What do you think?
Rate this book
Divine Generosity: The Scope of Salvation in Reformed Theology
A brief, accessible inquiry into the wideness of God’s mercy in Reformed theology
How broad is the scope of salvation? To explore this question, Richard J. Mouw draws on Scripture and a rich heritage of Calvinist theology. Mouw brings voices like the old Princeton theologians, Kuyper, and Bavinck into conversation with more recent voices such as David Engelsma on pertinent topics,
• The salvation of unbaptized infants
• God’s wrath and love for sinners
• Problems with universalism
• The number of the elect
Learned yet approachable, Mouw explains how Christians can affirm God’s justice while holding hope for the wideness of his saving mercy. Congregations today face pressing questions about how to reconcile orthodoxy with empathy in increasingly pluralist neighborhoods and communities. For Reformed pastors, students, and interested laypeople, Divine Generosity serves as a biblically based, doctrinally sound guide.
How broad is the scope of salvation? To explore this question, Richard J. Mouw draws on Scripture and a rich heritage of Calvinist theology. Mouw brings voices like the old Princeton theologians, Kuyper, and Bavinck into conversation with more recent voices such as David Engelsma on pertinent topics,
• The salvation of unbaptized infants
• God’s wrath and love for sinners
• Problems with universalism
• The number of the elect
Learned yet approachable, Mouw explains how Christians can affirm God’s justice while holding hope for the wideness of his saving mercy. Congregations today face pressing questions about how to reconcile orthodoxy with empathy in increasingly pluralist neighborhoods and communities. For Reformed pastors, students, and interested laypeople, Divine Generosity serves as a biblically based, doctrinally sound guide.
- GenresTheology
140 pages, Kindle Edition
Published February 29, 2024
2 people are currently reading
23 people want to read
About the author
Richard J. Mouw
86 books42 followersRichard John Mouw is a theologian and philosopher. He held the position of President at Fuller Theological Seminary for 20 years (1993-2013), and continues to hold the post of Professor of Faith and Public Life.
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 6 of 6 reviews
November 18, 2025
I share Mouw’s heart and posture but I can’t jibe with many of his speculations.
September 17, 2025
With the risk of seeming ignorant, I couldn't read the book for more than 30 pages simply because from my understanding, the ideas presented in the book are based on the fact that there are "elects" and "non-elects" (the idea that God, before the beginning of the world, chooses which people go to heaven and which people go to hell, based on nothing else than God's predetermined will).
I cannot agree with this idea because I think that people choose on their own will if they choose Christ as their saviour and repent of their sins.
Yes, I agreed with the idea that even if we want to be saved, we can't be saved on our own, which to me means that we still need Jesus death and resurrection to save us, but we still have to CHOOSE Him willingly.
(I still agree that God knows before the beginning of the world which people go to heaven or hell (Omniscient God), but that doesn't mean that He chooses the end of each of us. Because if he did, in my opinion, we would lose our humanity and our free will, which I think is the most important aspect of being saved.
Let me put it like this: how would God be more pleased with someone having Him as saviour and lord? By free choice or being "forced" to choose him? I think it's an obvious answer.
Another aspect that seemed absolutely ludicrous to me was the attitude of some so-called elects towards the so-called non-elects. (Quote from the book: "But there are some Calvinist thinkers who actively oppose any notion of a divine love toward anyone outside of the elect community.")
From my understanding, this means that they (the elects) punish the non-elects by marginalizing them and forbidding them from even thinking they have access to God's love, not to mention the elect's love and understanding towards them.
I know this might be only an idea from the book and is probably a minority of Calvinists, not a majority, who actually support this idea, but at the moment I simply can't get over this idea.
I might come back at a later date in trying to revisit this idea and this book, but for the moment I just can't.
I cannot agree with this idea because I think that people choose on their own will if they choose Christ as their saviour and repent of their sins.
Yes, I agreed with the idea that even if we want to be saved, we can't be saved on our own, which to me means that we still need Jesus death and resurrection to save us, but we still have to CHOOSE Him willingly.
(I still agree that God knows before the beginning of the world which people go to heaven or hell (Omniscient God), but that doesn't mean that He chooses the end of each of us. Because if he did, in my opinion, we would lose our humanity and our free will, which I think is the most important aspect of being saved.
Let me put it like this: how would God be more pleased with someone having Him as saviour and lord? By free choice or being "forced" to choose him? I think it's an obvious answer.
