Why I Am Not an Arminian

Good read. Makes you think. Does it really matter? As long as eternity with G-d is where I am going, it really does not matter what you think.

This author is a good communicator and explains Calvinist doctrine better than most. He convinced me of the validity of Limited Atonement, for example, one I'd wrestled with for years. Recommended.

In "Why I am Not an Arminian", Robert Peterson and Michael Williams present a tough critique of Arminian doctrine and a solid defense of Calvinist theology. Unlike so many other writings on this divisive topic, this work is irenic and good-natured. They make clear near the outset that Arminians are brothers and sisters in Christ. While clearly stating their view that Arminian theology makes serious doctrinal errors on important theological points, they wisely refrain from making the overblown charge of heresy. In the introduction, they write, "You see, calling someone a heretic is serious business. Heresy is not merely doctrinal error; it is damnable error. The heretic so mangles the gospel of Jesus Christ that it no longer communicates the grace of God in Jesus Christ. Heresy is such a corruption of the grace of God in Christ that it invalidates either Jesus as he Savior or grace as the way of salvation. The Arminian tradition does neither. The Arminian Christian believes that Jesus Christ is God come in the flesh to save sinners and that the saving work of Christ comes to the sinner by way of the grace of God received through faith. Whatever issues relevant to salvation we disagree upon, let us agree on this: the Calvinist and the Arminian are brothers in Christ." [13] The authors are wise to understand the distinction between heresy and incorrect doctrine, and they should be commended for recognizing, in no uncertain terms, that Arminian theology is within orthodoxy. Despite their charitable attitude towards their ideological counterparts, Peterson and Williams pull no punches in their critique of the Arminian tradition. They begin their work with a brief history of the debate between Augustine and Pelagius. Both of these thinkers endorsed monergism- which is the view that only one agent acts authoritatively in salvation. While Augustine defended divine monergism, with God being the sole actor in salvation, Pelagius defended human monergism (note: there is some debate about this point. Pelagius's works are only available in bits via critiques from other writers like Augustine, who is not known for being charitable when quoting opponents. Nevertheless, Pelagius certainly focused much more attention on human effort in salvation than did Augustine). Pelagius was condemned in 417. Soon after, the so-called Semi-Pelagians John Cassian and Vicent of Lerins defended the view that human nature is weakened but not disabled by sin. However, the first step towards God is taken by man, though grace is still needed if salvation is to be attained. This view defends synergism, the view that there are two actors in salvation- both God and man- working together. This discussion is important not only because it sets up the historical context of this debate, but also because it reveals a fundamentally unfair charge made by many anti-Arminians that Arminian theology is Pelagian or Semi-Pelagian. As a matter of fact, Arminian theology affirms that sin has so c

You also need to purchase Why I Am Not a Calvinist. Both books provide a balanced view on the subject, we used both books as text books for a Bible study class.

I have had classes with both of these fins scholars, and really enjoyed the experience. I thought this defense of their theological standpoint was very good. At central issue to the Reform belief system is that there is a tension between human responsibility and divine sovreignty. These two gentlemen are well-equipped to argue this point. I found their exposition of the main points of their theological stance to be straightforward and solid. Interestingly, rumor has it the autthors did not want to title this book in the negative, but rather "Why I am a Calvinist." they were persuaded by the publishers to use the more combatative title. Both men exude grace in their own lives, and it came out in their writing.