What do you think?
Rate this book
Mere Calvinism
WHAT DO YOU KNOW ABOUT CALVINISM?
There are so many misconceptions about Calvinism that it is safe to say that even most Christians do not truly know what it teaches. You may have grown up in a Reformed church, or you may have heard about Calvinism mostly in arguments. Either way, it may surprise you to know that this belief has huge, and very positive , implications for a believer's daily life!
Jim Orrick clears up misinformation about Calvinism and explains its basic yet profound ideas and teachings—using the Bible as the basis for everything he says.
Making use of relatable life illustrations, as well as an engaging, clear, and friendly style, he sets out the basics of what Calvinism teaches, explores each of the five points that summarize its positions, and addresses rebuttals and misunderstandings. Learn why the teachings of Calvinism not only matter, but can renew your trust and hope in the gospel!
There are so many misconceptions about Calvinism that it is safe to say that even most Christians do not truly know what it teaches. You may have grown up in a Reformed church, or you may have heard about Calvinism mostly in arguments. Either way, it may surprise you to know that this belief has huge, and very positive , implications for a believer's daily life!
Jim Orrick clears up misinformation about Calvinism and explains its basic yet profound ideas and teachings—using the Bible as the basis for everything he says.
Making use of relatable life illustrations, as well as an engaging, clear, and friendly style, he sets out the basics of what Calvinism teaches, explores each of the five points that summarize its positions, and addresses rebuttals and misunderstandings. Learn why the teachings of Calvinism not only matter, but can renew your trust and hope in the gospel!
219 pages, Paperback
Published February 1, 2019
59 people are currently reading
248 people want to read
About the author
Jim Scott Orrick
4 books8 followersJim Scott Orrick is professor at Boyce College in Louisville, Kentucky, as well as the author of A Year with George Herbert: A Guide to Fifty-Two of His Best Loved Poems.
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 30 of 43 reviews
January 23, 2019
From the introduction: Early in the 1990s, I was reading a book of literary criticism by C. S. Lewis when I came across an entire page on which Lewis discusses the influence of Calvinism in the sixteenth century.
This book seeks to explain Calvinism to Calvinists. That's the book at its simplest. In the introduction he writes, "I fear that we pastors and teachers are making a serious mistake when we assume that our people and students understand Calvinism just because they call themselves Calvinists." In the first chapter he writes, "My goal in this book is to demonstrate to you, the reader, that the Bible teaches that God always does as he pleases, and that he initiates, sustains, and completes the salvation of everyone who goes to heaven."
But in the process of explaining Calvinism to Calvinists, there is an opportunity to explain it to others as well. Perhaps to those that have long misunderstood it. Perhaps to those that have feared it.
Anyone who carefully--prayerfully--reads Mere Calvinism would find it difficult to deny that Orrick's book is saturated with the Word of God. That his arguments for Calvinism are rooted deeply, oh-so-deeply, in the Word of God. Now mere human logic or reason will never get believers to switch teams from Arminianism to Calvinism. But perhaps with a little nudge, nudge from the Spirit, the book will do just that. Not because Orrick is super-persuasive and a charismatic teacher. But because his book rightly uses the Word of God.
The first chapter introduces Calvinism briefly. The last chapter plays a "what if" and "but in fact" game with Calvinism. In between, Orrick spends a chapter on each of the five points of Calvinism. T for Total Depravity. U for Unconditional Election. L for Limited Atonement. I for Irresistible Grace. P for Perseverance of the Saints. Usually he includes several illustrations per chapter to help readers understand abstract ideas.
I did not grow up a Calvinist. I was born into an Arminian church-going family. But as I began--as an adult--studying the Word, listening to biblically sound teachers on the radio, reading theology I had an epiphany of sorts. I became an enthusiastic Calvinist who LOVED talking the five points to anyone and everyone--whether they wanted to listen or not. I have read many books on the subject. This book is in some ways a basic beginner course in understanding the five points. I didn't precisely learn anything new, but it was a good opportunity to rejoice in these doctrines once again.
This book seeks to explain Calvinism to Calvinists. That's the book at its simplest. In the introduction he writes, "I fear that we pastors and teachers are making a serious mistake when we assume that our people and students understand Calvinism just because they call themselves Calvinists." In the first chapter he writes, "My goal in this book is to demonstrate to you, the reader, that the Bible teaches that God always does as he pleases, and that he initiates, sustains, and completes the salvation of everyone who goes to heaven."
But in the process of explaining Calvinism to Calvinists, there is an opportunity to explain it to others as well. Perhaps to those that have long misunderstood it. Perhaps to those that have feared it.
Anyone who carefully--prayerfully--reads Mere Calvinism would find it difficult to deny that Orrick's book is saturated with the Word of God. That his arguments for Calvinism are rooted deeply, oh-so-deeply, in the Word of God. Now mere human logic or reason will never get believers to switch teams from Arminianism to Calvinism. But perhaps with a little nudge, nudge from the Spirit, the book will do just that. Not because Orrick is super-persuasive and a charismatic teacher. But because his book rightly uses the Word of God.
The first chapter introduces Calvinism briefly. The last chapter plays a "what if" and "but in fact" game with Calvinism. In between, Orrick spends a chapter on each of the five points of Calvinism. T for Total Depravity. U for Unconditional Election. L for Limited Atonement. I for Irresistible Grace. P for Perseverance of the Saints. Usually he includes several illustrations per chapter to help readers understand abstract ideas.
I did not grow up a Calvinist. I was born into an Arminian church-going family. But as I began--as an adult--studying the Word, listening to biblically sound teachers on the radio, reading theology I had an epiphany of sorts. I became an enthusiastic Calvinist who LOVED talking the five points to anyone and everyone--whether they wanted to listen or not. I have read many books on the subject. This book is in some ways a basic beginner course in understanding the five points. I didn't precisely learn anything new, but it was a good opportunity to rejoice in these doctrines once again.
July 16, 2024
This is a great book that explains Calvinism from a lay viewpoint. I really enjoyed how Jim Scott Orrick used every day examples to make the points of Calvinism understandable and practical. After reading this book I believe everyone would understand better the hard tenants of Calvinism. I would recommend this book to everyone that struggles with understanding total depravity, unconditional atonement, perseverance of the saints, and the other tenants of Calvinism.
July 31, 2023
Jesus paid it all. All to Him I owe.
April 19, 2020
Mere Calvinism is a short and simple book which presents the five points of Calvinism in a way that few other books can. Jim Orrick focuses on the Scriptures, uses simple terms, illustrates the doctrines from every angle, responds to common objections, and applies the teachings to life. The book title truly does the book justice considering its brevity and simplicity. The layout of the book illustrates this – consisting of a chapter on each of the five points in traditional order (TULIP), surrounded by a short explanation of Calvinism and a concluding argument for embracing the doctrine.
Full review available at BooksAtaGlance.com
In the first chapter, Calvinism: More than the Five Points, Orrick sets out to explain what Calvinism is and what it is not. What a Calvinist believes can be summarized by the following two statements. “First, a Calvinist believes that God always does whatever he pleases. Second, a Calvinist believes that God initiates, sustains, and completes the salvation of everyone who gets saved” (14). The book stays true to this unifying idea throughout when addressing each of the five points. The book also makes clear in this opening chapter that Calvinism, despite its name, is about what the Bible says rather than what John Calvin has said. What the Bible says will always be true and genuine Christians, when they understand what the Bible teaches, will believe it. The Bible continually makes clear that God is the creator of all things and he does whatever he desires to do (Ps. 115:3). Orrick does not suggest that all Christians are Calvinists and all Calvinist are Christians. He rather says that the doctrines of grace are taught in the Bible and if a Christian begins to understand what the Bible says regarding Calvinism, they will submit to it saying, “It is the Lord. Let him do what seems good to him” (1 Sam. 3:18).
One of the common accusations against Calvinism is that it discourages missions and evangelism. Orrick, therefore, addresses this issue both in this initial chapter as well as at several other points in the book. He points out that many of the most zealous and powerful evangelists, from William Carey to George Whitefield, were devout Calvinists who were zealous for the spread of the gospel. The reality is that the doctrines of grace, when rightly understood, serve as a motivation to preach the gospel and to call the lost to faith in Jesus. This argument is backed up by the assurance that the gospel will surely be effective in light of Jesus’ assertion in John 6:37 and Orrick further shows an illustration of this in Paul’s experience at Corinth in Acts 18.
Chapter two, Total Depravity: We Have Received a Bleak Diagnosis, lays the foundation for the other five points. Orrick fulfills his promise in the introduction to stick close to the text, addressing passage after passage presenting the bleak state of the unregenerate human heart. He argues that “while no human is completely saturated with sin, every component of human nature has been adversely affected by sin.” He makes his argument by examining each of the three non-physical components of human nature and showing how the Bible presents each of them as ruined by the fall. The three components of human nature are understanding, will/volition, and affections. The Bible presents the fall as bringing about a spiritual death that corrupts every aspect of our nature. This is most clearly seen in the Bible’s description of fallen humanity as marked by sin (Ps. 51:5), dead (Eph. 2:1-2), a natural person who “does not accept the things of the Spirit of God” (1 Cor. 2:14), and in the flesh (Rom 8:5-8). These bleak pictures display the need that humanity has for an act of God to bring salvation. The chapter concludes by responding to objections and providing applications.