Another aspect that seemed absolutely ludicrous to me was the attitude of some so-called elects towards the so-called non-elects. (Quote from the book: "But there are some Calvinist thinkers who actively oppose any notion of a divine love toward anyone outside of the elect community.")
From my understanding, this means that they (the elects) punish the non-elects by marginalizing them and forbidding them from even thinking they have access to God's love, not to mention the elect's love and understanding towards them.
I know this might be only an idea from the book and is probably a minority of Calvinists, not a majority, who actually support this idea, but at the moment I simply can't get over this idea.
I might come back at a later date in trying to revisit this idea and this book, but for the moment I just can't.
June 13, 2024
"At its heart Calvinism is a theology of surprises."
The book doesn't (necessarily) defend Calvinism. It's an investigation into some of the conversations that major Calvinist theologians had in the 20th century regarding the extent of the "...few chosen". How vast (or narrow) is the number of the elect? What about dying infants? What about people who don't hear the Gospel? This kind of questions.
While he departs from universalism (there's also a treatment of that in the first chapter, mostly engaging with DBH), honestly, in the end, a "good" Calvinist must, at least, be a 'hopeful universalist'.
The Spirit “worketh when, and where, and how he pleaseth.”
The book doesn't (necessarily) defend Calvinism. It's an investigation into some of the conversations that major Calvinist theologians had in the 20th century regarding the extent of the "...few chosen". How vast (or narrow) is the number of the elect? What about dying infants? What about people who don't hear the Gospel? This kind of questions.
While he departs from universalism (there's also a treatment of that in the first chapter, mostly engaging with DBH), honestly, in the end, a "good" Calvinist must, at least, be a 'hopeful universalist'.
The Spirit “worketh when, and where, and how he pleaseth.”
April 8, 2024
Summary: A discussion from a Calvinist perspective of how widely God’s saving mercy extends.
There is a perception of Calvinism that believes that relatively few people will be saved and that the vast majority of humanity will be consigned to everlasting condemnation. In this concise, scholarly and accessible discussion, Richard J. Mouw makes a case for a broad, though not universal, extension of God’s saving mercy.
First of all, Mouw makes it clear that he is not a universalist, not even a hopeful one. Along with N.T. Wright, Mouw holds to the importance of an accountability before God of the persistently unrepentant, including those responsible for cruelties and injustices. He also points out the dehumanizing effects of persistent rejection of God, that there is a directional character of spiritual life where the persistently unrepentant reach the point where God says “thy will be done.” Personally, I’ve thought that the outer darkness is the mercy of God to those for whom being in the immediate presence of God would be unspeakable torture.
That addressed, Mouw turns to the question of how wide may we hope for God’s mercy to be, and what sources might be drawn upon in Calvinist theology. He engages the ideas of Hoeksema and Engelsma that God’s love is restricted to the elect by drawing upon both Benjamin Warfield and Geerhardus Vos who cite biblical examples for the love of God for the non-elect. He questions whether it is hate God has when he commands Jacob return to Esau, who welcomes with open arms and forgives Jacob.
The extent of mercy broadens further with the question of unbaptized infants, showing that from the Westminster Confession, chapter ten, “that all dying in infancy are included in the election of grace, and are regenerated and saved by Christ through the Spirit.” Shedd and Warfield also note that the article on infants allows for adults who are “regenerated and sanctified immediately by God without use of means.” He notes evidence from the papers of W.G.T. Shedd, Charles Hodge and Benjamin Warfield that there would be a large number who would be saved. He cites the work of Amos Yong that many may be In Christ who have not had “epistemic access” to the preaching of Christ. Mouw goes on to consider his encounters with both devout Muslims and Mormons. While leaving judgment to God, he urges that our response not be to express doubt about their testimony. He explores the biblical examples of those who believe on behalf of others, and raises questions of how this may be done, including in the case of ancestors of believing persons in Asian cultures.
Mouw is clear in all these instances that salvation is through the Spirit’s regenerating work, and through the justifying and sanctifying work of Christ. It is not a result of good works or devotion. What he does is uphold both God’s justice and the greatness of God’s mercy without undercutting the importance of Christian proclamation. He avoids going beyond scripture, allowing God to be God and acknowledging mystery where it exist. And along the way, he retrieves some surprising writings of W.,G.T. Shedd as well as the 19th century “Princeton theologians” who support an expansive view of divine generosity as consistent with confessional faithfulness.
