What do you think?
Rate this book
Willing to Believe: The Controversy over Free Will
What is the role of the will in believing the good news of the gospel? Why is there so much controversy over free will throughout church history? R. C. Sproul finds that Christians have often been influenced by pagan views of the human will that deny the effects of Adam's fall.
In Willing to Believe, Sproul traces the free-will controversy from its formal beginning in the fifth century, with the writings of Augustine and Pelagius, to the present. Readers will gain understanding into the nuances separating the views of Protestants and Catholics, Calvinists and Arminians, and Reformed and Dispensationalists. This book, like Sproul's Faith Alone, is a major work on an essential evangelical tenet.
In Willing to Believe, Sproul traces the free-will controversy from its formal beginning in the fifth century, with the writings of Augustine and Pelagius, to the present. Readers will gain understanding into the nuances separating the views of Protestants and Catholics, Calvinists and Arminians, and Reformed and Dispensationalists. This book, like Sproul's Faith Alone, is a major work on an essential evangelical tenet.
224 pages, Paperback
First published January 1, 1997
113 people are currently reading
1128 people want to read
About the author
R.C. Sproul
675 books1,973 followersDr. R.C. Sproul (1939–2017) was founder of Ligonier Ministries, an international Christian discipleship organization located near Orlando, Fla. He was founding pastor of Saint Andrew’s Chapel in Sanford, Fla., first president of Reformation Bible College, and executive editor of Tabletalk magazine.
Ligonier Ministries began in 1971 as the Ligonier Valley Study Center in Ligonier, Pa. In an effort to respond more effectively to the growing demand for Dr. Sproul’s teachings and the ministry’s other educational resources, the general offices were moved to Orlando in 1984, and the ministry was renamed.
Dr. Sproul’s radio program, Renewing Your Mind, is still broadcast daily on hundreds of radio stations around the world and can also be heard online. Dr. Sproul produced hundreds of lecture series and recorded numerous video series on subjects such as the history of philosophy, theology, Bible study, apologetics, and Christian living.
He contributed dozens of articles to national evangelical publications, spoke at conferences, churches, and academic institutions around the world, and wrote more than one hundred books, including The Holiness of God, Chosen by God, and Everyone’s a Theologian. He signed the 1978 Chicago Statement on Biblical Inerrancy and wrote a commentary on that document. He also served as general editor of the Reformation Study Bible, previously known as the New Geneva Study Bible.
Dr. Sproul had a distinguished academic teaching career at various colleges and seminaries, including Reformed Theological Seminary in Orlando and Jackson, Miss. He was ordained as a teaching elder in the Presbyterian Church in America.
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 30 of 65 reviews
March 19, 2018
The doctrine of election says that God chooses who will believe in Him. This choice not based on anything that we did or said, but is dependent completely on God and His mercy and compassion. This doctrine has been hotly debated throughout church history. For some Christians, it’s a tough doctrine to swallow because in our American way of life, we like to preserve our independence and our belief that we are in control of our own destinies.
Just after he passed away, R.C. Sproul’s new book, Willing to Believe: Understanding the Role of the Human Will in Salvation was released by Baker Books.
I expected the whole book to be an expository analysis of passages of Scripture that had to do with election and free will. However, the book is an overview of church history and the theologians that studied and taught on issues of free will, election, and total depravity. R.C. Sproul makes the case that the issue of election is so tied to what a person believes about whether or not we are born sinners so out of necessity, the book talks a lot about that total depravity, too.
I am thankful for how the book is organized. It turned my “bits and pieces” knowledge of the theologians (Pelagius, Augustine, Luther, Calvin, Arminius, Edwards, Finney, and Chafer) into a mental timeline connecting the theologians together. Since one person’s work is a refutation or a reaffirmation of those theologians who have gone before, the overview of history helped me understand the pendulum swing of the popularity of Arminianism and Calvinism.