Chapter three, Unconditional Election: The Father Planned for the Success of the Gospel, begins by arguing that anyone who believes the Bible must believe something about election because the Bible talks about election. The added nuance presented in Reformed theology though relates to the condition or grounds for this election. Unconditional election holds that God’s choice is not grounded upon any action of any person but upon the sovereign choice of God. Universal election holds that God elects all people but not all the elect will be saved, only those who believe in Jesus. One might hold to this view of election because the idea of God electing some but not others seems unfair, yet the Bible presents God electing Israel while rejecting other nations, a choice on God’s part that is clearly not based upon anything good in Israel (Deut. 7:6-8). Alternatively, many reject the Reformed view in favor of conditional election. This view presents the grounds of God’s election as the future faith of those who will believe. God knows those who will believe in Jesus, and he therefore looks down through the tunnel of time and he chooses to elect them alone. Orrick counters this view by first pointing to the inability of people to believe in Jesus (Rom. 3:10-12). Furthermore, there is an important inconstancy in this view in relation to prayer. When we pray, we often ask for God to bring salvation to the lost, yet in so praying we contradict this “Tunnel of Time” theory behind conditional election. If God honors the free will of man to the extent that he will only elect those whom he knows will believe in him on their own, then why would we pray for God to interfere with this “hands-off” approach to saving the “elect.” With this overview and interaction with other views, Orrick moves on to address two important texts related to election; Ephesians 1:3-14 and Romans 9:6-23. Ephesians 1 teaches God chose a specific people to be holy and blameless, to be predestined for adoption, all according to God’s will. Biblical election makes salvation secure for God’s people and brings glory to God alone. Romans 9 teaches unconditional election and makes clear that God’s choice is never based on godly parents or human works but is rather dependent on God’s choice. This election of God may lead some to question God’s justice, yet God’s actions fit with a perfect standard of justice that often contradict ours. Other views of election often seek to align this doctrine with a human understanding of justice, yet Romans 9 affirms that the true nature of election will surely sound unjust to the natural man (71).
This chapter concludes with several objections to Election. Dr. Orrick uses this section to address the idea of people being predestined to hell. Those who object to unconditional election would argue that election creates an unalterable future that is fatalistic. Yet the Tunnel of Time theory creates the same difficulty since God election is still set in eternity past based on future actions that cannot be altered. Furthermore, election to everlasting life is unconditional, but election to eternal punishment is conditional. People are sent to hell because they willingly rebel against God. This doctrine also does not kill evangelism because it assures us that our work of spreading the gospel is not in vain. It frees Christians to ignore gimmicks and tricks, having confidence that God has chosen a people for salvation that he has then chosen to reach through our preaching.
Chapter four, Limited Atonement: The Son Secured the Salvation of His People, focuses on two questions related to the atonement: “Did Christ die to take away the sins of every human in the world, or did he die to take away the sins of his people only?” and “Did Christ die to make the salvation of every human possible, or did he die to make the salvation of his elect certain” (90). The book argues that Jesus only died for the elect and that his death makes the salvation of the elect certain. This is important for Christians to understand mainly because “those who hold to false ideas about the extent of the atonement nearly always give a non-biblical answer to the all-important question “What must I do to be saved?” They tell sinners that they must believe that Jesus died for them and that, if they believe this, then they will be saved. This is deadly false” (87). Orrick lays the foundation for limited atonement in penal substitutionary atonement because this doctrine related to the nature of the atonement determines the extent and power of the atonement. The book then lays out the three possible perspectives on the extent of the atonement, explaining the problems with the first two and progressing through the chapter with the final view, that Christ died to take away all sins of some persons. The idea that Christ died to take away all sins of all persons is rejected because this reality would undermine the justice of God in sending sinners to hell for sins that Jesus paid for. The idea that Christ died for all sins except for the sin of persistent unbelief is rejected because the Bible indicates that people are sent to hell for sins other than unbelief (1Cor. 6:9-10, Gal. 5:19-21) and this view would once again require God to punish sins twice.
The argument of the chapter then progresses to address three ideas that have the potential to call limited atonement into question. The idea that limited atonement is unfair should be moved to the side considering the mercy of God in saving anyone. God would be just if he did not pay for any sins but he mercifully chooses to pay for the sins of some. God is under no obligation to save anyone.
The next idea that calls limited atonement into question is the idea that the words “world” and “all” in the Bible always refer to all people without exception including in texts such as John 3:16, 1 John 2:2, 1 Tim. 2:3-6, John 12:32, and Romans 5:18. This idea is countered by a lengthy analysis of texts which indicate that the Bible often uses the words “world” and “all” to refer to all people without distinction rather than all people without exception. In Orrick’s own words, “the words world and all in these passages refer to all the people groups of the world, not to every person who has ever lived.”
The final idea that could lead people to question limited atonement is the idea that all sin is equal in God’s eye. Dr. Orrick spends several pages defending the view that different sins receive different levels of punishment. Based on this understanding of God’s exact execution of justice upon sinners, it follows that God was exact in his administration of justice upon Christ at the cross.
Next in the progression of the argument, Orrick presents his three main arguments in favor of limited atonement. He begins by walking through several proof texts that indicate that Jesus died for a specific group of people. Jesus came to save “his people from their sins” (Matt. 1:21), he “lays down his life for the sheep” (John 10:11). He has a people “whom the Father has given” him (John 6:37), and prays for them specifically in John 17:9. His people are his bride in Revelation 19:6-8, 21:9 and he “gave himself up for her” (Eph. 5:25). Finally, Romans 8:32 is provided as a final argument in favor of limited atonement.
The next big argument provided is the tone of victory presented in the NT. Because in fact, Christ has already paid for the sins of the elect, their salvation is secured, and the victory is completely won for them individually. According to Dr. Orrick, this would indicate that either Christ died for a chosen people and therefore their redemption is accomplished already, or Christ died for all people and therefore salvation is universally accomplished and all people will be saved in the end (a clearly unbiblical option that he rejects).
The final major argument of the chapter addresses the word pictures used in the Bible regarding the atonement. According to Orrick, the idea of Christ being a ransom, a means of redemption, a sacrifice of propitiation, and other word pictures make more sense within the limited atonement view.
Next, the proper use of limited atonement is addressed along with more objections. Limited atonement should be used as a means of assurance of salvation, as a guide to preaching the true full gospel, and a ground for confidence in Christ. Orrick’s concluding interactions deals with more complex objections related to how Christ could die for a specific amount of sin. The question of why the elect are born condemned is illustrated with a story of how people generally value items that they have taken pride in fixing and this correlates to the way God gets glory in redeeming and repairing the elect who are born into condemnation and sin. The conclusion of the chapter returns to the issue addressed at the start, the question of how the gospel should be presented.
Chapter 5, Irresistible Grace: The Holy Spirit Supernaturally Calls the Elect, once again builds off the foundation of total depravity. If in fact, people are completely sinful and unable to come to Christ on their own as the Bible teaches, God must act to save His people. God intervenes in the heart of the elect and he overcomes the resistance inside of them. “As a result of the Spirit’s work, the elect person freely repents of sin and believes in Christ. God uses the bees of circumstances and the honey of his kindness and goodness to lead his people to himself. The objection of some, that God would not interfere with human freedom because that would be unjust, is rejected with an illustration. If a small child was determined to walk deeper and deeper into the waves at the beach to the point of no return, the parents act quickly, often against the will of the child, to bring deliverance. In the same way, God is loving to act against the will of sinful hearts to save people from their stubborn intent on walking into eternal destruction.
Full review available at BooksAtaGlance.com
In the first chapter, Calvinism: More than the Five Points, Orrick sets out to explain what Calvinism is and what it is not. What a Calvinist believes can be summarized by the following two statements. “First, a Calvinist believes that God always does whatever he pleases. Second, a Calvinist believes that God initiates, sustains, and completes the salvation of everyone who gets saved” (14). The book stays true to this unifying idea throughout when addressing each of the five points. The book also makes clear in this opening chapter that Calvinism, despite its name, is about what the Bible says rather than what John Calvin has said. What the Bible says will always be true and genuine Christians, when they understand what the Bible teaches, will believe it. The Bible continually makes clear that God is the creator of all things and he does whatever he desires to do (Ps. 115:3). Orrick does not suggest that all Christians are Calvinists and all Calvinist are Christians. He rather says that the doctrines of grace are taught in the Bible and if a Christian begins to understand what the Bible says regarding Calvinism, they will submit to it saying, “It is the Lord. Let him do what seems good to him” (1 Sam. 3:18).
One of the common accusations against Calvinism is that it discourages missions and evangelism. Orrick, therefore, addresses this issue both in this initial chapter as well as at several other points in the book. He points out that many of the most zealous and powerful evangelists, from William Carey to George Whitefield, were devout Calvinists who were zealous for the spread of the gospel. The reality is that the doctrines of grace, when rightly understood, serve as a motivation to preach the gospel and to call the lost to faith in Jesus. This argument is backed up by the assurance that the gospel will surely be effective in light of Jesus’ assertion in John 6:37 and Orrick further shows an illustration of this in Paul’s experience at Corinth in Acts 18.
