Why I Am Not a Calvinist

by Jerry L. Walls, Joseph R. Dongell

What's wrong with Calvinism? Since the Reformation, Calvinism has dominated much of evangelical thought. It has been so well established that many Christians simply assume it to be the truest expression of Christian doctrine. But Calvinism has some serious biblical and theological weaknesses that unsettle laypeople, pastors and scholars alike. God is sovereign. All evangelical Christians--whether Arminians or Calvinists--have no doubt about this fundamental truth. But how does God express his sovereignty? Is God a master puppeteer, pulling our strings? Or has he graciously given his children freedom to respond to his love? In this eminently readable book, Jerry L. Walls and Joseph R. Dongell explore the flaws of Calvinist theology. Why I Am Not a Calvinist is a must-read for all who struggle with the limitations of this dominant perspective within evangelical theology.

Genres: Theology, Christian, Christianity, Nonfiction, Religion, Biblical Studies, Reference

225 pages, Kindle Edition

First published April 1, 2004

About the author

Jerry L. Walls (PhD, University of Notre Dame), a world-class expert on the afterlife and a sought-after speaker, has written for Christianity Today, First Things, and Christian Century. He has appeared on NPR’s Talk of the Nation and in the documentary film Hellbound? Walls, professor of philosophy and scholar in residence at Houston Baptist University in Houston, Texas, is the coauthor of Why I Am Not a Calvinist and the Christianity Today Book Award Winner Good God: The Theistic Foundations of Morality. He has authored or edited a dozen books, including a trilogy on the afterlife—Hell: The Logic of Damnation, Purgatory: The Logic of Total Transformation, and Heaven: The Logic of Eternal Joy—and is a senior speaking fellow for the Morris Institute for Human Values.

Reviews

[Amy Lynn · Rating 4 out of 5]

I must state emphatically from the outset that I am neither Calvinist nor Arminian in my Christian beliefs because I believe that these are man-made constructs that limit the true nature of God. With that stated, I begin my review of Why I Am Not A Calvinist with the statement that I was pleasantly surprised by this book and also comforted by its content.

I was raised in an over religious, although decidedly not Godly, home that used Calvinistic thought to abuse and dominate me. Not surprisingly, I already had deep rooted animosity toward what I consider to be a grossly narcissistic system of belief toward the living God. My reason for reading this book in the first place was not to dispel what my heart had already defined as a deliberate distortion of the truth, but to answer questions authoritatively about my concerns with the erroneous doctrine. I was not disappointed.

Other works that I have read in past that dispute Calvinism did not clearly address the three distortions of Calvinism: God's sovereignty; the concept of unearned grace; and what many interpret as "election" as relates to the saved. Fortunately, this book addresses each issue clearly and without shredding scripture. I was evermore thankful as I read each chapter that my questions regarding the spiritual abusiveness of Calvinistic thought were clearly and concisely addressed by the authors.

Although, as previously stated, I do not consider myself Arminian I will concede that Arminian thought has scriptural validity much to the dislike of die-hard Tulip loving Calvinists. One of the best discussions within the book is found in the topic of free will which is something that Calvinists cannot seem to accept. Additionally, the authors address an issue which has bothered me for the duration of my thinking life and that is Calvin's inability to rationally understand the nature of evil even to the exclusion of being able to identify evil within himself.

Calvin was of the mind that salvation was entirely up to God Himself which reduces God to some human-dependent, glory lusting, and micromanaging being who cannot allow others to choose Him freely because of His inability to face rejection and that is NOT the God that I know. Coerced love and dependence are not Godly concepts but the creation of the selfish and controlling heart which are antithetical to the true nature of the living God.

Finally, Calvinism contains a critical flaw which it cannot reconcile that Why I Am Not A Calvinist so clearly points out which is: if salvation were entirely up to God then all of mankind would be saved(1 Timothy 2:4). Calvinists do not believe this and conveniently ignore this glaring hole in their self centered theological system of salvation making God dependent on mankind which I find untrue and absurd. For those willing to confront the errors of Calvinist thinking this is a good read but be willing to read it with an open mind.

[James · Rating 2 out of 5]

I am not a proper philosopher. I work at being a theologian. This book is helpful in defining philosophical problems with Calvinism as the authors define it. They state the issues that they have with Calvinist theology clearly. Their solutions however pay more homage to the philosophical ideal of libertarian free will than to letting Scripture truly rule over their philosophical convictions.

