|
Arminian Theology: Myths And Realities | 
 enlarge | Author: Roger E. Olson
Publisher: InterVarsity Press
Category: Book
List Price: $25.00
Buy New: $16.50
You Save: $8.50 (34%)
New (24) Used (9) from $15.88
Rating:  22 reviews
Sales Rank: 61763
Media: Hardcover
Number Of Items: 1
Pages: 250
Shipping Weight (lbs): 1.2
Dimensions (in): 9.1 x 6.1 x 1.1
ISBN: 0830828419
Dewey Decimal Number: 230.49
EAN: 9780830828418
ASIN: 0830828419
Publication Date: October 30, 2006
Shipping: Eligible for Super Saver Shipping
Availability: Usually ships in 24 hours
|
| Also Available In:
|
| Similar Items:
|
| Editorial Reviews:
Product Description
About the Book 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. This is a book for those who want to know or should know what Arminian theology is.
|
| Customer Reviews: Read 17 more reviews...
 Barely Christian? Sub-Christians? Arminian theology... November 20, 2008
1 out of 1 found this review helpful
This is an attempt by one not enamored by Calvinism to explain and defend his own essentially Arminian understanding of divine things from the calumny of aggressive, intolerant, and poorly informed Calvinists who either hint or assert that Olson and those who share anything like his version of conservative Protestantism are not genuine Christians.
He does this by describing ten myths about Arminian beliefs, devoting a chapter to each. He describes the impact on his own thinking when Clark Pinnock, who was one of his "theological mentors from a distance . . . very publicly switched from Calvinist theology to Arminianism" (p. 8).
Olson describes in several places in this book the problem of Arminians having to hide their faith "in order to avoid conflict and suspicion that might hinder their careers in teaching and publishing" (p. 9).
Olson concludes his argument by insisting that "evangelicalism is a multidenominational and transdemoninational movement; it has no headquarters and no firm boundaries" (p. 245). He insists that both Calvinists of various stripes and Arminians need to keep in mind the things they share, especially "when they are in contexts where neither Calvinism nor Arminianism is the norm (as in the National Association of Evangelicals [NAE] and similar organizations)" (p. 245).
Most readers will undoubtedly find themselves sympathetic when they sense that Olson and others who are Arminian in their theology are deeply offended when they are treated as "barely Christian" or as "sub-Christians" merely because they hold views that do not entirely square with some version of Calvinism.
An Essential Reading for Those Interested in this Debate November 11, 2008
1 out of 1 found this review helpful
This book discusses ten myths that are commonly held about Arminians, especially by its critics but oftentimes even by its advocates. Olson, though not systematically arguing for or defending the Arminian viewpoint, simply purposes to reveal the fundamental nature of the theology over and against the prevalent myths.
The `Arminianism versus Calvinism' debate can be very passionate, and the risks for misrepresentation of the opposing view are high, even amongst academics. Arminian theology receives many harsh criticisms, often stemming from mistaken notions about what that theology entails. For example, it is often labeled as `man-centered,' moreover, it is sometimes claimed to diminish God's sovereignty, eliminate justification by faith, minimize or eliminate the role of grace in salvation, and to deny the Biblical teaching of predestination. As a result, the theology is absolutely lambasted in some circles, considered outside the scope of evangelical Christianity, deemed `barely Christian,' and even denounced as heretical.
Thankfully, Olson's clear analysis reveals these to be total misunderstandings, often betraying and almost total ignorance of contemporary or classical Arminian theology. Olson clearly acknowledges that some within the Arminian tradition have often slipped into dangerous theological territory. Nevertheless, the theology of Arminius himself was free from these errors, and a majority of major Arminian thinkers (including John Wesley) have kept true to Arminius's heritage. As he points out, the fact that some individuals within the tradition have strayed away from evangelical thinking does not mean that the tradition itself should be jettisoned, just like hyper-Calvinists who take Calvinism too far should not discredit the theology of Calvinism altogether. Olson substantiates his arguments thoroughly, providing extensive quotations from Arminius and his followers to demonstrate that their theologies are certainly orthodox, within the evangelical tradition, and not fair targets for the types of criticisms mentioned above.