Chapter two, Total Depravity: We Have Received a Bleak Diagnosis, lays the foundation for the other five points. Orrick fulfills his promise in the introduction to stick close to the text, addressing passage after passage presenting the bleak state of the unregenerate human heart. He argues that “while no human is completely saturated with sin, every component of human nature has been adversely affected by sin.” He makes his argument by examining each of the three non-physical components of human nature and showing how the Bible presents each of them as ruined by the fall. The three components of human nature are understanding, will/volition, and affections. The Bible presents the fall as bringing about a spiritual death that corrupts every aspect of our nature. This is most clearly seen in the Bible’s description of fallen humanity as marked by sin (Ps. 51:5), dead (Eph. 2:1-2), a natural person who “does not accept the things of the Spirit of God” (1 Cor. 2:14), and in the flesh (Rom 8:5-8). These bleak pictures display the need that humanity has for an act of God to bring salvation. The chapter concludes by responding to objections and providing applications.
Chapter three, Unconditional Election: The Father Planned for the Success of the Gospel, begins by arguing that anyone who believes the Bible must believe something about election because the Bible talks about election. The added nuance presented in Reformed theology though relates to the condition or grounds for this election. Unconditional election holds that God’s choice is not grounded upon any action of any person but upon the sovereign choice of God. Universal election holds that God elects all people but not all the elect will be saved, only those who believe in Jesus. One might hold to this view of election because the idea of God electing some but not others seems unfair, yet the Bible presents God electing Israel while rejecting other nations, a choice on God’s part that is clearly not based upon anything good in Israel (Deut. 7:6-8). Alternatively, many reject the Reformed view in favor of conditional election. This view presents the grounds of God’s election as the future faith of those who will believe. God knows those who will believe in Jesus, and he therefore looks down through the tunnel of time and he chooses to elect them alone. Orrick counters this view by first pointing to the inability of people to believe in Jesus (Rom. 3:10-12). Furthermore, there is an important inconstancy in this view in relation to prayer. When we pray, we often ask for God to bring salvation to the lost, yet in so praying we contradict this “Tunnel of Time” theory behind conditional election. If God honors the free will of man to the extent that he will only elect those whom he knows will believe in him on their own, then why would we pray for God to interfere with this “hands-off” approach to saving the “elect.” With this overview and interaction with other views, Orrick moves on to address two important texts related to election; Ephesians 1:3-14 and Romans 9:6-23. Ephesians 1 teaches God chose a specific people to be holy and blameless, to be predestined for adoption, all according to God’s will. Biblical election makes salvation secure for God’s people and brings glory to God alone. Romans 9 teaches unconditional election and makes clear that God’s choice is never based on godly parents or human works but is rather dependent on God’s choice. This election of God may lead some to question God’s justice, yet God’s actions fit with a perfect standard of justice that often contradict ours. Other views of election often seek to align this doctrine with a human understanding of justice, yet Romans 9 affirms that the true nature of election will surely sound unjust to the natural man (71).
This chapter concludes with several objections to Election. Dr. Orrick uses this section to address the idea of people being predestined to hell. Those who object to unconditional election would argue that election creates an unalterable future that is fatalistic. Yet the Tunnel of Time theory creates the same difficulty since God election is still set in eternity past based on future actions that cannot be altered. Furthermore, election to everlasting life is unconditional, but election to eternal punishment is conditional. People are sent to hell because they willingly rebel against God. This doctrine also does not kill evangelism because it assures us that our work of spreading the gospel is not in vain. It frees Christians to ignore gimmicks and tricks, having confidence that God has chosen a people for salvation that he has then chosen to reach through our preaching.
Chapter four, Limited Atonement: The Son Secured the Salvation of His People, focuses on two questions related to the atonement: “Did Christ die to take away the sins of every human in the world, or did he die to take away the sins of his people only?” and “Did Christ die to make the salvation of every human possible, or did he die to make the salvation of his elect certain” (90). The book argues that Jesus only died for the elect and that his death makes the salvation of the elect certain. This is important for Christians to understand mainly because “those who hold to false ideas about the extent of the atonement nearly always give a non-biblical answer to the all-important question “What must I do to be saved?” They tell sinners that they must believe that Jesus died for them and that, if they believe this, then they will be saved. This is deadly false” (87). Orrick lays the foundation for limited atonement in penal substitutionary atonement because this doctrine related to the nature of the atonement determines the extent and power of the atonement. The book then lays out the three possible perspectives on the extent of the atonement, explaining the problems with the first two and progressing through the chapter with the final view, that Christ died to take away all sins of some persons. The idea that Christ died to take away all sins of all persons is rejected because this reality would undermine the justice of God in sending sinners to hell for sins that Jesus paid for. The idea that Christ died for all sins except for the sin of persistent unbelief is rejected because the Bible indicates that people are sent to hell for sins other than unbelief (1Cor. 6:9-10, Gal. 5:19-21) and this view would once again require God to punish sins twice.
The argument of the chapter then progresses to address three ideas that have the potential to call limited atonement into question. The idea that limited atonement is unfair should be moved to the side considering the mercy of God in saving anyone. God would be just if he did not pay for any sins but he mercifully chooses to pay for the sins of some. God is under no obligation to save anyone.
The next idea that calls limited atonement into question is the idea that the words “world” and “all” in the Bible always refer to all people without exception including in texts such as John 3:16, 1 John 2:2, 1 Tim. 2:3-6, John 12:32, and Romans 5:18. This idea is countered by a lengthy analysis of texts which indicate that the Bible often uses the words “world” and “all” to refer to all people without distinction rather than all people without exception. In Orrick’s own words, “the words world and all in these passages refer to all the people groups of the world, not to every person who has ever lived.”
The final idea that could lead people to question limited atonement is the idea that all sin is equal in God’s eye. Dr. Orrick spends several pages defending the view that different sins receive different levels of punishment. Based on this understanding of God’s exact execution of justice upon sinners, it follows that God was exact in his administration of justice upon Christ at the cross.
Next in the progression of the argument, Orrick presents his three main arguments in favor of limited atonement. He begins by walking through several proof texts that indicate that Jesus died for a specific group of people. Jesus came to save “his people from their sins” (Matt. 1:21), he “lays down his life for the sheep” (John 10:11). He has a people “whom the Father has given” him (John 6:37), and prays for them specifically in John 17:9. His people are his bride in Revelation 19:6-8, 21:9 and he “gave himself up for her” (Eph. 5:25). Finally, Romans 8:32 is provided as a final argument in favor of limited atonement.
The next big argument provided is the tone of victory presented in the NT. Because in fact, Christ has already paid for the sins of the elect, their salvation is secured, and the victory is completely won for them individually. According to Dr. Orrick, this would indicate that either Christ died for a chosen people and therefore their redemption is accomplished already, or Christ died for all people and therefore salvation is universally accomplished and all people will be saved in the end (a clearly unbiblical option that he rejects).
The final major argument of the chapter addresses the word pictures used in the Bible regarding the atonement. According to Orrick, the idea of Christ being a ransom, a means of redemption, a sacrifice of propitiation, and other word pictures make more sense within the limited atonement view.
Next, the proper use of limited atonement is addressed along with more objections. Limited atonement should be used as a means of assurance of salvation, as a guide to preaching the true full gospel, and a ground for confidence in Christ. Orrick’s concluding interactions deals with more complex objections related to how Christ could die for a specific amount of sin. The question of why the elect are born condemned is illustrated with a story of how people generally value items that they have taken pride in fixing and this correlates to the way God gets glory in redeeming and repairing the elect who are born into condemnation and sin. The conclusion of the chapter returns to the issue addressed at the start, the question of how the gospel should be presented.
Chapter 5, Irresistible Grace: The Holy Spirit Supernaturally Calls the Elect, once again builds off the foundation of total depravity. If in fact, people are completely sinful and unable to come to Christ on their own as the Bible teaches, God must act to save His people. God intervenes in the heart of the elect and he overcomes the resistance inside of them. “As a result of the Spirit’s work, the elect person freely repents of sin and believes in Christ. God uses the bees of circumstances and the honey of his kindness and goodness to lead his people to himself. The objection of some, that God would not interfere with human freedom because that would be unjust, is rejected with an illustration. If a small child was determined to walk deeper and deeper into the waves at the beach to the point of no return, the parents act quickly, often against the will of the child, to bring deliverance. In the same way, God is loving to act against the will of sinful hearts to save people from their stubborn intent on walking into eternal destruction.
August 7, 2023
This book is a testament to my inability to read non-fiction books. I checked this book out of my church library at the beginning of my Junior year and it’s been like 9 months, so sorry about that. It’s just the kind of theology book that slows me down. I also chose this book because I had a lot of questions about Calvinism and figured I should do some research. I loved this book because it broke down very complex theological issues into very understandable arguments and everything was very well supported by biblical evidence. My big take away is that Calvinism is a theological system defined by “because He” rather than any efforts we as broken humans could make. I agreed with a lot of the points the author made and supported, but I still feel like I have some more research to do, so I would definitely recommend this book to anyone who wants to learn more about how Calvinism differs from standard belief systems and how is supported by biblical texts. 8/10
January 10, 2020
A refreshing approach to speaking well of Calvinism. Orrick skillfully presents the doctrines of grace according to strict biblical exegesis instead of from a confessional perspective. Due to its conversational tenor and methodological honesty, it serves as a great introduction to Calvinistic soteriology for those who are either totally unacquainted with it or only understand a false caricature of Calvinism as a whole.