My chief gripe with this book is that it is a theological book with a primarily philosophical argument. I wrote in the margins more times than I've bothered to count "GIVE ME SCRIPTURE." At the risk of gross oversimplification, their argument tries to make God's sovereignty and man's responsibility too neatly defined. The fact of the matter is that the Bible affirms both and does not do it in a way that is neat and tidy. Bad versions of Calvinism are just as guilty in this regard. The point is, both sides can over rationalize both the aspects of God's sovereignty and man's responsibility and ignore parts of scripture that make their position difficult. This would have at least been a 3 star review if they had dome more exegesis and handled more scripture even if I disagreed with their conclusions (which is likely based on my understandings of soteriology and covenant theology).

God will absolutely hold individuals responsible for their sins.
God is absolutely the one who frees men from the bondage of sin.
God saves some and not all (from before all time, in the present, and in the future).
Any (and all) who persevere in faith in Christ have been / are / will be saved.
None of us knows who God has saved / is saving / will save so we preach salvation to all knowing that He will save and faith comes through hearing.

I don't see scripture spelling out an idea of libertarian free will as the authors define it. Show me scriptures that refute this and maybe I will no longer be a Calvinist either...but I doubt it.

[Denis Antonio · Rating 4 out of 5]

I found the book to be quite interesting, although I do think that a second reading would be beneficial. As many have noted, the book is more philosophical than theological. While the authors attempt to provide exegetical support for their arguments, they are often forced to rely on the interpretation of scholars like James Dunn who view Romans 9-11 through the lens of the new perspective rather than as a discussion of justification.

Some readers were offended by the authors' philosophical critique of Calvinism rather than a biblical one. I understand this frustration, as I too experienced it. However, I must admit that the book presents some compelling arguments. For instance, the authors raise important questions about the loving character of God, the (im)possibility of non-elect individuals accepting Christ, and the need to choose between determinism and compatibilism.

The authors also examine the arguments of prominent Calvinist theologians such as R. C. Sproul, D. A. Carson, and John Piper, and point out inconsistencies in their views. This was particularly enlightening to me, as these scholars are often considered the foremost authorities on Calvinism.

That being said, the Arminian perspective presented in the book also had its flaws. While some of their arguments made sense, not all of them did. Ultimately, both systems have their own shortcomings. However, reading this book has made me more aware of the complex issues involved in the Calvinism-Arminianism debate. I believe that understanding these challenges will make it easier to find solutions.

[Mike Jorgensen · Rating 4 out of 5]

Thoughtful, largely irenic, and mostly fair. Should be read by all Calvinists as it serves as a corrective against the worst among us. This book gives the benefit of the doubt and interacts with the most thoughtful, mature, and philosophically sound versions of Calvinism. A good Calvinist can stand alongside the authors and reject the outer fringe of Calvinism which is regrettably becoming more mainstream. Popular Calvinism will be the death of modern reformed theology although books like this can help correct the ship.

[Cathy · Rating 4 out of 5]

I have recently reread both "Why I Am Not an Arminian" and its' opposite book, "Why I Am Not a Calvinist," in preparation to give both to a friend whose church is facing these issues. If one's going to read either of these books, I think it's important to also read the other. "The first to present his case seems right, till another comes forward and questions him." - Proverbs 18:17, NIV

I also think it's important to note that both these strains of thought agree that Jesus died to save sinners, and they also agree on many other aspects of Christianity, including the inspiration and authority of scripture. Being on one side or the other does not mean that person is less a Christian. We can still befriend each other, care about each other, encourage each other, etc. (For that matter, we can still befriend, care about, and encourage people who are not Christians as well.)

I also think of what Jesus said when His disciples asked him about a different hard teaching, involving divorce and remarriage. "Not everyone can accept this word, but only those to whom it has been given." - Matthew 19:11, NIV. I take that to mean that there are some hard teachings that some people are not ready for, some hard teachings that are not central to Jesus' main teachings regarding salvation, etc.

Or what Paul said on another possible disagreement. "All of us who are mature should take such a view of things. And if on some point you think differently, that too God will make clear to you. Only let us live up to what we have already attained." - Philippians 3:15-16, NIV. I like the thought that Paul leaves the results of the disagreement up to God to clarify in His way and in His timing. Only, let's agree to live up to what we already do know.