____________________
Disclosure of Material Connection: I received a complimentary copy of this book from the publisher for review.
There is a perception of Calvinism that believes that relatively few people will be saved and that the vast majority of humanity will be consigned to everlasting condemnation. In this concise, scholarly and accessible discussion, Richard J. Mouw makes a case for a broad, though not universal, extension of God’s saving mercy.
First of all, Mouw makes it clear that he is not a universalist, not even a hopeful one. Along with N.T. Wright, Mouw holds to the importance of an accountability before God of the persistently unrepentant, including those responsible for cruelties and injustices. He also points out the dehumanizing effects of persistent rejection of God, that there is a directional character of spiritual life where the persistently unrepentant reach the point where God says “thy will be done.” Personally, I’ve thought that the outer darkness is the mercy of God to those for whom being in the immediate presence of God would be unspeakable torture.
That addressed, Mouw turns to the question of how wide may we hope for God’s mercy to be, and what sources might be drawn upon in Calvinist theology. He engages the ideas of Hoeksema and Engelsma that God’s love is restricted to the elect by drawing upon both Benjamin Warfield and Geerhardus Vos who cite biblical examples for the love of God for the non-elect. He questions whether it is hate God has when he commands Jacob return to Esau, who welcomes with open arms and forgives Jacob.
The extent of mercy broadens further with the question of unbaptized infants, showing that from the Westminster Confession, chapter ten, “that all dying in infancy are included in the election of grace, and are regenerated and saved by Christ through the Spirit.” Shedd and Warfield also note that the article on infants allows for adults who are “regenerated and sanctified immediately by God without use of means.” He notes evidence from the papers of W.G.T. Shedd, Charles Hodge and Benjamin Warfield that there would be a large number who would be saved. He cites the work of Amos Yong that many may be In Christ who have not had “epistemic access” to the preaching of Christ. Mouw goes on to consider his encounters with both devout Muslims and Mormons. While leaving judgment to God, he urges that our response not be to express doubt about their testimony. He explores the biblical examples of those who believe on behalf of others, and raises questions of how this may be done, including in the case of ancestors of believing persons in Asian cultures.
Mouw is clear in all these instances that salvation is through the Spirit’s regenerating work, and through the justifying and sanctifying work of Christ. It is not a result of good works or devotion. What he does is uphold both God’s justice and the greatness of God’s mercy without undercutting the importance of Christian proclamation. He avoids going beyond scripture, allowing God to be God and acknowledging mystery where it exist. And along the way, he retrieves some surprising writings of W.,G.T. Shedd as well as the 19th century “Princeton theologians” who support an expansive view of divine generosity as consistent with confessional faithfulness.
____________________
Disclosure of Material Connection: I received a complimentary copy of this book from the publisher for review.
February 5, 2025
I am not a "reformed" person.
Nonetheless, I enjoyed this book.
I see the line of argumentation that he makes coming from his perspective. Though I do not agree with all of his premises, his articulation given that framework and how he pushes the boundaries is sensible. He uses reformed thinking to articulate a reformed vision of the large scope of salvation.
It is well researched with lots of footnotes.
What was surprising was discovering the view of the princeton theologians and their "salvific generosity". Furthermore, the discussion on having right doctrine vs right behaviour, that is probably one of the more surprising things I've heard from a reformed person.
The book has set out and achieve it's purposes. On that metric, it deserves to be judged. With that in mind. 5/5
Nonetheless, I enjoyed this book.
I see the line of argumentation that he makes coming from his perspective. Though I do not agree with all of his premises, his articulation given that framework and how he pushes the boundaries is sensible. He uses reformed thinking to articulate a reformed vision of the large scope of salvation.
It is well researched with lots of footnotes.
What was surprising was discovering the view of the princeton theologians and their "salvific generosity". Furthermore, the discussion on having right doctrine vs right behaviour, that is probably one of the more surprising things I've heard from a reformed person.
The book has set out and achieve it's purposes. On that metric, it deserves to be judged. With that in mind. 5/5
July 30, 2025
This book had interesting insight into how many reformed theologians have understood the scope of salvation. I appreciated the style of writing, that was fairly easy to follow. At times I wished Mouw would have gone further into depth into the biblical evidence for each stance, as well as more depth on his own understanding of salvation. Overall I enjoyed the book, leaving me with insight as well as many more questions.
Displaying 1 - 6 of 6 reviews