Here are some key things I learned:
1. Free will and election are not opposing forces. We often think that it has to be one or the other that is in charge. Either you decide to come to Jesus or Jesus draws you to Himself all on His own. But that is not the case. The “opposite” of election would be human autonomy. In other words being dependent on the Lord for your eternity is opposite of depending on yourself for it. God does not offend your will when you are elected. He doesn’t force you to do it from a human perspective. If you are a believer, you wanted in your own will to come to Him. How does it work? How does God elect you and have you come to Him without forcing you to? We don’t really know how it works, only that it does. R.C. Sproul puts it this way:
“Though the relationship between divine sovereignty and human freedom may be mysterious they are by no means contradictory. The antithesis to divine sovereignty is not human freedom, but human autonomy.”
2. Luther did more study and writing on the doctrine of election than Calvin did. The doctrine of election is known today as one of the five points of Calvinism. However, R.C. Sproul says that “Calvin’s work on the will and predestination may be considered nothing more than a footnote to Luther’s.” The term Calvinist seems to have stuck because John Calvin’s followers were more vocal and organized on these particular matters of doctrine.
3. I need to be mindful of how I explain how a person becomes saved. When I share the gospel with kids, I often talk about deciding to believe in Jesus. Now I know that that particular wording comes out of evangelical thought that upholds human autonomy which is popular today because of Charles Grandison Finney. Finney was a 19th-century evangelist and revivalist.
When I ask a kid if they will decide to believe in Jesus, I am doing it in the context of Reformed doctrine. I believe that God elects those who will be saved and by asking a kid about his decision, I just want to know if God has given them salvation. However, I should simply ask the kid if he believes. I don’t need to use the word decide. The word “decide” is not a biblical way to describe salvation. It does not appear in any verse related to salvation. However, “believe” appears in a majority of them.
I realize this is probably splitting hairs. I don’t want to paralyze anyone from presenting the gospel. If you have a chance to share the gospel, just do it! The Holy Spirit will give you the words to say. You cannot screw up someone’s salvation by saying it wrong since salvation is God’s work, not yours.
Does that mean I can never sing “I Have Decided to Follow Jesus”? No. From a human perspective, we make a decision to follow Jesus. But our decision is not a prerequisite for salvation from God’s perspective. Plus, the song itself is an incredible testimony about an Indian man who believed in Jesus for salvation even though that meant his wife and kids would be killed before his eyes. I just want to be careful that I don’t focus more on the decision moment than the belief itself.
Should I read Willing to Believe? If you want a deep dive into the doctrine of election than yes, you should read this book. Take it slowly. Read it with a dictionary nearby. You will need it! I appreciated the opportunity to read a lot of original quotes from the theologians who were referenced. While I didn’t absorb every single point that was made, there was a lot that made me think. R.C. Sproul is able to explain doctrine in a way that preserves the complexity of the doctrine while making it understandable.
I only had one problem with the book. In the introduction, R.C. Sproul mentions he is often asked if Arminians are saved. Arminians do not believe in the doctrine of election as the Calvinists understand election. He answers “yes, barely.” That didn’t sit well with me. I read it to my pastor/husband. He said that wasn’t fair. He said, “We are saved by Who we know, not what we know.” Our salvation is all because of God and His mercy no matter our understanding of doctrine. Like Paul says:
Romans 9:14-15
What then shall we say? Is God unjust? Not at all! For he says to Moses,
“I will have mercy on whom I have mercy,
and I will have compassion on whom I have compassion.”
It does not, therefore, depend on human desire or effort, but on God’s mercy.
This review also appears on readthehardparts.com. Read the Hard Parts encourages and equips Christians to understand the hard parts of Scripture.
Just after he passed away, R.C. Sproul’s new book, Willing to Believe: Understanding the Role of the Human Will in Salvation was released by Baker Books.
I expected the whole book to be an expository analysis of passages of Scripture that had to do with election and free will. However, the book is an overview of church history and the theologians that studied and taught on issues of free will, election, and total depravity. R.C. Sproul makes the case that the issue of election is so tied to what a person believes about whether or not we are born sinners so out of necessity, the book talks a lot about that total depravity, too.