Perhaps the best part of the book was its emphasis on the character of God being the primary motivation for Arminian theology. Many critics see the theology as motivated by a desire to keep "sacred" the human free will, but Olson wisely points out that this is not the main point of affirming the reality of human free will. The primary motivation is to protect the character of God. Since God is not the author of evil, Arminians seek to place the blame for sin (including the Fall of Adam), evil, and unbelief in the hands of free human creatures. In fact, this reflects my intuitions as well. When I read Calvinistic theology, I find myself deeply troubled by the character of God implied by such a system, not repulsed at the idea that I might not have `free will' in the way I think I do. In fact, I would have no problem with Calvin's theology if everybody were in fact saved or if there were no horrendous moral evil in the world, but given the presence of these undesirable features of the universe, I find the temptation to endorse Arminian theology strong.
Olson's book did suffer from one major flaw when it came to discussing the nature of God's foreknowledge. The problem is this- how can God foreknow the future free actions of human agents if they are really free? It is difficult to see how He could possibly know these free decisions. Moreover, if He did know them, it would obliterate free will.
There are two major lines of thought to address this question. The first idea is Molinism, the view of Luis de Molina who argued that God knows, before He creates the world, what any possible free creature would freely choose to do in any possible circumstance (See, for an exposition and defense of this view, The Only Wise God). I find this solution to be very compelling because it also explains how God can exercise His providential control despite deciding to create free creatures. However, Olson brushes off this possibility rather quickly, offering a few brief criticisms that (in my opinion) are rather weak. He also dismisses the idea that Arminius embraced this model, which I find dubious.
The other line of thought is commonly termed open theism. According to this view, it is impossible to know the decisions of free creatures in the future because there are no such facts to be known. Since they haven't decided yet, there simply is no fact of the matter! Thus, God does not have complete foreknowledge of everything that will occur in the future. Olson does not adopt this model but seems much more sympathetic to it than he does to the Molinist account.
While I agree with Olson (against many others) that open theism is a genuine evangelical option, I am surprised that Olson is prepared to give it more credibility than the Molinist account. Open theism, by denying God full foreknowledge of the future, is a very radical position that is regarded by many as not only outside the realm of evangelical thinking- but outside the realm of classical (and perhaps even orthodox) Christianity! Given Olson's attempt to remain within classical evangelical thought, I am surprised by his soft treatment of this view. In my opinion, it presents at least as many problems as the Molinist account and may require a radical revision of our conception of God. Indeed, many critics of Arminianism blast the theology by contending that it ultimately leads to dangerous views like open theism!
Other than this regrettable flaw, Olson's book succeeds in its goal admirably. By overcoming myths and refuting unjust criticisms of Arminianism, Olson opens the door for irenic discussion of this often controversial topic. This book is therefore appropriate for individuals on both sides of the fence. "Arminian Theology" does not provide a systematic defense of Arminianism or a critique of Calvinism, but it should help to further the debate in the spirit of Christian charity.
Excellent well balanced book October 1, 2008
1 out of 1 found this review helpful
Dr Olsen has done an excellent job of presenting Arminianism in a balanced and non-hostile way. Everyone who has ever delved into the whole Calvinism versus Arminianism should read this book. It is fair to say, as Dr Olsen states, that most people who debate this issue do not fully understand Arminianism. There are many misinformed people who reject Arminian Theology without really understanding what they reject. A must read!
Not an easy read but a rewarding one September 2, 2008
0 out of 1 found this review helpful
This book seemed to answer most of my doubts about Arminian theology being a legitimate evangelical position. There really is a lot of misrepresentation about the theology, and after reading it I would definately have to say that really there shouldn't be anyone who doubts the orthodoxy and legitimacy of Arminianism as being truly protestant. There will be people who disagree with some of the books conclusions, but at the heart of it, Arminianism can stand proudly beside Calvinism as being an alternative protestant doctrine on election and predestination.