In some sense, Christians need unity and such conversations can divide it, but sometimes, someone finds some aspect of the issue troubling, and then it is well worth studying. I suspect that, in the future, Christians will need each other more and more, as persecution in various parts of the world has increased, and such disagreements might be set aside as less critical in the face of day to day survival and unified belief in Jesus.

Having said all that, it is nice to calmly think through such issues from a Biblical standpoint and examine the scriptures on both sides of the issue of Arminian verses Calvinist. Anything less just sets up a straw man to represent the opposing side, an argument to easily be knocked over, without considering the real depth of that point of view.

I thought both of these books did a scholarly job of presenting the issues. They presented the history surrounding these viewpoints and various philosophies on one side or the other, but to me, the heart of the matter involves the scripture they discuss. What does the Bible say on each issue, and how does each side interpret those verses? What do they say about the interpretations of the other?

It's a little more confusing because there's a range of belief in each camp as well, and actually, I find that honesty refreshing. People on one side of an issue don't always agree with each other on all the details, and I appreciate that the authors tried to discuss the various "flavors" of Calvinism and Arminianism.

Well done, both of them.

And no, I'm not going to say which side I agree with more here, because I don't want to alienate people who either haven't yet thought through the issues, or disagree with me. Some things are more important to me than clarity on these points.

[Patrick Porras · Rating 2 out of 5]

Well written and raised some good questions, but there wasn't much engagement with Scripture or any hard work done to break down Calvinist's favorite Scriptures and build up an Arminian case from Scripture. All the arguments were philosophical and most hinged on the presupposition that the will is free in a libertarian sense.

Frustrating. The Calvinist companion book took popular doctrinal stances from both camps, engaged with the Scriptures utilized for those doctrines, and tried to show where the Arminian camp goes wrong and where the Reformed side lives based on the Scripture.

[Daniel Garon · Rating 5 out of 5]

Walls and Dongell have written an excellent introduction in to the Calvinist/Arminian debate from the Arminian perspective. Reformed/Calvinist theology, of which I have grown up in, deservedly has taken a strong foothold in the church and therefore in my opinion needs to be evaluated for consistency and faithfulness to scripture. I am sure the founding theologians of the reformation themselves would agree with this premise.

What makes this book a worthwhile read is the the authors’ humility, their fair representation of Calvinism/Reformed theology, and their descriptions of the practical implications of this debate.

First, the book takes a tone of humility and reverence for scripture that I would hope to find in any theological discussion. The biggest example of this in my opinion is when the authors introduce idea that any reading of scripture will inevitably be skewed by our preconceived notions and theological preferences. This self awareness is one that I have found lacking in the Calvinist camp in my personal experience, and it was a breath of fresh air. Too easy is it for me to claim that other theologies must not care about scripture and write them off. After reading, I can neither make this claim about the authors nor do they make this claim about their opponents.

Second, I found the representation of the Calvinist side very accurate to my understanding from growing up in and around reformed theology. Many times I found myself objecting to the authors argument only to find them addressing this objection on the next page. Additionally they rightfully point out the attraction to Calvinism consistent with what I know about the Calvinists I grew up around. Namely it is comforting to think your sons or daughters are elect and cannot chose to leave the faith. It is also comforting to believe that everything happens according to God’s direct control when hardships come. The authors do well to address where these comforts are either not exclusive to Calvinism or have implications that are not supported by scripture.

Finally, I appreciated the clearly presented implications of this debate. Throughout the book, I was tempted to say, “what does this matter if it does not affect who or who is not ultimately a Christian?” Walls and Dongell effectively spell out the implications for theology as a whole as well as the implications Calvinism has for pastoral, community, and non believer relationships. How do you tell the unelected that Jesus loves them if God has not chosen them? Do we truly freely love God or are we just pre determined to do so? And how can one be responsible for their sin if they were destined to act in this way? These are a few of the questions any Calvinist is left to answer at the end of the authors’ work, and I hope they are addressed in the companion book.