January 15, 2021
Whatever historical label that your Biblical theology falls under, this book is worth a read. It’s very gospel centered and Christ honoring. The chapter on man’s depravity is probably the best that I’ve ever read on the subject. Also, the poems and illustrations throughout are amazing. As with just about anyone else, I don’t agree with all of his positions, most particularly some his his views on the atonement, but overall a very informative and enriching read.
October 1, 2024
Would recommend this as a good, accessible book on the 5 points of Calvinism. Avoids too much technicality, and really inspires confidence in the sovereignty of God
February 12, 2019
Delightful!
Succinct. Clear. Very readable. Excellent discussion questions. Great illustrations. Helpful chapter on what must be true if the five points are not. I highly recommend it both as an introduction or review of the subject.
Succinct. Clear. Very readable. Excellent discussion questions. Great illustrations. Helpful chapter on what must be true if the five points are not. I highly recommend it both as an introduction or review of the subject.
July 16, 2019
I don’t think I was fair to Jim Orrick. My original review was pretty tough (pasted below as the final note). Since reading Mere Calvinism, I read more John Calvin. Now I better understand Orrick on freedom of the will and persuasion/means. I'm still not sure Orrick's position (or even Calvin's!) is consistent with the doctrines of grace, but better to agree inconsistently than to disagree in one accord.
Notes.
(1) Personal note: Calvinism is definitely popular now! (9)
(2) “Just because someone calls himself a Calvinist does not mean he knows what Calvinism is” (10)
(3) “... most of the discussions she had heard about Calvinism were more philosophical than biblical” (11)
(4) "Well, in two sentences . . . First, a Calvinist believes that God always does whatever he pleases. Second, a Calvinist believes that God initiates, sustains, and completes the salvation of everyone who gets saved."(14)
(5) "If the Bible asserts something about God to be true, and it could not possibly be true of your God, then you have the wrong god." (16)
(6) "While sinners may try to resist him, no one successfully resists him. God is the one “who works all things according to the counsel of his will” (Eph. 1:11). (17)
(7) Personal note: is Orrick priming the reader for unreasonable arguments? (19)
(8) Personal note about reason versus revelation: Scripture is prior to reason. I agree with the author. If I come to a doctrine that seems unreasonable and yet is clearly taught, I bow my knee. However, this could also indicate I’ve misunderstood the doctrine. If I find another interpretation that does justice to the passage while eliminating the logical problem, this interpretation should be preferred.
(9) Dr. Orrick quotes a verse about God’s inscrutability. Ironic that the very preceding verse clarifies Romans 9, the chief Calvinist proof text. (19)
(10) Personal note: I love this idea. Calvinism explained using Lewis’s model from Mere Christianity. 20 pages in, and I notice a contrast. While Lewis was gentle, Orrick lays down the gauntlet.
(11) "God has planned in advance for the success of the gospel" (23)
(12) "Admittedly, this is a great mystery. All persons think and act freely, yet all the while God is sovereignly superintending all things so that his eternal purpose is infallibly accomplished." (24)
(13) "Our Lord summarizes the doctrine of total depravity in one sentence: “No one can come to me unless the Father who sent me draws him” (John 6:44). Sin has so corrupted and disordered the human race that unless God intervenes in a person’s life, he or she will never repent of sin and believe in the Lord Jesus Christ" (27)
(14) "perhaps it would be less confusing to call the doctrine total inability" (28)
(15) "The Components: Understanding, Will, and Affections
When God created humans, he created us in his image so that we loved him and were capable of fellowship with him. He gave us the ability to understand the truth that he revealed. He made us so that we eagerly chose what was good. In this state of spiritual health, we loved God and loved all persons and things as God intended. In other words, he gave us enlightened understanding, free will, and healthy affections.1 Stated another way, God created humans in knowledge, righteousness, and holiness.2 These three qualities—understanding, will (sometimes called volition), and affections—are essential to what it means to be human, so we can say that these are the nonphysical components of human nature." (29) Personal note: free will?
(16) "Even in human relationships we do not want to be friends with people who constantly disagree with our most fundamental and important beliefs. If such people go beyond mere disagreement and persistently condemn us for what we love, we outright avoid them when we can. As long as it is our nature to love sin, we will not want to know intimately a God who hates sin." (35)
In this dead condition it is impossible for us to do anything that pleases God, because no matter what it is, and no matter how much it may look like a good deed to us and to other humans, God will not be pleased with it. Why? Because we will do our alleged good deeds for some reason other than love of God. (35) Personal note: Orrick’s commentary on John 3:19–20 is great. Certainly true, but he leaves out an important detail. Why is the human will corrupted? Yes, because the fall, but how do individuals participate? Volitionally? Yet Calvinism sacrifices volition on the altar of God’s sovereignty (38)
Personal note: Helpful discussion on total depravity
It is true that whosoever will may come to Jesus. Beyond merely permitting us, God commands us to believe in Jesus! “And this is his commandment, that we believe in the name of his Son Jesus Christ” (1 John 3:23). (44)
When humans reject God’s gracious offer of forgiveness through Christ, that refusal makes it obvious that God is just when he condemns the unrepentant (44) If we reject his offer of grace through Jesus, it becomes obvious that we deserve to fail and to suffer God’s condemnation...Men have deliberately chosen to do evil deeds, and there are far- reaching consequences to this.
Personal note: Orrick’s words on our stubborn love of sin and refusal to repent are spot on. But are they consistent with Calvinism? This is a blind spot within reformed theology. When they're talking about God's sovereignty, the Calvinist insists that God causually determines man. This is conveniently forgotten when it comes to culpability (47). Calvinists assert the latter as a brute fact, but it doesn’t flow from their view of God's sovereignty. Why is this a problem? Consider the following. Calvinists affirm
I. God causually determines all things
ii. God does not causually determine sinful choices
The law of non-contradiction states that A cannot be both A and -A at the same time and in the same way. Yet this is the very trap Calvinists have set for themselves. They have embedded a contradiction at the heart of their theology. Christian apologists sieze these opportunities when they encounter them among the world's religions.
Human inability is the result of human disobedience (46). Yes!
Personal note: love the headphone illustration (47)
Personal note: My note about the Law of Non-Contradiction was pretty aggressive. Let me step back. As I reflect on what Calvinists actually believe about free will, they think it comes down to this: If the topic is about God's sovereignty, Calvinists are quick to affirm a Lutheran, Edwardian understanding of causal determinism overlayed with compatiblism. When the topic turns to human responsibility, they adopt a light libertarianism. As long as the creature cannot choose good but can only opt among evil alternatives, then this is sufficient. So Calvinists aren’t contradictory, only inconsistent.
learning that we cannot save ourselves is an indispensable first step in our salvation (47)
Orrick’s Chapter on depravity could have been written by an Arminian. (54)
Unconditional election: “The Bible teaches that before God had created anyone or anything, he decided that he would choose, or elect, some humans to be his adopted children. No one deserved this honor; God did not foresee any condition in them that prompted him to choose them, so we say that God chose them unconditionally. God chose or elected them because he wanted to; or, to put it another way, it was his will to elect them.” (59)
Why did the Lord choose you? Because he loved you. Why did the Lord love you? Because he loves you.” There was simply no condition in Israel that attracted God to choose them. Is this fair? (61)
Fairness does not consist in treating everyone equally; fairness consists in giving everyone what he deserves (61)
Personal note: given Orrick’s annoyance with how Calvinism is often represented, his description of conditional election is unfortunate (63)
Why evangelize given the doctrine of election? “We do not believe that the elect will be saved apart from the means that God has appointed. Rather, God uses his appointed means to save the elect. (67)
Molinism? “ God arranges all circumstances so that his elect hear the gospel, believe the gospel, and receive all that is necessary to obtain the inheritance.“ (68)
Orrick lays out some presuppositions, based on an understanding of some passages, that informs his position on unconditional election. I don’t find a hefty exposition of faith passages (68)
(2 Peter 3:9). We must take Pharaoh into account when we interpret that verse. It must mean that God is not willing that any of his elect should perish. (71)
If your version of election does not sound unjust to the natural man, it is almost certainly not the version of election we have here in Romans 9. (71)
Personal note: Orrick’s comparison of double predestination to foreknowledge is unsatisfying. There is a world of difference between knowing a state of affairs and causing a state of affairs. Case in point. A parent may be aware that a bully is harassing her child at the bus stop. Yet she chooses to let her son walk anyway. She hopes the boy will learn a life lesson on handling these kind of people. But suppose we learn that the mother is paying the bully to beat up her child! (74)
Election to everlasting life is unconditional, but election to eternal punishment is conditional. God has “endured with much patience vessels of wrath prepared for destruction” (Rom. 9:22). He must be patient with them, because they are rebelling against him. According to the Bible, God does not send anyone to hell because that person is non-elect; he sends them to hell because they are sinners who willingly rebel against him (74). Excellent
Every human deserves God’s wrath, and God would be just to send all humans to hell. Is it wrong for God to send rebellious sinners to hell? Then why would it be wrong for him to plan to do so? (74). This is great.