I am thankful for how the book is organized. It turned my “bits and pieces” knowledge of the theologians (Pelagius, Augustine, Luther, Calvin, Arminius, Edwards, Finney, and Chafer) into a mental timeline connecting the theologians together. Since one person’s work is a refutation or a reaffirmation of those theologians who have gone before, the overview of history helped me understand the pendulum swing of the popularity of Arminianism and Calvinism.
Here are some key things I learned:
1. Free will and election are not opposing forces. We often think that it has to be one or the other that is in charge. Either you decide to come to Jesus or Jesus draws you to Himself all on His own. But that is not the case. The “opposite” of election would be human autonomy. In other words being dependent on the Lord for your eternity is opposite of depending on yourself for it. God does not offend your will when you are elected. He doesn’t force you to do it from a human perspective. If you are a believer, you wanted in your own will to come to Him. How does it work? How does God elect you and have you come to Him without forcing you to? We don’t really know how it works, only that it does. R.C. Sproul puts it this way:
“Though the relationship between divine sovereignty and human freedom may be mysterious they are by no means contradictory. The antithesis to divine sovereignty is not human freedom, but human autonomy.”
2. Luther did more study and writing on the doctrine of election than Calvin did. The doctrine of election is known today as one of the five points of Calvinism. However, R.C. Sproul says that “Calvin’s work on the will and predestination may be considered nothing more than a footnote to Luther’s.” The term Calvinist seems to have stuck because John Calvin’s followers were more vocal and organized on these particular matters of doctrine.
3. I need to be mindful of how I explain how a person becomes saved. When I share the gospel with kids, I often talk about deciding to believe in Jesus. Now I know that that particular wording comes out of evangelical thought that upholds human autonomy which is popular today because of Charles Grandison Finney. Finney was a 19th-century evangelist and revivalist.
When I ask a kid if they will decide to believe in Jesus, I am doing it in the context of Reformed doctrine. I believe that God elects those who will be saved and by asking a kid about his decision, I just want to know if God has given them salvation. However, I should simply ask the kid if he believes. I don’t need to use the word decide. The word “decide” is not a biblical way to describe salvation. It does not appear in any verse related to salvation. However, “believe” appears in a majority of them.
I realize this is probably splitting hairs. I don’t want to paralyze anyone from presenting the gospel. If you have a chance to share the gospel, just do it! The Holy Spirit will give you the words to say. You cannot screw up someone’s salvation by saying it wrong since salvation is God’s work, not yours.
Does that mean I can never sing “I Have Decided to Follow Jesus”? No. From a human perspective, we make a decision to follow Jesus. But our decision is not a prerequisite for salvation from God’s perspective. Plus, the song itself is an incredible testimony about an Indian man who believed in Jesus for salvation even though that meant his wife and kids would be killed before his eyes. I just want to be careful that I don’t focus more on the decision moment than the belief itself.
Should I read Willing to Believe? If you want a deep dive into the doctrine of election than yes, you should read this book. Take it slowly. Read it with a dictionary nearby. You will need it! I appreciated the opportunity to read a lot of original quotes from the theologians who were referenced. While I didn’t absorb every single point that was made, there was a lot that made me think. R.C. Sproul is able to explain doctrine in a way that preserves the complexity of the doctrine while making it understandable.
I only had one problem with the book. In the introduction, R.C. Sproul mentions he is often asked if Arminians are saved. Arminians do not believe in the doctrine of election as the Calvinists understand election. He answers “yes, barely.” That didn’t sit well with me. I read it to my pastor/husband. He said that wasn’t fair. He said, “We are saved by Who we know, not what we know.” Our salvation is all because of God and His mercy no matter our understanding of doctrine. Like Paul says:
Romans 9:14-15
What then shall we say? Is God unjust? Not at all! For he says to Moses,
“I will have mercy on whom I have mercy,
and I will have compassion on whom I have compassion.”
It does not, therefore, depend on human desire or effort, but on God’s mercy.
This review also appears on readthehardparts.com. Read the Hard Parts encourages and equips Christians to understand the hard parts of Scripture.