I'm not the sharpest tool in the shed, but I do try to expand my knowledge of Christianity and theology bit by bit. For this reason I sometimes found myself getting frustrated while reading, due to the fact that I couldn't understand some concepts when first read. Whether this is the book's fault or my own, well I'm not entirely sure. Overall though I think most readers should be able to get a handle on the concepts quite quickly, though it is not for those wanting a light read. It made me think hard!
Another great credit to the book's author, is his objectivity and ability to explain calvinism with respect, clarity and honesty. There are no harsh or degrading statements towards calvinism or it's supporters, but neither does he just let Calvinist writers get away with everything they say. While defending Arminianism, Olson also makes Calvinists think deeper about their own theology, which is good for all. In fact he explains calvinism so well, that I even learnt things that I didn't know before about the theology (such as Calvinists do believe in free will, but of course it's different to Arminian free will).
Lastly, the book itself is well made, and the front cover and picture are of high quality. So if you want a book which is objective, fair, enlightening and defends arminianism amazingly well; pick this book up. It may be challenging though.
An irenic model in a characteristically contentious debate July 14, 2008
1 out of 1 found this review helpful
Let me say at the beginning of this review that I am an unapologetic Calvinist. Olsen did not change my position, but he did correct and sharpen my understanding of Arminianism. I have believed and even promulgated some of the myths exposed in this book and for that chastisement alone I am grateful for his work.
More importantly, Roger Olson has done both sides in the Calvinism/Arminianism debate a favor in penning this work. He succinctly dispels the "myths" that have creped into the debate and history of Arminianism. The overriding disagreement according to Olsen is one that goes beyond the debate between predestination and free will--these are merely derived from the fundamental issue. The main area of dispute concerns whether the love or sovereignty of God should be the superseding principle in His dealings with humanity. The Arminian would stress the love of God and the Calvinist His sovereignty. (p. 73)
Olson gives the raison d'etre for the book in his introduction: The purpose of this book is simple and straightforward: to correctly delineate true Arminian theology and to begin to undo the damages that has been done to this theological heritage by both its critics and friends. (p. 43) He examines 10 myths that are commonly believed and cited by both proponents and Calvinists regarding Arminianism, (see the TOC on Amazon's preview and other reviews). Most of these myths, if not all, deal with areas relating to soteriology.
He notes that Jacob Arminus did not adhere to a lot of the views that are commonly understood today as Arminianism by both Arminians and Calvinists. For instance some Calvinists maintain that Arminians do not believe in total depravity. Olson defends the position that in fact Arminius and true Arminians do believe this doctrine. The key difference surrounds the notion of prevenient grace (i.e. all mankind is in a fallen state that cannot be penetrated unless God awakens the deadness). The proper concept of prevenient grace for the Arminian states that God awakens all to understand the gospel, then each person makes the choice whether to accept or reject the gospel presentation and embrace Christ. Without this awakening, all would be dammed. (Of course, the Calvinist would maintain that this awakening and calling is absolutely efficacious and limited to the elect.)
Each chapter is structured basically the same with a general introduction to the issue at hand followed by an examination of Arminus's comments which both clarify true Arminian doctrine and refute the myth at hand. Next he explores the historical evolution of Arminus's teaching, citing such church personalities from Wesley to current thought that both adhere to and digress from Arminius.
Olsen writes with the following overriding concern and one that should be echoed and modeled by all in this and other doctrinal disagreements and debates: "One principle that ought to be observed by all parties to this debate is before you disagree make sure you understand. In other words, we must make sure that we can describe another's theological position as he or she would describe it before we criticize or condemn. Another guiding principle should be do not impute to others beliefs you regard as logically entailed by their beliefs but that they explicitly deny." p. 41.
Only rarely does Olson deviate from his gracious and irenic discussions with his Calvinistic brothers. One such instance was his comments regarding the meaning of "all" in John 3:16; 2 Pet 3:9) and the Calvinistic interpretation of its meaning (p. 223) I will forgive him "for this momentary lapse of kindness." One other concern I did have was his passing remark in a footnote to his openness to "open theism" (p. 198, note 65) other than that I heartedly recommend this book to both camps in the debate for both a proper understanding of the issues at hand and a paradigm for future engagement.
|
|
|
|
Powered by CBN AssociateStore
| |