But if we are going to encounter perplexing mysteries in any system, let us encounter them through embracing what is plainly taught in the Scriptures and not because we are trying to explain away what is plainly taught there (78)
Discretion is not deception, nor is it cowardice. Jesus recognized that his disciples were not yet ready to receive everything that they needed to know. “I still have many things to say to you, but you cannot bear them now” ( John 16:12)(80)
Orrick thinks the "efficiency" and "sufficiency" of the atonement are coequal. I agree that given the Calvinist understanding, this is consistent. (92)
Orrick may be confusing foreknowledge with causation (92)
Ooh. I like Orrick's argument for particular atonement (95). (i) Jesus died for all sins (ii) unbelief is a sin (iii) Therefore Jesus died for the sin of unbelief (iv) If God punished Jesus for the sins for which he died, then God will not punish the sinner for that sin (v) God punished Jesus for the sins for which He died (vi) Therefore God will not punish the sinner for unbelief.
Orrick says passages about God loving/saving "the world" do not mean universal atonement. World should be taken to mean "gentiles". That is, the point is that Jesus was not only saving Jews, but gentiles as well (103)
“Christ purchased our redemption, but we partake of it only when the Spirit effectively applies it to us by working faith in us and thereby uniting us to Christ in our effectual calling“ (135)
As a result of the Spirit's work, the elect freely repent of sin and believe in Christ (137)
Is Orrick’s point that God uses means to persuade men? Even if the outcome is guaranteed, this is not Calvinism. On Calvinism, regeneration is the means of persuasion. (138)
“Some people erroneously suppose that when God calls a sinner to himself, he does no more than the turkey hunter. Similar to the hunter, God knows how to arrange circumstances skillfully. He knows how to capitalize on our desires for love, for security, and for meaning in life so that we see that these desirable things are found only in him. He applies his skills of superior intellect, and then he sets up in a good hiding place to see if he can get a sinner to come in to him.“ (143) Personal note: certainly Douberley match what he said in the note above.
Personal note: Orrick has fallen into a trap of his own making. How can God “really mean” a call to salvation on Orrick’s description of limited atonement? God is calling the sinner to accept a provision that God has not supplied. (144)
Personal note: this falls into a pattern I’ve seen in Calvinism. One doctrine will be affirmed when it’s convenient. Then discarded when it no longer works
“Effectual calling is the work of God’s Spirit, whereby, convincing us of our sin and misery, enlightening our minds in the knowledge of Christ, and renewing our wills, he doth persuade and enable us to embrace Jesus Christ freely offered to us in the gospel. — Westminster Shorter Catechism, answer 31.” Personal note: if this is all that is meant by effectual call, everyone should believe it. (146)
“Faith is that persuasion of truth which is founded on testimony.” Hodge (174). Personal note: there is a problem here. Orrick continually uses this verbiage. Persuade. Convince. “God has provided...evidence.” What do these words mean? They entail an interplay between minds. How does this fit with monergism? I think Orrick is playing both sides. He uses terms that suggest a classical understanding of faith. He overlays them on Calvinism. The question is, is faith causally determined in the sinner? If no, then wherefor is Calvinism?
To illustrate. Calvinists see “draw” from John 6 as being more like “drag”. If I drag a man through a door, I haven’t persuaded him. I didn’t convince him. I determined him. This speaks to my complaint that the Calvinist is inconsistent. He adopts terms that don’t fit the intended meaning. He equivocates when it suits his needs.
“While faith, per se, is a human response, and therefore not a supernatural act, no human ever exercises saving faith apart from the supernatu- ral work of God in him.” (178)
“Faith is a condition of salvation, but faith is not a work” (178)
faith is a passive virtue—faith receives truth. (178)
Personal note: Dr. Orrick has really opened Pandora’s box in this last chapter. How is this in any way Calvinism? His entire description of faith goes back and forth. Humbly, either Dr. Orrick or yours truly is confused. He’s describing the regenerative work of the spirit in ways every Arminian would celebrate. Persuade. Convince. Provide evidence. It’s almost as if an Arminian wrote this book to trick us. Let me be gentle. I’m not trying to insult Dr. Orrick.
If God is not sovereign over all, then there are some things, persons, and events that God either cannot or will not control. If that be the case, then future events must be uncertain (202). Personal note: i don’t know an Arminian who would accept this characterization
“If unconditional election is not true, then Christ could not be confident that his work would save anyone” (206). Personal note: again. This makes me wonder how much interaction Orrick has had with non-Calvinists
If irresistible grace is not true, then a sinner must be capable of responding to the gospel call, and the work of the Holy Spirit is not really necessary for salvation (209). Personal note: this is a really bad non-sequitur and straw man. No Arminian would accept this
Original Review: I appreciate what Dr. Jim Orrick was trying to do here. Calvinism is rarely spoken of charitably by its detractors. If someone could apply C.S. Lewis's accessibility to the doctrines of grace, it would be helpful. Alas, Orrick has confused a simple presentation for a simplistic one. This is frustrating. He begins the book complaining that Calvinism is often misrepresented and misunderstood. He goes on to misrepresent and misunderstand Arminianism. Arminianists would accept very little of what Orrick attributes to them. Worse, I fear Calvinists would accept little of what Orrick attributes to Calvinism!
Notes.
(1) Personal note: Calvinism is definitely popular now! (9)
(2) “Just because someone calls himself a Calvinist does not mean he knows what Calvinism is” (10)
(3) “... most of the discussions she had heard about Calvinism were more philosophical than biblical” (11)
(4) "Well, in two sentences . . . First, a Calvinist believes that God always does whatever he pleases. Second, a Calvinist believes that God initiates, sustains, and completes the salvation of everyone who gets saved."(14)
(5) "If the Bible asserts something about God to be true, and it could not possibly be true of your God, then you have the wrong god." (16)
(6) "While sinners may try to resist him, no one successfully resists him. God is the one “who works all things according to the counsel of his will” (Eph. 1:11). (17)
(7) Personal note: is Orrick priming the reader for unreasonable arguments? (19)
(8) Personal note about reason versus revelation: Scripture is prior to reason. I agree with the author. If I come to a doctrine that seems unreasonable and yet is clearly taught, I bow my knee. However, this could also indicate I’ve misunderstood the doctrine. If I find another interpretation that does justice to the passage while eliminating the logical problem, this interpretation should be preferred.
(9) Dr. Orrick quotes a verse about God’s inscrutability. Ironic that the very preceding verse clarifies Romans 9, the chief Calvinist proof text. (19)
(10) Personal note: I love this idea. Calvinism explained using Lewis’s model from Mere Christianity. 20 pages in, and I notice a contrast. While Lewis was gentle, Orrick lays down the gauntlet.
(11) "God has planned in advance for the success of the gospel" (23)
(12) "Admittedly, this is a great mystery. All persons think and act freely, yet all the while God is sovereignly superintending all things so that his eternal purpose is infallibly accomplished." (24)
(13) "Our Lord summarizes the doctrine of total depravity in one sentence: “No one can come to me unless the Father who sent me draws him” (John 6:44). Sin has so corrupted and disordered the human race that unless God intervenes in a person’s life, he or she will never repent of sin and believe in the Lord Jesus Christ" (27)
(14) "perhaps it would be less confusing to call the doctrine total inability" (28)
(15) "The Components: Understanding, Will, and Affections
When God created humans, he created us in his image so that we loved him and were capable of fellowship with him. He gave us the ability to understand the truth that he revealed. He made us so that we eagerly chose what was good. In this state of spiritual health, we loved God and loved all persons and things as God intended. In other words, he gave us enlightened understanding, free will, and healthy affections.1 Stated another way, God created humans in knowledge, righteousness, and holiness.2 These three qualities—understanding, will (sometimes called volition), and affections—are essential to what it means to be human, so we can say that these are the nonphysical components of human nature." (29) Personal note: free will?
(16) "Even in human relationships we do not want to be friends with people who constantly disagree with our most fundamental and important beliefs. If such people go beyond mere disagreement and persistently condemn us for what we love, we outright avoid them when we can. As long as it is our nature to love sin, we will not want to know intimately a God who hates sin." (35)
In this dead condition it is impossible for us to do anything that pleases God, because no matter what it is, and no matter how much it may look like a good deed to us and to other humans, God will not be pleased with it. Why? Because we will do our alleged good deeds for some reason other than love of God. (35) Personal note: Orrick’s commentary on John 3:19–20 is great. Certainly true, but he leaves out an important detail. Why is the human will corrupted? Yes, because the fall, but how do individuals participate? Volitionally? Yet Calvinism sacrifices volition on the altar of God’s sovereignty (38)
Personal note: Helpful discussion on total depravity
It is true that whosoever will may come to Jesus. Beyond merely permitting us, God commands us to believe in Jesus! “And this is his commandment, that we believe in the name of his Son Jesus Christ” (1 John 3:23). (44)
When humans reject God’s gracious offer of forgiveness through Christ, that refusal makes it obvious that God is just when he condemns the unrepentant (44) If we reject his offer of grace through Jesus, it becomes obvious that we deserve to fail and to suffer God’s condemnation...Men have deliberately chosen to do evil deeds, and there are far- reaching consequences to this.
Personal note: Orrick’s words on our stubborn love of sin and refusal to repent are spot on. But are they consistent with Calvinism? This is a blind spot within reformed theology. When they're talking about God's sovereignty, the Calvinist insists that God causually determines man. This is conveniently forgotten when it comes to culpability (47). Calvinists assert the latter as a brute fact, but it doesn’t flow from their view of God's sovereignty. Why is this a problem? Consider the following. Calvinists affirm
I. God causually determines all things
ii. God does not causually determine sinful choices
The law of non-contradiction states that A cannot be both A and -A at the same time and in the same way. Yet this is the very trap Calvinists have set for themselves. They have embedded a contradiction at the heart of their theology. Christian apologists sieze these opportunities when they encounter them among the world's religions.
