If you are a bibliophile with a particular interest in theology, you may be aware of the recently-published companion volumes (I hesitate to use words like “volume” to describe cheap paperbacks, but there you go) For Calvinism and Against Calvinism. I expect one to be pretty good, and the other poor. Guess which is which. I haven’t read either, and probably won’t, so I quite naturally thought I should write something about them.
The point I want to address is found in the titles of these books: For Calvinism and Against Calvinism. These titles create a premise for the argument, and it is hardly neutral. Like an earlier work, Debating Calvinism, the titles give the impression that Calvinism is an extrabiblical theory, a tangent from simple biblical theology. Why not publish them as For Arminianism, Against Arminianism, and Debating Arminianism? The answer is simple: Arminianism is considered the default position. While I understand that Arminianism is the majority opinion, Calvinists should not allow the debate to be presented as though we hold the weaker position. If we really believe that monergistic regeneration is the clear teaching of Scripture, we ought to speak and write as though it is so. We ought to speak and write as though the orthodox church has always believed it (because it has), and treat synergistic regeneration as the innovation it is. I have no doubt that Michael Horton and James White, the Calvinist authors of the books in question, do just that. But the titles give the advantage to the synergists. Imagine the average ignorant evangelical (forgive the redundancy) perusing their CBD catalogue. They’re probably not going to buy either book, having exhausted their book budget on the deep (if you get my meaning) emanations of [the latest popular authors]. All they will see are the titles, and possibly these accompanying blurbs:
On For Calvinism:
“For the past 500 years, Calvinism has been immensely influential—and often misunderstood, argues Horton. Taking you beyond the caricature of Reformed theology as a fatalistic belief system, he walks you through the “Five Points” and invites you to consider how Calvin’s teachings provide a biblically centered path for faith and practice in the 21st century.”
On Against Calvinism:
“John Calvin's doctrines have been debated for five centuries—affecting God's reputation in the process. Is Calvinism a viable theology for the 21st century? Drawing on Scripture, reason, and tradition, Olson exposes what he believes are errors in Reformed theology, critiques the “new Calvinism,” and proposes historically rich, biblically faithful alternative theologies.”
The blurb for Horton’s For Calvinism calls Calvinism “Calvin’s doctrines,” and we are “invite[d] to consider how Calvin’s teachings provide a biblically centered path for faith and practice in the 21st century.” Against Calvinism, on the other hand, “proposes historically rich, biblically faithful alternative theologies.” Which one sounds like one man’s opinion, and which sounds like The Truth®?” While we are invited to consider one view, we are told that the other is historically rich and biblically faithful. “Calvin’s doctrines” are pitted against doctrines that are “historically rich” and “biblically faithful.” And that is the message most who see these books will get. I don’t doubt that the Calvinist argument will be more convincing to the few objective readers, but for the majority who see the titles and blurbs, I think the opposite will be true.
In conclusion, I wonder about the overall effectiveness of these two (or three, or four) view books when the argument is presented from a defensive position. I would rather see stand-alone works with titles like The Potter’s Freedom, the subtitle of which is “A Defense of the Reformation and a Rebuttal of Norman Geisler’s Chosen But Free.” Those words present it as a defense of something all orthodox Christians recognize and love, the Reformation, and a rebuttal of (by implication) a doctrine that is in opposition to the Reformation. That is beginning from a position of strength. And that is the way anyone who really believes what they write should begin.
Addendum: This is not intended to discourage you from reading the For/Against Calvinism books. As I’ve said, I believe actually reading them will produce valuable fruit to the discerning reader.
TrackBack URL: http://www.thirstytheologian.com/mt/mt-tb.cgi/1940
Share this post:
Posted in:
Link · 0 Comments · 0 TrackBacks
← Previous · Home · Next →
