What do you think?
Rate this book
A Display of Arminianism
This classic Puritan treatise by John Owen shows the inconsistencies of the Arminian perspective as they cannot be squared with Scripture.
218 pages, Kindle Edition
First published January 1, 1642
52 people are currently reading
127 people want to read
About the author
John Owen
1,375 books424 followersJohn Owen was an English theologian and "was without doubt not only the greatest theologian of the English Puritan movement but also one of the greatest European Reformed theologians of his day, and quite possibly possessed the finest theological mind that England ever produced" ("Owen, John", in Biographical Dictionary of Evangelicals, p. 494)
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 13 of 13 reviews
January 12, 2020
Well, it's Owen and he was going after the Arminians. Wow. It's very polemic and he didn't hold anything back whatsoever.
October 14, 2017
John Owen demonstrates the idolatry of free will, comparing the Arminian position to Scripture. He demonstrates the primacy of God's eternal decrees, foreknowledge, and providence of God, and how boundless free-will would rob God of His freedom to work. Owen counters with Scripture and explains the irresistibility of God's will and man's need considering his depravity. In short, this is a good book to read to understand the issues of Calvinism vs. Arminianism.
The version I listened to is the audio reading found here: http://www.sermonaudio.com/search.asp...
The version I listened to is the audio reading found here: http://www.sermonaudio.com/search.asp...
April 2, 2026
John Owen continues to be my favorite Puritan. Granted, he is not easy to read. He was brilliant. He was widely read, including in the works of his opponents. And this work was polemical. He quotes at length the Arminians of his day and of bygone days so that he attacks the lion of their arguments (not the kitten). There are no strawmen here. Then, with their own arguments from their own words established, he systematically answers them from the Scriptures. Especially valuable are at the end of most chapters when he lists "Sacred Scripture" in one column against quotations from Free-Will advocates in another, side-by-side comparison.
"Now, we call that contingent which, in regard of its next and immediate cause, before it come to pass, may be done or may be not done; as, that a man shall do such a thing tomorrow, or any time hereafter, which he may choose whether ever he will do or no. Such things as these are free and changeable, in respect of men, their immediate and second causes; but if we, as we ought to do, look up unto Him who foreseeth and hath ordained the event of them or their omission, they may be said necessarily to come to pass or to be omitted. It could not be but as it was." (22)
"The question is, Whether we choose him because he hath chosen us, or he chooseth us because we have chosen him, and so indeed choose ourselves?" (65)
On the unity of the work of Christ: "His intercession in heaven is nothing but a continued oblation of himself. So that whatsoever Christ impetrated, merited, or obtained by his death and passion, must be infallibly applied unto and bestowed upon them for whom he intended to obtain it; or else his intercession is vain, he is not heard in the prayers of his mediatorship." (90)
Some of the statements made by Arminians are absolutely shocking:
"It is in the power of man to hinder the execution of God’s will." (52)
"We deny that God’s election unto salvation extendeth itself to singular persons." (67)
"Christ did not properly die to save any one." (99)
"I believe it might have come to pass that the death of Christ might have had its end, though never any man had believed." (99)
"Why, then, the efficacy of the death of Christ depends wholly on us." (99)
It is no wonder Owen was so pointed in his evaluation & critique of the Arminian position. Why he regularly refers to their "idol" of free will. Why he calls their beliefs heretical. Why at times he verges is equating them with Pelagians.
This is an antidote for much which passes for theological thought in broader evangelical Christianity today. "Free will" is often talked about, bandied about, assumed, but rarely defined with any precision. I've even talked with some when pressed to show me in the Bible where it says humans have what they call free will tell me, "Well, its just there." Owen takes such shallow thinking to task. But who will take the time to cut through this heavy timber?