Human inability is the result of human disobedience (46). Yes!
Personal note: love the headphone illustration (47)
Personal note: My note about the Law of Non-Contradiction was pretty aggressive. Let me step back. As I reflect on what Calvinists actually believe about free will, they think it comes down to this: If the topic is about God's sovereignty, Calvinists are quick to affirm a Lutheran, Edwardian understanding of causal determinism overlayed with compatiblism. When the topic turns to human responsibility, they adopt a light libertarianism. As long as the creature cannot choose good but can only opt among evil alternatives, then this is sufficient. So Calvinists aren’t contradictory, only inconsistent.
learning that we cannot save ourselves is an indispensable first step in our salvation (47)
Orrick’s Chapter on depravity could have been written by an Arminian. (54)
Unconditional election: “The Bible teaches that before God had created anyone or anything, he decided that he would choose, or elect, some humans to be his adopted children. No one deserved this honor; God did not foresee any condition in them that prompted him to choose them, so we say that God chose them unconditionally. God chose or elected them because he wanted to; or, to put it another way, it was his will to elect them.” (59)
Why did the Lord choose you? Because he loved you. Why did the Lord love you? Because he loves you.” There was simply no condition in Israel that attracted God to choose them. Is this fair? (61)
Fairness does not consist in treating everyone equally; fairness consists in giving everyone what he deserves (61)
Personal note: given Orrick’s annoyance with how Calvinism is often represented, his description of conditional election is unfortunate (63)
Why evangelize given the doctrine of election? “We do not believe that the elect will be saved apart from the means that God has appointed. Rather, God uses his appointed means to save the elect. (67)
Molinism? “ God arranges all circumstances so that his elect hear the gospel, believe the gospel, and receive all that is necessary to obtain the inheritance.“ (68)
Orrick lays out some presuppositions, based on an understanding of some passages, that informs his position on unconditional election. I don’t find a hefty exposition of faith passages (68)
(2 Peter 3:9). We must take Pharaoh into account when we interpret that verse. It must mean that God is not willing that any of his elect should perish. (71)
If your version of election does not sound unjust to the natural man, it is almost certainly not the version of election we have here in Romans 9. (71)
Personal note: Orrick’s comparison of double predestination to foreknowledge is unsatisfying. There is a world of difference between knowing a state of affairs and causing a state of affairs. Case in point. A parent may be aware that a bully is harassing her child at the bus stop. Yet she chooses to let her son walk anyway. She hopes the boy will learn a life lesson on handling these kind of people. But suppose we learn that the mother is paying the bully to beat up her child! (74)
Election to everlasting life is unconditional, but election to eternal punishment is conditional. God has “endured with much patience vessels of wrath prepared for destruction” (Rom. 9:22). He must be patient with them, because they are rebelling against him. According to the Bible, God does not send anyone to hell because that person is non-elect; he sends them to hell because they are sinners who willingly rebel against him (74). Excellent
Every human deserves God’s wrath, and God would be just to send all humans to hell. Is it wrong for God to send rebellious sinners to hell? Then why would it be wrong for him to plan to do so? (74). This is great.
But if we are going to encounter perplexing mysteries in any system, let us encounter them through embracing what is plainly taught in the Scriptures and not because we are trying to explain away what is plainly taught there (78)
Discretion is not deception, nor is it cowardice. Jesus recognized that his disciples were not yet ready to receive everything that they needed to know. “I still have many things to say to you, but you cannot bear them now” ( John 16:12)(80)
Orrick thinks the "efficiency" and "sufficiency" of the atonement are coequal. I agree that given the Calvinist understanding, this is consistent. (92)
Orrick may be confusing foreknowledge with causation (92)
Ooh. I like Orrick's argument for particular atonement (95). (i) Jesus died for all sins (ii) unbelief is a sin (iii) Therefore Jesus died for the sin of unbelief (iv) If God punished Jesus for the sins for which he died, then God will not punish the sinner for that sin (v) God punished Jesus for the sins for which He died (vi) Therefore God will not punish the sinner for unbelief.
Orrick says passages about God loving/saving "the world" do not mean universal atonement. World should be taken to mean "gentiles". That is, the point is that Jesus was not only saving Jews, but gentiles as well (103)
“Christ purchased our redemption, but we partake of it only when the Spirit effectively applies it to us by working faith in us and thereby uniting us to Christ in our effectual calling“ (135)
As a result of the Spirit's work, the elect freely repent of sin and believe in Christ (137)
Is Orrick’s point that God uses means to persuade men? Even if the outcome is guaranteed, this is not Calvinism. On Calvinism, regeneration is the means of persuasion. (138)
“Some people erroneously suppose that when God calls a sinner to himself, he does no more than the turkey hunter. Similar to the hunter, God knows how to arrange circumstances skillfully. He knows how to capitalize on our desires for love, for security, and for meaning in life so that we see that these desirable things are found only in him. He applies his skills of superior intellect, and then he sets up in a good hiding place to see if he can get a sinner to come in to him.“ (143) Personal note: certainly Douberley match what he said in the note above.
Personal note: Orrick has fallen into a trap of his own making. How can God “really mean” a call to salvation on Orrick’s description of limited atonement? God is calling the sinner to accept a provision that God has not supplied. (144)
Personal note: this falls into a pattern I’ve seen in Calvinism. One doctrine will be affirmed when it’s convenient. Then discarded when it no longer works
“Effectual calling is the work of God’s Spirit, whereby, convincing us of our sin and misery, enlightening our minds in the knowledge of Christ, and renewing our wills, he doth persuade and enable us to embrace Jesus Christ freely offered to us in the gospel. — Westminster Shorter Catechism, answer 31.” Personal note: if this is all that is meant by effectual call, everyone should believe it. (146)
“Faith is that persuasion of truth which is founded on testimony.” Hodge (174). Personal note: there is a problem here. Orrick continually uses this verbiage. Persuade. Convince. “God has provided...evidence.” What do these words mean? They entail an interplay between minds. How does this fit with monergism? I think Orrick is playing both sides. He uses terms that suggest a classical understanding of faith. He overlays them on Calvinism. The question is, is faith causally determined in the sinner? If no, then wherefor is Calvinism?
To illustrate. Calvinists see “draw” from John 6 as being more like “drag”. If I drag a man through a door, I haven’t persuaded him. I didn’t convince him. I determined him. This speaks to my complaint that the Calvinist is inconsistent. He adopts terms that don’t fit the intended meaning. He equivocates when it suits his needs.
“While faith, per se, is a human response, and therefore not a supernatural act, no human ever exercises saving faith apart from the supernatu- ral work of God in him.” (178)
“Faith is a condition of salvation, but faith is not a work” (178)
faith is a passive virtue—faith receives truth. (178)
Personal note: Dr. Orrick has really opened Pandora’s box in this last chapter. How is this in any way Calvinism? His entire description of faith goes back and forth. Humbly, either Dr. Orrick or yours truly is confused. He’s describing the regenerative work of the spirit in ways every Arminian would celebrate. Persuade. Convince. Provide evidence. It’s almost as if an Arminian wrote this book to trick us. Let me be gentle. I’m not trying to insult Dr. Orrick.
If God is not sovereign over all, then there are some things, persons, and events that God either cannot or will not control. If that be the case, then future events must be uncertain (202). Personal note: i don’t know an Arminian who would accept this characterization
“If unconditional election is not true, then Christ could not be confident that his work would save anyone” (206). Personal note: again. This makes me wonder how much interaction Orrick has had with non-Calvinists
If irresistible grace is not true, then a sinner must be capable of responding to the gospel call, and the work of the Holy Spirit is not really necessary for salvation (209). Personal note: this is a really bad non-sequitur and straw man. No Arminian would accept this
Original Review: I appreciate what Dr. Jim Orrick was trying to do here. Calvinism is rarely spoken of charitably by its detractors. If someone could apply C.S. Lewis's accessibility to the doctrines of grace, it would be helpful. Alas, Orrick has confused a simple presentation for a simplistic one. This is frustrating. He begins the book complaining that Calvinism is often misrepresented and misunderstood. He goes on to misrepresent and misunderstand Arminianism. Arminianists would accept very little of what Orrick attributes to them. Worse, I fear Calvinists would accept little of what Orrick attributes to Calvinism!
January 8, 2020
Explains some important biblical doctrines with great clarity.
January 21, 2021
Such a beautiful, worshipful, deep summary of the doctrines of grace! One of the main strengths of this book are the analogies and illustrations. Some of the best I have ever read or heard. His use of scripture is incredibly expository in nature and extremely helpful. I took away one star just because there was just a few moments he may have been guilty of misrepresenting the opposite position which we need to be careful of. But generally, he did not do that. He was incredibly humble and extremely charitable. Thankful for this read which caused me to worship in light of such a great salvation God has given to me!
December 9, 2020
This rating is based on whether this book is what the author intended it to be or not. He is extremely clear up front that this book is not meant to be a deep, theological treatise on the doctrines of grace. If you are a pastor and have preached the doctrines of grace for many years, you are not the target audience. This book is aimed at those who have never really been exposed to the doctrines of grace and desire to learn more—or have just recently come to embrace them.