Ultimately whether you are open to the authors’ conclusions or not, Why I am not a Calvinist is a great resource to understand the debate and challenge beliefs. Every Calvinist should read about and wrestle with the implications of their theology, and Dongell and Wells have presented an excellent resource to do so. If done in humility and honesty by Gods grace, despite what “side” you end on, the only result will be a refined view of the wonderful work of Jesus that is closer to truth and a renewed passion for his glory.

[Greg Baughman · Rating 3 out of 5]

This was a book with which I could identify as these authors disagreements with and misunderstandings of Calvinism were similar to my own. Unlike the Williams/Peterson volume, Walls and Dongell seek to answer the question implied in the title by seeking to show how Calvinism is unacceptable instead of demonstrating why Arminianism is preferable. I would have much preferred the later approach as this book over emphasizes philosophy (seeking to show Calvinism is an incoherent system) and under emphasizes Scripture (building the case for Arminianism). I would have much preferred to read a Biblical defense of Arminianism rather than a philosophical polemic against Calvinism.

Unfortunately, while they quote Calvinist authors, it seems that they do not really understand the Calvinist system at all. Walls admits as much in chapter 3 when he claims that his understanding of Calvinism is largely informed by the secular philosophies of hard and soft determinism. Too often his analytic approach evaluates Calvinism using definitions of terms that are foreign to the system itself.

At the end of the day, what I was hoping to read was a strong Biblical defense of Arminianism (more similar to the sister volume), but that is not this book. One wonders if Williams and Peterson's book should have been more like this one. Still, it is often more beneficial to show how one's own system of doctrine is true before trying to show that another is false, and this would be a much a better book for one seeking to engage this issue if they had put forth a strong defense of Arminianism.

A couple other notes: The epistemology is interesting. It is strong on analytic philosophy and weak on revelation. The a priori commitment to libertarian free will is the primary assumption underlying their critique. On another note, the tone in this volume is a bit more desperate. I believe this is due to the growing influence of SBTS in the Baptist churches. This is a serious current issue for Walls and Dongell. It is much more likely that an Arminian in their circles will bolt to Calvinism than a Calvinist in Williams and Peterson's circles would do the opposite. This, I think, also influenced their approach to this volume.

[E · Rating 2 out of 5]

Now obviously I disagree with the authors, so I can't just rate the book on what I think of their arguments. Otherwise it would be one star for sure. But I can rate them on how they go about their arguments. Not well. Basically, to them the Calvinist God is used-car salesman. They say as much. He cannot be trusted to mean what he says.

At one point they give a beautiful description of Calvinism, but then say, "but no one actually believes this. John Piper might, but the rest of you are inconsistent." That may be true, but if anything that's an argument for the fact that we're fallen, that all of us are inconsistent. But that's not a fault with Calvinism itself.

Furthermore, when there is a facet of Calvinism that they don't quite understand, they assume the problem is thus with Calvinism's idea of God, not with our finite attempts to understand him. They assume that if you can't place everything the God of Calvinism is or does into your neat, logical boxes, then Calvinism must fail. I would say, you're too small!

They also fault D. A. Carson for not hammering with Calvinism someone who is mourning the death of a loved one. But if he DID do so, they'd probably fault him for that, too.

Although they fault Calvinism for 200 pages, there is no defense of what they believe. So it is a bit of a one-sided argument. Anyone can poke holes in you for 200 pages if you have nothing to attack yourself. May I suggest reading the companion volume?

[Janelle Pimpo · Rating 5 out of 5]

I found this book to be well-written, relatively easy to understand, and abounding with Scripture.

[Chris Comis · Rating 3 out of 5]

As far as pro-Arminian books go, this was one of the better written and argued cases for Arminianism that I've read. These guys are Classical Arminians, and so try to avoid the dangers they see in Open Theism, Molinism, etc. Dongell also does a decent job defending Arminianism from a biblical/exegetical point of view.

But all-in-all, I am more persuaded than ever that the central problem with Arminianism is it's denial that God is absolutely sovereign over His covenantal interactions with mankind. They get some of the covenantal issues, but then they fail to see all the way through the covenant and into God's eternal decrees. Basically, they stop short at the covenant, and then confuse God's covenantal interactions in created time and space with His eternal decrees before created time and space. For them, God's covenantal interactions end up being identified with His eternal decrees. So they end up losing the Creator-creature distinction and end up replacing this with their own version of the Creator-creature equality. Not quite as bad as Open Theists do, but it’s a stone’s throw away.