"Now, we call that contingent which, in regard of its next and immediate cause, before it come to pass, may be done or may be not done; as, that a man shall do such a thing tomorrow, or any time hereafter, which he may choose whether ever he will do or no. Such things as these are free and changeable, in respect of men, their immediate and second causes; but if we, as we ought to do, look up unto Him who foreseeth and hath ordained the event of them or their omission, they may be said necessarily to come to pass or to be omitted. It could not be but as it was." (22)
"The question is, Whether we choose him because he hath chosen us, or he chooseth us because we have chosen him, and so indeed choose ourselves?" (65)
On the unity of the work of Christ: "His intercession in heaven is nothing but a continued oblation of himself. So that whatsoever Christ impetrated, merited, or obtained by his death and passion, must be infallibly applied unto and bestowed upon them for whom he intended to obtain it; or else his intercession is vain, he is not heard in the prayers of his mediatorship." (90)
Some of the statements made by Arminians are absolutely shocking:
"It is in the power of man to hinder the execution of God’s will." (52)
"We deny that God’s election unto salvation extendeth itself to singular persons." (67)
"Christ did not properly die to save any one." (99)
"I believe it might have come to pass that the death of Christ might have had its end, though never any man had believed." (99)
"Why, then, the efficacy of the death of Christ depends wholly on us." (99)
It is no wonder Owen was so pointed in his evaluation & critique of the Arminian position. Why he regularly refers to their "idol" of free will. Why he calls their beliefs heretical. Why at times he verges is equating them with Pelagians.
This is an antidote for much which passes for theological thought in broader evangelical Christianity today. "Free will" is often talked about, bandied about, assumed, but rarely defined with any precision. I've even talked with some when pressed to show me in the Bible where it says humans have what they call free will tell me, "Well, its just there." Owen takes such shallow thinking to task. But who will take the time to cut through this heavy timber?
January 1, 2021
This book is amazing, it's thoroughly based on scripture, constantly and accurately holding Arminian philosophies up to the light of God's Word. I must add, it had a very refreshing take on "irresistible grace":
"Thirdly. We do not affirm that grace is irresistible, as though it came upon the will with such an overflowing violence as to beat it down before it, and subdue it by compulsion to what it is not inclined to in any way. But if that term must be used, it denotes, in our sense, only such an unconquerable efficacy of grace as to always and infallibly produce its effect; for who can “withstand God?” Acts 11:17 – as it may also be used on that part of the will which will not resist it: “All that the Father gives to Christ shall come to him,” John 6:37. The operation of grace is not resisted by a hard heart because it mollifies the heart itself. It does not so much take away a power to resist, as give a will to obey, whereby the powerful impotency of resistance is removed."
It seemed appropriate though to remove one star, because I don't see how productive this would be to the debate. The author is so hostile towards any who would defend this "heresy," that they won't want to read this book, and if they did, why would they believe it? Pink's Sovereignty is much better for discourse, but both books are true.
"Thirdly. We do not affirm that grace is irresistible, as though it came upon the will with such an overflowing violence as to beat it down before it, and subdue it by compulsion to what it is not inclined to in any way. But if that term must be used, it denotes, in our sense, only such an unconquerable efficacy of grace as to always and infallibly produce its effect; for who can “withstand God?” Acts 11:17 – as it may also be used on that part of the will which will not resist it: “All that the Father gives to Christ shall come to him,” John 6:37. The operation of grace is not resisted by a hard heart because it mollifies the heart itself. It does not so much take away a power to resist, as give a will to obey, whereby the powerful impotency of resistance is removed."
It seemed appropriate though to remove one star, because I don't see how productive this would be to the debate. The author is so hostile towards any who would defend this "heresy," that they won't want to read this book, and if they did, why would they believe it? Pink's Sovereignty is much better for discourse, but both books are true.
April 5, 2026
3 out of 5 stars
In A Display of Arminianism, John Owen, a 17th Century Puritan, attacks doctrine taught by Arminius and his followers.
This book was an interesting read. It shows that the free will/predestination argument has been going on for a very long time. The only thing that has changed is the form in which it is presented.