There is much good in this book. Over the 22 years I've been pastoring, I have yet to talk to an opponent of the truths often nicknamed "Calvinism" who truly understood what it is. Most have preconceived notions that turn them off before they ever hear an explanation. I recall listening to a man just a few months back explain to me why he rejected them. After hearing his explanation, I said, "If what you have described is Calvinism, I don't believe it either." Bottom line, there are too many preconceived notions when we approach the Bible, especially concerning this subject. I thought the author did a really fine job of handling that.
I'll also say, he did a fine job of handling the common objections I hear from my Arminian friends (yes, I have Arminian friends). He didn't ignore the "other side" of the argument. He tried to answer their questions.
This book is written with a good attitude. There's no name calling. He isn't looking down his nose at those who disagree with them. He's simply explaining his view from Scripture.
The one thing I wish he hadn't included were a few obviously amillennial statements. I have enough respect for him to believe he knew fully what he was saying. Now admittedly, I am a premillennialist. That said, there really wasn't a good reason to include ANY statements that are even leading towards a prophetic position. That detracts from the purpose of the book to the cautious reader. I would think that even my amillennial friends (and yes, I do have amillennial friends too!) would agree that those things should be handled in another setting. If I give this book to somebody, I don't want them to be sidetracked by those few statements. There were only 5-6...but that's 5-6 too many.
All that said, this is a fine book to give to somebody whom you want to share the doctrines of grace with.
There is much good in this book. Over the 22 years I've been pastoring, I have yet to talk to an opponent of the truths often nicknamed "Calvinism" who truly understood what it is. Most have preconceived notions that turn them off before they ever hear an explanation. I recall listening to a man just a few months back explain to me why he rejected them. After hearing his explanation, I said, "If what you have described is Calvinism, I don't believe it either." Bottom line, there are too many preconceived notions when we approach the Bible, especially concerning this subject. I thought the author did a really fine job of handling that.
I'll also say, he did a fine job of handling the common objections I hear from my Arminian friends (yes, I have Arminian friends). He didn't ignore the "other side" of the argument. He tried to answer their questions.
This book is written with a good attitude. There's no name calling. He isn't looking down his nose at those who disagree with them. He's simply explaining his view from Scripture.
The one thing I wish he hadn't included were a few obviously amillennial statements. I have enough respect for him to believe he knew fully what he was saying. Now admittedly, I am a premillennialist. That said, there really wasn't a good reason to include ANY statements that are even leading towards a prophetic position. That detracts from the purpose of the book to the cautious reader. I would think that even my amillennial friends (and yes, I do have amillennial friends too!) would agree that those things should be handled in another setting. If I give this book to somebody, I don't want them to be sidetracked by those few statements. There were only 5-6...but that's 5-6 too many.
All that said, this is a fine book to give to somebody whom you want to share the doctrines of grace with.
December 31, 2023
If I could, I'd give Orrick's book 3.5 stars. I'll say that this short book was a great primer, or gateway, into more fleshed out treatments on the 5 points of Calvinism or other Reformed doctrines. I'm glad that Orrick opened up the WCF and the WSC numerous times showing that, though he is a Baptist, he agreed with the Reformed tradition in these areas. That being said, Reformed theology is far m0re than just the 5 Points. From the title itself you can see that it's just describing the beginning aspects of soteriology from a Reformed perspective. You won't get a major treatment on these popular doctrines since that's not the aim of the book.
There are some strong points that Orrick makes and offers in the book. One is its readability. His writing style is easy to grasp, accessible, and clear. He makes good use of illustrations and opens up the 5 points to a young believer or somebody who's exploring Calvinistic doctrine for the first time. I agree with most of his understandings of the biblical doctrines, though there's much more to be said for all of them that the length of the work doesn't allow.
Now for some of the issue areas. One is Orrick's illustration usage. I like his illustrations, but he can go a bit overboard with them. Of course that's his style, and it's understandable in his context where he ministers, but they can be a bit too much. Best to use shorter ones that get to the point quicker. The other is, I'd say, he commits some straw-manish arguments. What I mean by this is that he doesn't interact with some of the more in-depth and well-articulated arguments against the 5 Points. I'm a confessional Presbyterian fully ascribing to the system of doctrine found in the Standards, but it's best to interact with more fleshed out arguments rather than "all means all." It is a primer book, and most non-Calvinists can't articulate a strong rebuttal of these doctrines, but it's best to interact with some more strident arguments than some addressed here.
All in all, it's a good and easy introduction to Calvinistic soteriology. I'd recommend it as a primer for somebody coming from a more Arminian Baptist, Methodist, Pentecostal, or Roman Catholic background then moving on to something more meaty. Definitely a good read though!
There are some strong points that Orrick makes and offers in the book. One is its readability. His writing style is easy to grasp, accessible, and clear. He makes good use of illustrations and opens up the 5 points to a young believer or somebody who's exploring Calvinistic doctrine for the first time. I agree with most of his understandings of the biblical doctrines, though there's much more to be said for all of them that the length of the work doesn't allow.
Now for some of the issue areas. One is Orrick's illustration usage. I like his illustrations, but he can go a bit overboard with them. Of course that's his style, and it's understandable in his context where he ministers, but they can be a bit too much. Best to use shorter ones that get to the point quicker. The other is, I'd say, he commits some straw-manish arguments. What I mean by this is that he doesn't interact with some of the more in-depth and well-articulated arguments against the 5 Points. I'm a confessional Presbyterian fully ascribing to the system of doctrine found in the Standards, but it's best to interact with more fleshed out arguments rather than "all means all." It is a primer book, and most non-Calvinists can't articulate a strong rebuttal of these doctrines, but it's best to interact with some more strident arguments than some addressed here.
All in all, it's a good and easy introduction to Calvinistic soteriology. I'd recommend it as a primer for somebody coming from a more Arminian Baptist, Methodist, Pentecostal, or Roman Catholic background then moving on to something more meaty. Definitely a good read though!
June 22, 2019
“Mere Calvinism” by Jim Scott Orrick is another book on the doctrines of grace as summed up in the acronym TULIP. Total depravity, Unconditional election, Limited atonement, and Perseverance of the saints make up what are commonly referred to as the 5 points of Calvinism. Many Calvinists, including Orrick occasionally prefer different or more precise language to describe these doctrines so at times the author explains where he might use different words than those just listed.
I tried to read this book keeping in mind how I felt first exploring the doctrines of grace and what I wanted from or did not like about works on the same topic. One major thing I wanted was thorough exegesis of Calvinist proof texts, which is more suited for a commentary than a short book such as this. In his chapter on limited atonement Orrick offers a wonderfully compiled list of passages which plainly state the doctrine. He does not, nor do I believe he sets out to offer an extensive exegesis of each specific verse, however he does an excellent job of explaining and laying the foundations of these doctrines. I would say compared to other works, “Mere Calvinism” is actually one of the more thorough in explaining what each doctrine means and the biblical foundation for believing them. I also found his explanations of what world and all mean in context to be beneficial.
I enjoyed this book and would recommend it for the new Calvinist to gain a more solid foundation in what they believe, “old” Calvinists looking to refresh their knowledge, or the curious non-Calvinist who simply wants to know what Calvinists believe, don’t believe, and why.
I received a copy of this book in exchange for my fair and honest review.
I tried to read this book keeping in mind how I felt first exploring the doctrines of grace and what I wanted from or did not like about works on the same topic. One major thing I wanted was thorough exegesis of Calvinist proof texts, which is more suited for a commentary than a short book such as this. In his chapter on limited atonement Orrick offers a wonderfully compiled list of passages which plainly state the doctrine. He does not, nor do I believe he sets out to offer an extensive exegesis of each specific verse, however he does an excellent job of explaining and laying the foundations of these doctrines. I would say compared to other works, “Mere Calvinism” is actually one of the more thorough in explaining what each doctrine means and the biblical foundation for believing them. I also found his explanations of what world and all mean in context to be beneficial.
I enjoyed this book and would recommend it for the new Calvinist to gain a more solid foundation in what they believe, “old” Calvinists looking to refresh their knowledge, or the curious non-Calvinist who simply wants to know what Calvinists believe, don’t believe, and why.
I received a copy of this book in exchange for my fair and honest review.
August 1, 2019
As an 11th-grade Sunday School teacher, I am tasked and privileged to teach on the Doctrines of Grace. While also known as TULIP, these doctrines are most famously known as Calvinism. When given the opportunity to review this book, I wanted to see if it would improve my teaching and enhance my understanding.
More Than the Five Points
What sets this book apart from other books I have read on Calvinism is the tone of writing and the guidance given. Author Jim Scott Orrick writes with a winsome tone, seeking to persuade the reader. He anticipates arguments and objections and aims for common understanding.
He cites Scripture and seeks to explain it with a straightforward approach. He sprinkles in illustrations and stories to help the reader understand. He provides questions for contemplation and discussion at the end of every chapter.
An Experienced Author
Orrick is an experienced author. I mean this in two ways. First, he has experience as a professor at Boyce College and also as an author. He knows how to teach and write well. His communication is clear and careful.
Second, he has lived a life full of experiences. My favorite illustrations are when he uses examples from his own life, including his hobbies as a hunter and beekeeper. He gives examples that I will seek to incorporate into my own teaching.
Life-Changing Truths
This book has challenged me to examine the Doctrines of Grace in different ways. I am given a clearer picture of Christ and a deeper love for God. This book serves beginners with a basic introduction to Calvinism. It serves teachers with tools to help sharpen the minds of students. And it has served me in strengthening my faith and reminding me of the riches I have in Christ.
