Customer Reviews

No Place for Sovereignty: What's Wrong with Freewill Theism

5 star:		(9)
4 star:		(2)
3 star:		(2)
2 star:		(1)
1 star:		(0)

 

 

Dr. Wright and I were friends when we both lived in Denver, Colorado. We have both since moved to different states, although I have maintained some sporadic contact with him.

No Place for Sovereignty is Dr. Wright's first book. And it is sure to be controversial! Dr. Wright takes head-on the Arminian notion of human "freewill."

In the very helpful Glossary at the end of the book, "Freewill theory" is defined as "View that the human will is free to act independently of divine control or external causation. Arminians usually define it as the ability to choose good or evil equally. Hence, `the liberty of indifference'" (p.236).

But is this concept true? Or more to the point for Christians, is it Biblical? Most Christians just assume that it is. But Dr. Wright demonstrates that this idea has more in common with Greek notions of autonomy than the Bible.

The book is divided into eleven chapters. Chapter One begins with a quick historical overview of the freewill controversy, from the time of the Apostolic Fathers to the present.

Dr. Wright then lists five reasons people believe in the freewill theory: 1. If we have no free will, we are not responsible for our actions. 2. It is essential to the image of God. 3. The denial of free will undermines both human effort and morality. 4. The Bible teaches free will. 5. Free will gets God off the hook in the problem of evil (pp.40,41).

Subsequent chapters then show that each of these claims is faulty, both logically and Biblically. In regards to the first claim, Chapter Two shows that a will "free" in the Arminian sense would not be responsible as it would be no different than chance. Responsibility is based on what God decides, not on what we decide.

As for the imago Dei, Chapter Three presents a study of passages in the Bible in which it is discussed. Dr. Wright concludes, "Throughout all the biblical references to the image of God, its loss in the Fall and its restoration in Christ, not a hint appears that the image necessarily includes anything recognizable as free will. The Bible simply does not use the idea of free will as an explanatory category at all" (p.76).

Chapter Four looks at Genesis chapter three and the Fall. It focuses on Eve's conversation with Satan and shows it was her desire to be autonomous from God that lead to her disobedience. Some consequences of the Fall are then noted.

As for human effort and morality, Dr. Wright states, "... freewill theory destroys any hope of relating human action to God's sovereignty and makes human action purely a chance affair" (p.40). These ideas are elaborated on in Chapter Five.

As for whether freewill theory is Biblical, Dr. Wright correctly notes that if any of the Five Points of Calvinism are true, then there can be no freewill in the Arminian sense. Chapters Six to Eight are then devoted to Biblical proofs of the Five Points of Calvinism.

Then Chapter Nine addresses the question, "Are there any `Arminian verses' in the Bible?" The chapter soundly exegetes supposedly Arminian verses and demonstrates that they simply do not teach what Arminians "assume" that they do.

Chapter Ten discusses the problem of evil. This question is often considered a "stronghold" for Arminians and unbelievers alike. The chapter first demonstrates that an appeal to freewill does not "solve" the problem but actually makes matters worse.

Dr. Wright then states very bluntly:

"Let it be stated plainly here that the problem of evil can be solved in a straightforward manner by proposing that if God decides to predestine or decree any particular evils for any purpose he may intend, who are we to answer back to God (Rom 9:19-24)? However galling it may seem to the fleshly mind, God is the final reference point for what counts as the good, not me, the sinner. If there ever was a practical application of Jesus' prayer "not my will but yours be done" (Lk 22:42), this would be it. The good is good because God determines it as such, not because it conforms to my irrelevant innate conception of how things ought to be. It is wholly besides the point that I might personally prefer things to be otherwise" (p.197).

Chapter Eleven demonstrates that a belief in human freewill can easily lead to a denial of essential attributes of God. As an example, the chapter chronicles Clark Pinnock's descent from a conservative Christian viewpoint of the attributes of God into finite godism.

This book covers a lot of ground and can be difficult reading at times, especially for those not familiar with the subject. But overall, it does a very effective job of refuting the commonly held notion of freewill, along with Arminianism in general.

I heartily recommend No Place for Sovereignty. And for further study on Calvinism, you can consult the three chapters on this subject in my book, "Scripture Workbook: For Personal Bible Study and Teaching the Bible." These chapters include hundreds of verses supporting the Calvinist viewpoint while refuting proposed arguments against it.

I truly enjoyed reading Wright's book as it is well written and full of great information. I enjoyed Wright's careful and meticulous analysis as well as his passion and forthright language. My only concern is in his insistence upon logical continuity. I am not one to deny the pursuit of logical continuity, but I question whether we should lift logical continuity to a position over the plain interpretation of Scripture.

It wasn't until I accepted the plain interpretation of Scripture that I was willing to abandon many of the Arminian assumptions I used to cling to. As I read Romans 9, I could not accept the "explaining away" that the Arminian argument tended to do. I found the Arminian position to shrink from the authority of the revealed word of God. In order to abandon my assumptions of free will, I had to be willing to abandom my views of who God should be. Fortunately, Isaiah supports the notion that we cannnot tell God who He should be: "His ways are not our ways."

However, Wright criticizes those who believe both in the Sovereignty of God and free will because of their logical inconsistence. Wright calls such believers "inconsistent Calvinists" as if Calvinism is some cherished virtue. What bothers me even further is in Wright's interpretation of the verses which Arminians usually hold as their defense. He insists that there are no Arminian verses, which is fine, but goes on to explain these verses under the light of Calvinist assumptions, ignoring, once again, the plain interpretation of the text. This is what I was trying to avoid. I think we have to ask ourselves what our epistemological assumptions are. If the Bible is our source of truth and knowledge, then we should not be quick to sweep away the plain interpretation of texts even if they seem to contradict our views of other texts.