March 29, 2022
If the Lord tarries, I am convinced that R.C. Sproul will ultimately be considered one of the greatest thinkers and teachers in church history, alongside some of the men whose views he compiles in this book, "Willing To Believe." Subtitled "Understanding the Role of the Human Will in Salvation," Sproul focuses in on nine men and their theology concerning the ability of humanity (or lack thereof) to participate in salvation, whether they are synergistic (Pelagius, Cassian [as a Semi-Pelagian], Arminius, Finney) or monergistic (Augustine, Luther, Calvin [with Turretin], Edwards, Chafer).
Sproul eloquently puts forth in the introduction a general synopsis of what is at stake in this discussion (for which a lengthier treatment can be found in his book "Chosen By God"). Even though he disagrees with the synergistic views, he presents them fairly and, as much as possible, in their own words. I found the chapter on Arminius particularly enlightening; I never realized there was as much overlap as there was between him and the monergists (at least linguistically!).
One of the more sobering aspects of this book is how much today's Church resembles the Semi-Pelagian, if not full-out Pelagian, view. Indeed, at the end of the chapter on Arminius, Sproul mentions Clark Pinnock, one of the leading proponents of Open Theism today. The errors of Open Theism are prevalent, not only in academic circles, but also from behind many pulpits, even if it is not known by that name.
I do have two issues with this work, though. The first thing is an act of omission: I wish Sproul would have included a treatment on Gordon H. Clark's view of the will. While Clark would have been a twentieth-century addition (along with Lewis Sperry Chafer), Clark's strong monergistic views, coupled with his views on determinism and God's will, would have been a welcome addition in this reviewer's mind. And it's not as if Clark as not on Sproul's radar -- the former is mentioned on p. 143!
The other issue I have is his treatment of Chafer, with Sproul's mischaracterization and misrepresentation of "dispenstionalist" soteriology. He notes that many dispensationalists charged Gerstner with misunderstanding historic dispensationalism in his work "Wrongly Dividing the Word of Truth" (p. 190), a fate that Sproul himself suffers. He summarizes his own findings on p. 191: "The universe of my experience provides an inadequate basis from which to draw final conclusions about dispensationalism today, but it does point out that no small amount of confusion exists regarding these issues."
The confusion is clearly in Sproul's own mind. Setting aside the matter of ordo salutis for the moment, and the relationship between faith and regeneration, Sproul readily admits that Chafer's soteriology sounds quite Augustinian (pp. 192-193). He then goes on to attack the "dispensationalist" notion that faith precedes regeneration. What Sproul fails to do is define the terms that are used between the two camps; the result of which would be the understanding that, while the monergistic concepts they believe are the same, the terminology they employ differs. It would take one paragraph to explain the "Reformed" definition of regeneration, compared and contrasted with that of the "dispensationalist." The end result is an uncharitable and intellectually dishonest criticism of the hermeneutical school. Indeed, he was fairer in his treatment to the synergistic views, not seeking to dismantle and parse every word! No wonder many in Reformed circles have such an errant view of what dispensationalists actually believe!
That being said, I highly recommend this volume. I recommend it to the lay believer who seeks to gain a greater understanding of the history of this doctrine. I would recommend it on the undergraduate or seminary level if a soteriology course would allow the time for the study. Throughout the bulk of the book, Sproul does well to survey the various views and contributions, leaving the reader much to consider.
Sproul eloquently puts forth in the introduction a general synopsis of what is at stake in this discussion (for which a lengthier treatment can be found in his book "Chosen By God"). Even though he disagrees with the synergistic views, he presents them fairly and, as much as possible, in their own words. I found the chapter on Arminius particularly enlightening; I never realized there was as much overlap as there was between him and the monergists (at least linguistically!).
One of the more sobering aspects of this book is how much today's Church resembles the Semi-Pelagian, if not full-out Pelagian, view. Indeed, at the end of the chapter on Arminius, Sproul mentions Clark Pinnock, one of the leading proponents of Open Theism today. The errors of Open Theism are prevalent, not only in academic circles, but also from behind many pulpits, even if it is not known by that name.