I'm also more convinced now than ever that the Arminian’s biggest beef is not with Classical Calvinism, but with Hyper-Calvinism. But that's not to say there's no beef with Historical Calvinism. There’s plenty of that, too.

[Emily · Rating 3 out of 5]

I really enjoyed the introduction. It helped me to see how theology has contributed to denominational differences in American Christianity. I understand why I have landed where I have landed.

The authors state that they are classic Arminians and acknowledge that extremes of Arminianism are problematic, as are extremes of Calvinism.

Many other reviews have already accurately stated the main problem with this book: Where is the biblical exegesis? The authors mostly employ philosophy and reason to make their arguments.

Despite the weak biblical exegesis, I do think they make some points worth considering in the last two chapters: Calvinism and Consistency, Calvinism and the Christian Life.

Overall, I liked some of this book and thought other parts were just okay. I think it’s problematic if the Bible is not the highest authority when discussing the nature and character of God. I’m not sure if that’s unique to this book or inherent to Arminian theology.

[Wes Bredenhof · Rating 2 out of 5]

Good introduction to modern Arminianism -- at least it helps one understand where they're coming from. However, totally unpersuasive. Telling that the companion volume "Why I Am Not an Arminian" was penned by two theologians, whereas "Why I Am Not a Calvinist" comes from a theologian and a philosopher. Also, very little about historical Arminianism -- for example, Arminius himself is mentioned once (!) and that in the title of an essay by Richard Muller in a footnote. Don't expect to understand the nature of the historical debate between the Reformed and the Remonstrants from this one.

[Seth Sowalskie · Rating 4 out of 5]

First, before I get into the review, let me clarify what this book is not so as to manage expectations.
1. It is not a treatise on Arminianism.
2. It is not focused on purely biblical reasons why Calvinism is wrong.
3. It is not a point-by-point rebuke of the Five Points of Calvinism (TULIP).
4. It is not a historical overview of the Calvinism-Arminianism debate.

Now that disclaimer is out of the way, I can actually review the book. This book certainly lives up to its name, as it is a comprehensive breakdown of why the authors are not Calvinists, and not much else. Fundamentally, the authors' "case against Calvinism is that it doesn't do justice to the character of God revealed in scripture" (pg. 220). The authors believe that God's love, not His sovereignty, is the primary trait in God's character, and that this informs His plan of salvation. To be clear, they do still believe that God is sovereign, but that He restrains His sovereignty for the sake of His love so as not to coerce people into salvation.

That said, the authors spend the vast majority of the book discussing not what they believe but rather why what Calvinism teaches is either biblically or philosophically unsound. I greatly appreciated their humble and honest assessment of biblical interpretation and the fact that all interpretations are guided by implicit philosophical beliefs. That is, we use our capacity for reason to interpret Scripture. Those reviews dismissing the book for being too philosophically-minded are missing the point, in my view. The authors address that two different people can look at the same Scriptures and come away with two very different interpretations, and so it is necessary to look at the logical coherency and consistency of those interpretations to determine which is true.

Of course, they do still delve into Scripture at length in an early chapter and come back to it throughout the book. Their treatment of the hardening of Pharaoh's heart in Exodus and Romans 9 was one of the best analyses I've ever read on those passages from a non-Calvinist standpoint, and they present their interpretation in a compelling way.

Nevertheless, the bulk of the book is spent discussing the philosophical underpinnings of Calvinism and attempting to point out Calvinism's philosophical shortcomings, the logical inconsistency among many Calvinists, and the negative effects Calvinism has on living out the Christian life. I won't delve into all of their topics or attempt to summarize them, but, suffice to say, I believe they succeed. They demonstrate that Calvinism makes God the author of evil in the world (in fact, He determined every evil act even when they could have been otherwise), Calvinism (in its traditional form) necessitates a belief in hard determinism, Calvinism makes the offer of salvation disingenuous to many people, and finally, that God cannot truly be said to love all people that He created if Calvinism is true. They also deal with a variety of other implications of Calvinism, but to address them all would make this review too long.

So why only four stars? I do wish they had expounded a bit on their own position, as the book is primarily just a case against Calvinism with little offered in the way of an alternative theological position (though they do spend an extensive amount of time arguing that a belief in libertarian freedom is more consistent with God's character as revealed in the Bible). They also could have delved into a few more counterarguments at times. Regardless, their points were still clear and accessible.

