doctrines of the unconditional election of some and irresistible grace, yet here appears to be a case of both unconditional election and irresistible grace for infants, especially those who die. This is also a clear case of inclusivism where a volitional faith in Christ is unnecessary for salvation. Some Christians try to get around this by either denying that all infants are elect or affirming a post-mortem opportunity to have the requisite faith that conditions election (or, more precisely, predestination).

Another questionable issue involves the doctrine of sin. The Arminian doctrine of two types of redemption through Christ's atonement is based on a distinction between two types of sin: original sin and actual sin. Universal redemption via prevenient grace covers the first whereas particular redemption through a volitional act of faith, which God foreknows and conditions the individual's destiny on, covers the second. As a non-Calvinist, I share the classical Arminian belief that God is not the author of sin and evil. However, this belief requires a lucid doctrine of sin that Olson failed to provide. To teach, as some Arminians do, that "actual sin is always an expression of original sin" (pg. 58) fails to provide the lucidity we need in terms of moral freedom and responsibility. Some actual sins are caused by moral freedom of the libertarian type, not original sin. They are avoidable, and that is why we are obligated not to commit them and guilty if we do. Clarity on this issue is crucial to understanding how anybody is damned, including those who have never known the gospel, when it is God's desire that they be saved. Clarity regarding sin is also critical for Arminians in their defense against the idea that God unconditionally damns some to hell for sin they could not avoid. It is also crucial for those Arminians who believe that salvation can be forfeited. According to Olson, "Arminius himself never settled the matter" on this issue (pg. 187). However, even among those who believe in "once saved always saved," there is disagreement regarding the nature of sin in a believer's life and how to determine whether one is a true Christian. Living a life of holiness, as well as having assurance of salvation, requires clarity on the doctrine of sin!

Olson states in his introduction that his book is not so much a defense of Arminian theology as a true statement of it. It is intended to address ten common misconceptions or "myths" about Arminianism, not provide in-depth biblical exegesis to support it. The book is also not a polemic against Calvinism, its primary historical opponent, although it does provide reasons why Arminians are not Calvinists. I repeat again that I am grateful for Olson's book. It is one of the most important books in my library! Like Olson, I was raised in a Pentecostal environment where Arminianism to some degree was assumed. However, it was through asking serious questions about certain issues like the ones I've raised in this review that I came to realize that many who call themselves Arminians don't have satisfying answers to them. May continued dialog bring them to the fore and may quality Arminian and Arminian-influenced books continue to be written.

40 of 43 people found the following review helpful

5.0 out of 5 stars Great Overview of Arminian Theology January 9, 2007

By Dr. Marc Axelrod VINE™ VOICE

Format:Hardcover|Amazon Verified Purchase

I needed this book. Roger Olson does a great job at dismantling 10 myths about Arminianism. He shows that Jacob Arminius has always held to the doctrines of total depravity and the conditional predestination of the believer. He also shows that Arminius himself and many others (including John Wesley) rejected the Moral Government view of the atonement of Christ. He also explains that even though Calvinism and Arminianism are both comfortably within the evangelical camp, there cannot be a hybrid of the two (Calminianism).

Olson contends that the heart of Arminianism is not the free will of man, but the goodness and grace of God. Contrary to some, he shows that Arminians have historically held (and still do hold) that believers are justified by grace through faith in Christ alone. He goes on to say that faith is instrumental to accessing the free gift of salvation, but that it is not the grounds of salvation (the ground of salvation is the blood of Christ).

Occasionally, Olson gets irritated with his contentious Calvinist critics. But he does a good job at working toward a rapprochement between the two camps. He concludes with a stirring appeal to fairness and love on both sides of the evangelical aisle. Way to go, Roger Olson!