During Owen's time, the push for free will over God's sovereignty was mainly from one figurehead, Arminius. Arminius made a lot of claims that very few Christians today would stand behind. For example, he said things such as:
"Our free-wills have such an absolute and uncontrollable power in the territory of all human actions, that no influence of God's providence, no certainty of His decree, no unchangeableness of His purpose, can sway it at all in its free-determinations, or have any power with his highness to cause him to will or resolve on any such act as God by him intendeth to produce"
Because of this, reading A Display of Arminianism in the 21st century feels like reading a straw man argument: Of course it is easy for Owen to rip these statements by Arminius to shreds; but what about modern Arminianism, where things are more complicated? What can be said about that?
This book doesn't answer that. I can't knock Owen for it though; he didn't live during our time and had no way of knowing the shape Arminian doctrine would take years down the road.
Nevertheless, this book was still worth reading - at the end of the day, the core Arminian argument is mostly the same as it was hundreds of years ago, so not all relevance to reading this book in 2026 is lost, and some points Owen made were extremely well-thought-out and helpful.
Dude needs to cool his temper a bit though and write fewer run-on sentences that accomplish nothing.
In A Display of Arminianism, John Owen, a 17th Century Puritan, attacks doctrine taught by Arminius and his followers.
This book was an interesting read. It shows that the free will/predestination argument has been going on for a very long time. The only thing that has changed is the form in which it is presented.
During Owen's time, the push for free will over God's sovereignty was mainly from one figurehead, Arminius. Arminius made a lot of claims that very few Christians today would stand behind. For example, he said things such as:
"Our free-wills have such an absolute and uncontrollable power in the territory of all human actions, that no influence of God's providence, no certainty of His decree, no unchangeableness of His purpose, can sway it at all in its free-determinations, or have any power with his highness to cause him to will or resolve on any such act as God by him intendeth to produce"
Because of this, reading A Display of Arminianism in the 21st century feels like reading a straw man argument: Of course it is easy for Owen to rip these statements by Arminius to shreds; but what about modern Arminianism, where things are more complicated? What can be said about that?
This book doesn't answer that. I can't knock Owen for it though; he didn't live during our time and had no way of knowing the shape Arminian doctrine would take years down the road.
Nevertheless, this book was still worth reading - at the end of the day, the core Arminian argument is mostly the same as it was hundreds of years ago, so not all relevance to reading this book in 2026 is lost, and some points Owen made were extremely well-thought-out and helpful.
Dude needs to cool his temper a bit though and write fewer run-on sentences that accomplish nothing.
February 11, 2020
Another exceptional job by Owen. I think of them book as the Death of Death lite. Less calories- With the same great taste! It is against the rise of Arminianism as a whole. It is not against a particular person. It speaks of predestination and limited atonement . This is Owen more readable. A fantastic read and great at under 150 pages.
July 13, 2018
Owen at his best, as he dispels the errors of free will and universal atonement, in order to defend the gospel of grace and unmerited favor in Christ.
March 29, 2026
It's a good treatise, but it also clearly shows itself to be Owen's first. It has many punchy statements but lacks the skillful refutation that Owen's other works demonstrate.
September 28, 2019
A classic. This was written in 1642, when many of the original Remonstrants were still living. Owen understood Arminianism as well or better than its founders. He uses their own words against them, and is particularly effective when he shows how they explicitly contradict Scripture.
December 23, 2013
This book is not an attempt to prove the system called Calvinism, per se, but an attempt to show the great errors in Arminianism. After each section, he places statements (NOT taken out of context. He is careful to use statements that represent what the authors are intending) by Arminius and other Arminians alongside Scripture verses that demonstrate their folly. Those that promote the "idol" (as he calls it) of man's "free-will" and oppose Calvinism could learn a lot by reading this book, and examining the Scriptures. I thoroughly enjoyed it.
August 11, 2016
Excellent analysis of the logical conclusions of Arminianism. Thankfully most Arminians are not consistent.
August 27, 2015
Análise devastadora!
Displaying 1 - 13 of 13 reviews