Along with Peterson and Williams (_Why I am Not an Arminian_), Walls and Dongell write with an irenic style as they engage perhaps the most controversial theological issue to face the Christian Church: Arminianism versus Calvinism. And they are to be commended for their equanimity. Of course, the controversy extends beyond the walls of the Church. Free will and determinism are volatile subjects within many different disciplines across academia, even in Geography! In this set of books published by InterVarsity Press, however, the discussion is delimited to Christian Theology.
Walls and Dongell do a good job of representing the beliefs of their opposition: That of Calvinism. They quote Calvinist sources frequently and not only that, the references are of the mainstream variety (e.g. Drs. R.C. Sproul Sr., D.A. Carson, Paul Helm, John Feinberg, etc.), which tends toward the minimization of straw-man argumentation and caricature. Their use of _The Westminster Confession of Faith_ and John Calvin's _Institutes of the Christian Religion_ is even-handed as well.
By their own admission, Walls' and Dongell's thesis is as follows: "In a nutshell, our case against Calvinism is that it doesn't do justice to the character of God revealed in Scripture." (2004, p. 220) On the final page of their book, they say, "Our reasons [for not being Calvinists] are not merely biographical or personal, but rather they are theological, philosophical and most of all biblical." (2004, p. 221)
This second statement creates a problem for me, particularly where Walls and Dongell mention biblical reasons as the greatest impediment to their acceptance of Calvinism. The reason being that their book is minimally exegetical. Yes, there is a chapter called "Engaging the Bible," where Walls and Dongell present biblical texts that are favourable to the Arminian position, and where they engage passages that are Calvinist strongholds, such as John 6, Romans 8-9, and Ephesians 1. However, when you read the book as a whole, or even just peruse the table of contents for that matter, it becomes clear that Walls and Dongell spend a great deal of time - I would say the majority of their time - attempting to demonstrate the philosophical inconsistency of the Calvinist position. I would hazard a guess that Walls, a professor of philosophy of religion, wrote a great deal of this book himself.
Not that there is anything wrong with scrutinizing a theological position by the standard of the laws of logic and such. As Walls and Dongell state, to ignore the consistency of a theological position is simply to posture piety and no more (cf. p. 155). That said, I believe Walls and Dongell are being overly gratuitous when they claim biblical reasons as the greatest impediment to their acceptance of Calvinism. Simply put, as good as their book is, its claim to fame will not be the biblical exegesis contained therein.
On a more positive note, Walls and Dongell really offer a wake-up call to Calvinists. For example, they point out weaknesses and inconsistencies in the argumentation employed by such Calvinistic greats as Packer, Sproul Sr., Carson, and Piper. Sproul Sr., for instance, is shown to waffle back and forth between a compatibilist and libertarian view of human freedom as it suits his fancy, though in all fairness to Sproul Sr., he has probably done so inadvertently.
Also, Walls and Dongell clearly point out where the great divide exists between Arminians and Calvinists. An uninformed Calvinist may think his or her position differs from that of the Arminian because he or she affirms God's sovereignty over everything whereas his or her opponent does not. But this is not the case. The issue is not whether God is in control of everything - this is not distinctive to Calvinism but fundamental to Christian Theology in general - but how it works out in the details. As Walls and Dongell echo on more than one occasion, God is in control of everything "in some sense."
One of the strengths of Walls' and Dongell's book is the clarity with which they explain philosophical concepts and positions such as "hard" determinism, "soft" determinism (compatibilism), libertarian freedom, Molinism, the Openness view of God's sovereignty, contradiction, paradox, mystery, etc. This emphasis, however, may not go over well with readers who may be looking for a more biblically-backed defence of Arminianism and who have little or no interest in philosophy.
Though admittedly _Why I am Not a Calvinist_ should be more of an offensive, than defensive, book as indicated by the title alone, Walls and Dongell could have been perhaps more convincing if they had of offered a more "positive" presentation of Arminianism, not just an exposé of Calvinism's weaknesses. For example, Walls and Dongell feel that Calvinism, at the level of practical theology, is incapable of meeting the needs of a person wrestling with assurance of salvation due to the fact that it is difficult for the Calvinist to assure a person in that position that God loves him or her. However, the reader is not even introduced to the problem relating to assurance of salvation that is inherent in the Arminian schema, which is due to its denial of eternal security.
Overall, I enjoyed _Why I am Not a Calvinist_. But I would use discernment when recommending the book. If someone were looking for a book that offers primarily an exegetical challenge to Calvinism, then I would not recommend Walls and Dongell. However, if someone were looking for a philosophical critique of Calvinism, I would not hesitate to put this work forward.
Regardless of one's stance on the issue of Arminianism and Calvinism, it is refreshing to see two opposing sides engaging one another in a way that is consistent with Christian Theology regarding how fellow believers are to interact with one another in intramural matters.