More Than the Five Points
What sets this book apart from other books I have read on Calvinism is the tone of writing and the guidance given. Author Jim Scott Orrick writes with a winsome tone, seeking to persuade the reader. He anticipates arguments and objections and aims for common understanding.
He cites Scripture and seeks to explain it with a straightforward approach. He sprinkles in illustrations and stories to help the reader understand. He provides questions for contemplation and discussion at the end of every chapter.
An Experienced Author
Orrick is an experienced author. I mean this in two ways. First, he has experience as a professor at Boyce College and also as an author. He knows how to teach and write well. His communication is clear and careful.
Second, he has lived a life full of experiences. My favorite illustrations are when he uses examples from his own life, including his hobbies as a hunter and beekeeper. He gives examples that I will seek to incorporate into my own teaching.
Life-Changing Truths
This book has challenged me to examine the Doctrines of Grace in different ways. I am given a clearer picture of Christ and a deeper love for God. This book serves beginners with a basic introduction to Calvinism. It serves teachers with tools to help sharpen the minds of students. And it has served me in strengthening my faith and reminding me of the riches I have in Christ.
May 12, 2020
65 of 2020. With the resurgence of Calvinism over the past 20 of years, Calvinists have faced a great bit of hostility and misunderstanding. Even some who take on the title of Calvinist do not understand the theological system they are affirming. Jim Orrick’s goal is to change that. He wants to teach Calvinists and those interested in what Calvinism is what the five points mean, and rather than leaning on the words of theologians, the makes a case from Calvinism straight from the Bible.
This book is a simple but comprehensive look at the five points of TULIP along with considerations and refutations for the objections that are raised against Calvinism.
It is a very thoughtful and well-reasoned book. It also has what may be the best chapter on limited atonement that I have ever read—at least on a layman’s level.
This would also, if you are coming from a Reformed perspective, make a great read with your teenager. I could also see it working perfectly in a 10th or 11th grade curriculum as part of your child’s religious education.
This is really just a really well-written book on the five points.
⭐️⭐️⭐️⭐️⭐️
#bookstagram #booklover #bookreview #theunreadshelfproject2020 #currentlyreading #merecalvinism #theology
This book is a simple but comprehensive look at the five points of TULIP along with considerations and refutations for the objections that are raised against Calvinism.
It is a very thoughtful and well-reasoned book. It also has what may be the best chapter on limited atonement that I have ever read—at least on a layman’s level.
This would also, if you are coming from a Reformed perspective, make a great read with your teenager. I could also see it working perfectly in a 10th or 11th grade curriculum as part of your child’s religious education.
This is really just a really well-written book on the five points.
⭐️⭐️⭐️⭐️⭐️
#bookstagram #booklover #bookreview #theunreadshelfproject2020 #currentlyreading #merecalvinism #theology
July 9, 2022
Jim Scott Orrick’s “Mere Calvinism” is simple, solid, and clear. Orrick navigates the reader through the five points of Calvinism with a grandfatherly hand and charm.
I was hoping for Orrick’s book to bring some freshness or more of a contemporary angle to the debate, but it’s more of a throw-back. Orrick’s examples are primarily taken from his love for the outdoors. The book feels about 50 years older than it is. That’s not a criticism, it just might not connect with certain readers.
What I like best is that Orrick writes with a charitable and peaceable spirit. He isn’t contentious and doesn’t pound his fist. I wish he would have spent more time on his final chapter and explained more of the deficiencies of trying to just take certain points and not all of them.
I would still point to the classic volume by Steele, Thomas, and Quinn as my go-to for an introduction to Calvinism. I am drawn to their scripture-saturated approach. I would love to find a newer volume that covers the topic in a more updated manner.
For more reviews see thebeehive.live.
I was hoping for Orrick’s book to bring some freshness or more of a contemporary angle to the debate, but it’s more of a throw-back. Orrick’s examples are primarily taken from his love for the outdoors. The book feels about 50 years older than it is. That’s not a criticism, it just might not connect with certain readers.
What I like best is that Orrick writes with a charitable and peaceable spirit. He isn’t contentious and doesn’t pound his fist. I wish he would have spent more time on his final chapter and explained more of the deficiencies of trying to just take certain points and not all of them.
I would still point to the classic volume by Steele, Thomas, and Quinn as my go-to for an introduction to Calvinism. I am drawn to their scripture-saturated approach. I would love to find a newer volume that covers the topic in a more updated manner.
For more reviews see thebeehive.live.
December 2, 2021
Calvinism made easy to understand! Orrick does a great job explaining the five points of Calvinism in a way that does not require a seminary degree to grasp! He deftly shows from Scripture how each of the points is Biblical, how they each show that salvation is of the Lord, and the practical implications of each of these doctrines. He also does a great job with his illustrations to aid in his explanations. Highly recommended for those who are trying to understand Calvinism, but don’t want a highly technical argument, or a dense philosophical explanation. Pastors, this would be a helpful book to give to people in your congregation, and it will also help your explanation of these doctrines in new members classes and in your preaching.
June 3, 2019
I have not found a clearer explanation of the Doctrines of Grace in print. Mr. Orrick does an excellent job of exposition on the five points of Calvinism using clear and understandable language and illustrations. He addresses and burns almost every straw man I have encountered from the synergist camp and does so saturating the reader with Scripture in context to make his case. The questions at the end of each chapter are very helpful and make great conversation starters. This book would make an excellent home group or Sunday school study and I would highly recommend you sharing a copy of Mere Calvinism with your favorite semi-pelagian or Amyraldian friend. Awesome book!
May 28, 2019
I would give this 5 stars except that I don’t see this book converting the “ other side”. But then again I’m not sure that was Orricks aim (although I’m sure he hopes it does). He simply aimed to make a biblical case for Calvinisms 5 points. He does that well but to a man stuck between Calvinism and Free Will I was not won over to that side totally. I agree with many of his points but can’t just flush away the free will side. Maybe further reading and prayer will help. But if you have never considered Calvinism and are curious what it’s all about this is a great book to explain it all.
December 29, 2019
As good as any introduction to the bare essentials of Calvinism. Unfortunately it’s mired by technical jargon—thankfully, not theological, but pertaining to bow hunting. Here is an actual sentence from the chapter on the doctrine of limited atonement: “So far this season, I have put several deer in the freezer, and we will eat every bit of meat. I also brain tan deer hides and use the resulting buckskin to make some of my hunting clothing and other accoutrements.” Great collection of hymns in the last chapter.
May 22, 2021
If you have folks that you are trying to reach with the gospel but they struggle with labels regarding what they feel Calvinism is, this is a biblical, well-footnoted, clear, brief, winsome demonstration of biblical theology for those who will listen.
A wonderful read filled with personal vignettes from his family, his love of literary things, stories from being a local pastor, stories of knitting wool socks, and calling turkeys, and bowhunting whitetails--all under the sovereignty of God's grace.
A wonderful read filled with personal vignettes from his family, his love of literary things, stories from being a local pastor, stories of knitting wool socks, and calling turkeys, and bowhunting whitetails--all under the sovereignty of God's grace.
December 28, 2024
Great overview and logical explanation of Calvinism! While it covers all the main points of Calvinism, the book also summarizes it as "God always does what He pleases and God initiates, sustains, and completes the salvation of everyone who gets saved." This book was a gift to me as it reminded me of the power of the Holy Spirit to convict hearts. My prayers have changed because of that and my frustration with "people" who don't want to believe is lessening - we were ALL dead in our sins, but God.... the two most amazing words in scripture.
May 16, 2019
This is an excellent resource for anyone wanting to understand Reformed theology.
Orrick does an excellent job of providing sufficient depth for each of the 5 points, but keeping the language simple and understandable so that normal people can read and understand what Reformed people actually believe.
Orrick does an excellent job of providing sufficient depth for each of the 5 points, but keeping the language simple and understandable so that normal people can read and understand what Reformed people actually believe.
May 22, 2020
Solid introduction to Calvinism that is very accessible. The author uses the TULIP framework to explain the doctrines and uses many illustrations. Each chapter concludes with questions for contemplation and discussion. Objections are raised and addressed; the answers leave you wanting more, but space is a factor.
December 13, 2021
I just say, this book has been a big blessing to my family and myself. It’s the most down to earth I’ve read so far. The only thing I have as a critique is that Dr Orrick didn’t explain why the system of theology is called Calvinism. I think a good chapter on that would have been an easy add. I have already purchased this book for a couple good friends with good questions.
July 1, 2024
A good introductory book to the five points of Calvinism. His chapters on total depravity, unconditional election, and perseverance of the saints were better than his chapters on limited atonement and irresistible grace. The latter chapters needed a bit more editing. However, he is an effective writer and provides many good examples to show his thoughts.
July 10, 2024
Such beautiful truth! This very readable exposition on the five points of Calvinism is full of scripture, hymns, and even an original poem or two that pour out of the author’s heart as he teaches and rejoices in the truth that God is indeed sovereign, and that our salvation is completely because of the finished work of Jesus Christ.
November 24, 2025
This book was amazing and did an incredible job of simply explaining the 5 points of Calvinism from the Scriptures. I was cynical about the chapter on limited atonement until I read it. This book whet my appetite to dive deep and learn more about God’s glorious work of salvation.
Displaying 1 - 30 of 43 reviews