I would highly recommend this book to all who are struggling with their soteriological beliefs or interested in this debate, but I would highly recommend it for Calvinists. This is not because I believe it will change the minds of many committed Calvinists, but because the objections the authors raise are very real and must be dealt with. As a former Calvinist myself, I find their arguments compelling. Others may not. But all thoughtful Calvinists owe it to themselves to reckon with the arguments in this book before dogmatically committing to their position.

[Jarmo Larsen · Rating 4 out of 5]

The authors of this book provides many strong reasons why they can't embrace Calvinism, highlighting how it is both logically and biblically untenable. The authors spend considerable time especially addressing the Calvinists' views on God's sovereignty, free will, and the issue of election, perhaps the most contentious points in Calvinist doctrine. They manage to present these arguments in a way that is not overly complex, although it sometimes borders on being so, yet they succeed in keeping the philosophical aspect understandable while effectively also referencing the biblical aspects of the theology. Authors Walls and Dongell also shed light on how prominent Calvinists mix definitions and often contradict themselves, or take a more non-Calvinist stance without perhaps being fully aware of it, while simultaneously avoiding addressing the problems that arise for Calvinism in other areas when they are focused on one specific topic, f.ex. the problem of evil.

The book was a good introduction to why one should not embrace Calvinism, but I missed a more systematic review on Bible passages that Calvinists use to defend their doctrine, even though the authors do address this in some areas. I particularly liked their review of one of Calvinists' favorite scripture passages in Romans 9:11-12, 16, 18, and 21, where the authors themselves consider the entire context from the beginning of chapter 9 to chapter 11. It then becomes clear that these passages are not about election in the Calvinist sense. Calvinists must also consider what type of predestination they believe in: "hard determinism," "liberal determinism," or "soft determinism" as the authors categorize it. Most calvinists, as I understood it, lean towards the "hard" type, but sometimes you see that they can soften a bit without perhaps being aware of it themselves. Walls and Dongell also bring up the accusation Calvinists direct at arminians regarding assurance of salvation and turn it against them instead, highlighting the problems it can cause within their own ranks.

There was much exciting content in this book, which can be recommended to anyone who wishes to see Calvinism from a slightly different and healthier perspective. Perhaps it will enlighten some? I know several Calvinists and I see them as sincere believers who love the Word of God, but perhaps some will begin to realize that TULIP does not entirely hold up?

[Patrick Berthalon · Rating 5 out of 5]

Why I Am Not a Calvinist (2004) by Jerry L. Walls and Joseph R. Dongell is a clear, accessible, and theologically rigorous critique of Calvinism. The authors argue from an Arminian perspective that Calvinism misrepresents God’s character, undermines human freedom, and distorts the biblical message of grace.
This book is often paired with Why I Am Not an Arminian (Peterson & Williams, IVP, 2004), offering two sides of the Calvinism–Arminianism debate.
Walls and Dongell affirm God’s sovereignty but reject the Calvinist understanding of predestination and election. Their central claims include:
- God’s love is universal: Christ died for all, not only for the elect.
- Human freedom is real: God grants genuine freedom to accept or reject grace.
- Election is conditional: It is based on God’s foreknowledge of human response, not an arbitrary decree.
- Grace is resistible: People can reject God’s call, which preserves the integrity of love.
- Perseverance is not automatic: Believers must continue in faith, rather than relying on “once saved, always saved.”
The authors argue that Calvinism portrays God as a “puppeteer” who predetermines all events, which they see as inconsistent with the biblical witness to God’s justice and love.

Why I Am Not a Calvinist is valued for its lucid style, biblical grounding, and pastoral sensitivity. It does not caricature Calvinism but engages it respectfully, offering a robust Arminian alternative. While Calvinist readers may disagree strongly, the book is widely recommended for students, pastors, and lay Christians seeking to understand the theological debate over God’s sovereignty, human freedom, and salvation.

This book is a thoughtful, accessible, and provocative critique of Calvinism, presenting a vision of God’s grace that is universal, resistible, and rooted in genuine human freedom. It remains a key resource in the Calvinism–Arminianism debate.