I do have two issues with this work, though. The first thing is an act of omission: I wish Sproul would have included a treatment on Gordon H. Clark's view of the will. While Clark would have been a twentieth-century addition (along with Lewis Sperry Chafer), Clark's strong monergistic views, coupled with his views on determinism and God's will, would have been a welcome addition in this reviewer's mind. And it's not as if Clark as not on Sproul's radar -- the former is mentioned on p. 143!
The other issue I have is his treatment of Chafer, with Sproul's mischaracterization and misrepresentation of "dispenstionalist" soteriology. He notes that many dispensationalists charged Gerstner with misunderstanding historic dispensationalism in his work "Wrongly Dividing the Word of Truth" (p. 190), a fate that Sproul himself suffers. He summarizes his own findings on p. 191: "The universe of my experience provides an inadequate basis from which to draw final conclusions about dispensationalism today, but it does point out that no small amount of confusion exists regarding these issues."
The confusion is clearly in Sproul's own mind. Setting aside the matter of ordo salutis for the moment, and the relationship between faith and regeneration, Sproul readily admits that Chafer's soteriology sounds quite Augustinian (pp. 192-193). He then goes on to attack the "dispensationalist" notion that faith precedes regeneration. What Sproul fails to do is define the terms that are used between the two camps; the result of which would be the understanding that, while the monergistic concepts they believe are the same, the terminology they employ differs. It would take one paragraph to explain the "Reformed" definition of regeneration, compared and contrasted with that of the "dispensationalist." The end result is an uncharitable and intellectually dishonest criticism of the hermeneutical school. Indeed, he was fairer in his treatment to the synergistic views, not seeking to dismantle and parse every word! No wonder many in Reformed circles have such an errant view of what dispensationalists actually believe!
That being said, I highly recommend this volume. I recommend it to the lay believer who seeks to gain a greater understanding of the history of this doctrine. I would recommend it on the undergraduate or seminary level if a soteriology course would allow the time for the study. Throughout the bulk of the book, Sproul does well to survey the various views and contributions, leaving the reader much to consider.
February 17, 2018
My Thoughts:
I was drawn to this book because in Bible Study Fellowship, we are studying the book of Romans. At this point in the study we are in chapter 11: 33-36.
Oh, the depth of the riches and wisdom and knowledge of God! How unsearchable are his judgments and how inscrutable his ways! For who has known the mind of the Lord, or who has been his counselor? Or who has given a gift to him that he might be repaid? For from him and through him and to him are all things. To him be glory forever. Amen. Translation from the ESV.
I felt Willing To Believe, would be a solid book to contribute to what I’ve been learning in BSF. However, it held pleasing surprises too.
Willing To Believe is a solid study of Christian history, specifically those who questioned “original sin” and “the work of God in a believer’s life.”
I’d not heard of Pelagius. I have read about Aurelius Augustine, also known as St. Augustine of Hippo (link is for further reading at Britannica.) A book I read a few years ago, Christianity In Roman Africa by J. Patout Burns Jr. and Robin M. Jensen, introduced me to Augustine and the early Christian Church in Northern Africa. If you’ve not read this book I recommend it. It is lengthy but it is a must read!
In Bible Study Fellowship, we’ve been reading about people who add to what God has done on the cross. This “adding to” is works. I believe that anything plus what God has already done on the cross through Jesus Christ is false and leads straight to Hell. We cannot add to our salvation. Salvation is from God alone.
One of the first things I learned in Willing To Believe are the words monergistic and synergistic.
“Monergistic means that regeneration is accomplished by a single actor, God. It means literally a ‘one-working.'” Page 22.
“Synergism, on the other hand, refers to a work that involves the action of two or more parties. It is a co-working.” Page 22.
In chapter one, we are introduced to the heated debate (A.D. 411-412) between Pelagius (Pelagianism belief) and Augustine. Pelagius (a British Monk) believed in synergism.
Pelagius did not like a prayer Augustine had written:
Grant what thou commandest, and command what thou dost desire. Page 32.