Let us look for the plain interpretation of the text, and if the plain interpretation is outright antithetical to itself, then let us find reasons to understand the scripture in other ways. However, we must be very careful about denying the plain interpretation of the text. In my view, "consistent calvinism" is not a good reason for reinterpreting Scripture. Is logic sovereign or is God? I would rather be consistently biblical than consistently Calvinist.

After reading Clark Pinnock's "The Grace of God and the Will of Man" and David Bassinger's "The Case for Freewill Theism", it was a pleasure to read Wright's "No Place for Sovereignty". His is a scholarly, biblicly-based critism of the danger involved in promoting "freewill theism" or "salvation by choice". These ideas are being promoted in evangelical circles by people who despise God's authority and who want to be free from God's control. Wright names several of these influential teachers and with sound reason and text-based critism correctly places them outside of the true gospel of Christ. I hope that Wright's book subtitled "What's Wrong with Freewill Thesim" will be widely read and debated.

Wright's book shines as a book that is both thought out and based squarely on Scripture, and for that he deserves to be commended. He states accurately that evangelical Christianity is too quick to accept contradictions where none is needed and explain them away as mystery simply to hold extrabiblical presuppositions.

I must respectfully disagree with the previous review of this book (johniii) and say that Wright's insistance on logical continuity is reasonable. Wright is not against the plain interpretation of Scripture, but what he is saying is that Scripture is not going to logically contradict itself, and if you have a presupposition (e.g. free will) that, when taken to its logical conclusion, contradicts Scripture, then the presupposition must be wrong (because Scripture is certainly right). He may overemphasize logical continuity to an extent, but I would give him a little room there considering that most evangelical Christians ignore the concept completely and that problem is far worse.

Wright makes every effort to ensure that his thesis is Scriptural (and I believe it is) and to back it up with all means that are appropriate. His book, although not a good starting point for those interested in predestination or free will (as it IS very technical and scholarly in nature), is a must-read for those who have already delved into the subject.

There are both some strong points and weak points to this book. The author excels in reviewing the historic origins of libertarian free. His historic and philosophical overviews are very informative and helpful. Yet, his review of biblical Calvinistic position is lacking and incomplete. He fails to mention some essential points in presenting the 5 points of Calvinism and is not written in a very understandable style. Overall, the author's writing is somewhat choppy and lacking cohesiveness. The last chapter seems out of place and rushed, not giving clear explanations of the issues raised. It appears as if the author was attempting to fit another book into one chapter. If a reader desires a good historic overview of the Armenian/Calvinism debate, this book is a good choice. If the reader is looking for a well written presentation and defense of the 5 points of Calvinism, I recommend "The Reformed Doctrine of Predestination" by Loraine Boettner.

This book was written to acquaint the doctrinally-concerned christian with a biblical, philosophical and historical defense of the Calvinist view of salvation, to show how Arminianism depends on an incoherent and unbiblical "freewill theory," and how belief in a libertarian view of free will inevitably leads to a finite God. A reviewer in Christian Scholars' Review said that it was a good clear explanation accessible to any intelligent reader. He also noted that it failed to take into account recent philosophical discussion of "compatibilist" views of free will with divine sovereignty. This is because 1) the author was not primarily addressing professional philosophers, but rather those believers with no special philosophical training, 2) he does not believe most of these theories, except those that redefine "free will" to make it compatible with the Bible's sovereignty teaching, and 3) there is no point trying to reconcile logical contradictions; it's better to abandon one side to avoid irrationalism. The book offers usable arguments from the Bible against Arminianism, and tries to show that no Christian apologetic can succeed that is based on an unquestioned acceptance of the assumption of human autonomy. Historically, Arminianism is really only a form of humanism.

I thoroughly enjoyed this exciting book and keep it on my shelf for reference. While there are many great classics on the Reformed view of scripture, this book explores the issues from a more contemporary and philosophical perspective. But the sections offering scriptural proof were excellent as well as the critiques of the so called "Arminian passages." There were also some wonderful eye openers such as the brief history of the persecution of Church Fathers who held to predestination prior to the time of Augustine and Calvin.

The doctrines of grace are received by the Spirit and we cannot necessarily expect people to be convinced through argument or logic. But a disregard for logic can shipwreck faith and weaken Biblical conviction. I know this from personal experience and I am convinced that the current movement away from sound reasoning in Scripture has diluted the faith of many. For those of us who have been given this view of scripture, Wright's book offers renewal and refreshment and growth. I highly recommended it to anyone serious about Biblical truth.

Published in 1996: Eight years later, this is still the best book on the subject, and will continue to be for a very long time.

This book is excellent. Regarding the final two chapters, that some find out of place and rushed, I have to disagree: it is the only place in the literature where I found a meaningful and reasonable explanation of the questions of evil and ultimacy, which are the essential issues where the debate ends up every time.

Of course, anyone opposed to the concept of being under God's sovereignty will find this book abhorrent.

McGregor Wright's text is a no-nonsense approach. Perhaps this is the best place to start if one is truly seeking a thorough refutation of all things Arminian. Highly recommended. Sell your coat if you have to, to buy this book!

I read this book a number of years ago during the "formative" years of my theological understanding. This book helped to strengthen and solidify my views in favor of a reformed anthropology. I have read several other books on this same topic sense that time but I still believe that this is one of the best if not the best I've read (especially among contemporary treatments of this topic). Sure it is technical and challenging throughout, but for the patient reader who is willing to put in the time and effort required to mine the rich gold found here, it will be well worth your endeavor. It is biblically founded and philosophically sophisticated and sound.