[An Te · Rating 3 out of 5]

Jerry Walls and Joseph Dongell delightfully poke holes in the Calvinist position in this small book. Inconsistencies such as the But I am not convinced on either side. I think God has yet to characterise a doctrine that completely satisfies. I do feel the emphasis placed on the will by Calvinists is a fickle one, as it is intrinsically logocentric (all about words) and not about the people. It embraces the concept and the words. The God of love is much grander than that! For us as humans, words and anything in creation changes. We can't depend on this doctrine as it isn't God focussed. It's not to the detriment of my Calvinist friends that I wish to undermine their position but I feel theirs is a perching post deficient in agape love. We profess not doctrine but that we know God's love for ourselves demonstrating this in all that we do. Neither am I an Arminian as typically caricatured. It cannot be simply demonstrated with a Calvinist or an Arminian in God's creative arch. God's canvas is more creative than that. This is why I feel we struggle with this. Perhaps I am moving towards JI Packer's position of it being a mystery, after all...Very open to hearing how people present this.

Not watertight, at the moment. I didn't expect to be either. I appreciate the authors demonstrating this with winsomeness and charity.

Further recommendations are welcome. Thanks.

[Anthony A · Rating 3 out of 5]

It has taken me a long time to complete my reading of this book because I read it twice and then decided to read Normal Geisler's book "Chosen But Free" before I finally reviewed both books. This book, "Why I am Not a Calvanist," is well-written and has some very good arguments against Calvanism. However, the authors spend a lot of time bashing Calvanism without outlining the alternatives and/or presenting the best alternative (and why). That I can recall, they don't differentiate between the different forms of Calvanism or Arminianism or state their own beliefs (overtly).

In addition, people can be deceptive and/or delusional with respect to salvation. Thus, you have all kinds of different beliefs on the subject of salvation, predestination, God's sovereignty, and man's free will.

If you are interested in any of the above subjects, the best thing you can do is investigate or explore or research them - by reading as much as you can in order to get an idea of what all of the perspectives or beliefs are. And then draw your own conclusions - hopefully based on sound logic and reasoning and (most importantly) scripture.

Personally, I have concluded that I am a moderate Calvanist - after exploring predestination - and I believe the best book on this subject is Norman Geisler's book "Chosen But Free."

[Eric · Rating 4 out of 5]

I read this book out of curiosity, not because I am in agreement with Jerry Walls or even because I want to debate him. This review handles the book, not the doctrinal position. I gave it 4 stars out of appreciation for his kind, fair approach to this historically volatile subject. Walls stated in the introduction the direction he would take with this book: "Calvinism does not represent the biblical picture of God's character." He spends much of the book trying to demonstrate the perceived inconsistencies with Calvinism. The title was well chosen because this is clearly not a biblical apologetic for Arminianism, but an attempt to rationally dismantle the incoherence of Calvinistic theologians throughout history. While Walls does give some proof texts for his position, he invests significantly more time in the dismantling of quotes & illustrative metaphors given by men like Augustine, Jonathan Edwards, JI Packer, RC Sproul, John Piper, Albert Moehler, John MacArthur, DA Carson, and others. I plan to read the counterpart to this book by Williams and Peterson.

[Andy Williamson · Rating 4 out of 5]

This this book does a great job of presenting a counterpoint to “Why I’m Not An Arminian” and should be read by anyone struggling between the two perspectives. Walls and Dongell offer inconsistencies in the Calvinist viewpoint that offer other ways to view God’s sovereignty, foreknowledge, predestination, and the like. What it doesn’t do, like most other books defending Arminianism, is offer a strong biblical case for Arminianism. In my view, Calvinists seem to always offer the more logical and orderly argument and while Arminians are good at poking holes in Calvinist arguments, they are not as good at presenting a compelling argument that doesn’t have its own holes.


Ultimately, these two books will not give you the answer, they will highlight strong cases for and against these theological arguments. You will still have to sort out in your own mind or through other perspectives, how to reconcile God’s sovereignty with human freedom, the question at the heart of this debate.

[Jacob Schwander · Rating 5 out of 5]

An excellent read that holds to the belief that a theological debate must be won by using scripture. A deep and thorough book, this is a must-read. People who hold Calvinistic convictions must ask themselves hard questions. If God has predestined everything from the very beginning, then why does he allow such evil in history? Can a person be accountable for evil if God has predestined their actions? Such questions are expertly handled in this book. I find the debate between free will and predestination to be profoundly fascinating. My conviction is, however, that Calvinism is more harmful than beneficial. I would never discount the godly men and women who are Calvinists as nonbelievers. They hold to a totally different theology than what I do with respect to such issues. Regardless of one's viewpoint, this book is worth reading.

[Joe Sewell · Rating 4 out of 5]

A deep plow, but thoughtful and respectful

This book is appropriate for anyone of a Calvinist (or, if preferred, "Reformed") thinking to reflect on precisely what they are teaching, whether intentionally or not. The authors do not brush off Reformers as ignorant, but dig deeply into the thinking behind the theology. While I don't always agree with the options presented, such as the distinctions between freedoms and determinism, I also must note that these are concepts wherein we likely cannot see things from God's perspective, being locked into cause and effect sequences we perceive as time. Though the payoff comes at the end, the entire book should be read to make the authors' conclusions clear.

[Rachel · Rating 5 out of 5]

Walls and Dongell give a comprehensive account of Calvinism in all its variations. The book also gives a brief introduction to Molinism, a concept I was not familiar with at the start. I found their arguments logically and theologically sound, but then again I’m a Wesleyan and thus not theologically Calvinist to begin with, so I don’t know if a Calvinist will find this book quite as persuasive. Even so, I recommend this book to Arminians, Calvinists, Molinists, and Christians who fall somewhere in between.

[SusanwithaGoodBook · Rating 3 out of 5]

Last month I was reading something that mentioned "Neo-Calvinism" but the concept or definition of "neo-Calvinism" wasn't clear to me from the context, so I decided to do some study on the issue. I began by refamiliarizing myself with "plain ole" Calvinism, which I did very well with the first book - Why I Am Not a Calvinist by Jerry L. Walls, Joseph R. Dongell. I can recommend it if someone is not familiar with the basics of Calvinism and the alternatives to it. I took copious notes so I could use them in further studies. There is a lot there to digest.

[Avery · Rating 5 out of 5]

This book and its sister book “why I am not an Arminian” are so good! Definitely recommend reading both (not just one). I think this one was slightly less well written, but still very good and informative. One of the authors specializes in philosophy of religion and I enjoyed hearing his philosophical arguments in addition to the Biblical arguments. I felt like this book really leaned into the title and laid out proofs against Calvinism as opposed to building a positive case for Arminianism. I suppose this was the goal, but would have loved more of a pro-Arminian case.

[Elizabeth Simpson · Rating 5 out of 5]

Does the Bible really say ...

I found this book very helpful, although, as a lay person interested in theology, and genuinely seeking answers on which side of this theological argument I should land to be worshipping God rightly, some of the theological and philosophical arguments were over my head. My one disappointment was that those specific scriptures that seem to make theologically not being a Calvinist impossible were not tackled. The writers' conclusions on God's heart towards humankind though mirror mine: hence my seeking to square the circle, if that makes sense.

[Bash · Rating 3 out of 5]

Serves as an acceptable introduction to various philosophical categories. However it falls flat in its attempts to delineate Christian truth. Christian history did not start with the reformers. A topical reading of the Ecumenical Councils vindicates the Orthodox Position and refutes many claims in this book such as total depravity and absolute divine simplicity. Part of philosophy is providing justifications for a worldview and this book simply grants the protestant Position as true.

[Carolyn 316 · Rating 4 out of 5]

The authors are very thorough and use the scriptures to justify their opinions. I appreciate how they present opposing opinions in a way that is respectful. For me, this was not a quick read as I needed time to reflect and dig deeper into scriptures for myself. I recommend this book to anyone who wants to better understand this topic.

[Paul · Rating 5 out of 5]

Extremely clear and well-written, this book does a great job of exposing the difficulties attendant on Calvinist theology. All orthodox Christians believe in God's sovereignty and power, but the authors here demonstrate Calvinism's focus on power at the expense of the Lord's loving character. This is a must-read for anyone working through these issues.

[Daniel Seabaugh · Rating 3 out of 5]

Some good arguments from an Arminian perspective about salvation and the character of God. Most of the arguments are philosophical in nature, which are pretty strong if you’re looking for that sort of thing. If you’re looking for a more biblically robust case against Calvinism, you might look elsewhere.