Pelagius did not like the first part of this prayer. In response, he wrote 18 premises. In Willing To Believe, between pages 33 and 41 these are listed and explained. In brief, Pelagius, “believed that God never commands what is impossible for man to perform.” Page 32.
When Sproul began the book with the information about Pelagius and Augustine, I wondered what I’d gotten myself in to by reading and reviewing this book. I felt unprepared for a heavy study of early church fathers and this subject. In retrospect, I was wrong to think this. Sproul is building a case for the book. Just as the apostle Paul was building his case in the book of Romans. The case in Willing To Believe is what part do humans have in salvation? The answer is from Jonathan Edwards, page 167.
Man is morally incapable of choosing the things of God unless or until God changes the disposition of his soul. Man’s moral inability is due to a critical lack and deficiency, namely the motive or desire for the things of God. Left to himself, he will never choose Christ unless God first changes the inclination of his soul by the immediate and supernatural work of regeneration. Only God can liberate the sinner from his bondage to his own evil inclinations.
The following chapters are theologians who took the road of either belief, monergistic or synergistic: Martin Luther, John Calvin, James Arminius, Jonathan Edwards, Charles Grandison Finney and Lewis Sperry Chafer. Their views are explored in respect to the theme of Willing To Believe.
Willing To Believe is organized well, it has solid explanations of the various views with respect to the subject; and the book itself has clarity and strength.
Complimentary copy from Baker Books.
I was drawn to this book because in Bible Study Fellowship, we are studying the book of Romans. At this point in the study we are in chapter 11: 33-36.
Oh, the depth of the riches and wisdom and knowledge of God! How unsearchable are his judgments and how inscrutable his ways! For who has known the mind of the Lord, or who has been his counselor? Or who has given a gift to him that he might be repaid? For from him and through him and to him are all things. To him be glory forever. Amen. Translation from the ESV.
I felt Willing To Believe, would be a solid book to contribute to what I’ve been learning in BSF. However, it held pleasing surprises too.
Willing To Believe is a solid study of Christian history, specifically those who questioned “original sin” and “the work of God in a believer’s life.”
I’d not heard of Pelagius. I have read about Aurelius Augustine, also known as St. Augustine of Hippo (link is for further reading at Britannica.) A book I read a few years ago, Christianity In Roman Africa by J. Patout Burns Jr. and Robin M. Jensen, introduced me to Augustine and the early Christian Church in Northern Africa. If you’ve not read this book I recommend it. It is lengthy but it is a must read!
In Bible Study Fellowship, we’ve been reading about people who add to what God has done on the cross. This “adding to” is works. I believe that anything plus what God has already done on the cross through Jesus Christ is false and leads straight to Hell. We cannot add to our salvation. Salvation is from God alone.
One of the first things I learned in Willing To Believe are the words monergistic and synergistic.
“Monergistic means that regeneration is accomplished by a single actor, God. It means literally a ‘one-working.'” Page 22.
“Synergism, on the other hand, refers to a work that involves the action of two or more parties. It is a co-working.” Page 22.
In chapter one, we are introduced to the heated debate (A.D. 411-412) between Pelagius (Pelagianism belief) and Augustine. Pelagius (a British Monk) believed in synergism.
Pelagius did not like a prayer Augustine had written:
Grant what thou commandest, and command what thou dost desire. Page 32.
Pelagius did not like the first part of this prayer. In response, he wrote 18 premises. In Willing To Believe, between pages 33 and 41 these are listed and explained. In brief, Pelagius, “believed that God never commands what is impossible for man to perform.” Page 32.
When Sproul began the book with the information about Pelagius and Augustine, I wondered what I’d gotten myself in to by reading and reviewing this book. I felt unprepared for a heavy study of early church fathers and this subject. In retrospect, I was wrong to think this. Sproul is building a case for the book. Just as the apostle Paul was building his case in the book of Romans. The case in Willing To Believe is what part do humans have in salvation? The answer is from Jonathan Edwards, page 167.
Man is morally incapable of choosing the things of God unless or until God changes the disposition of his soul. Man’s moral inability is due to a critical lack and deficiency, namely the motive or desire for the things of God. Left to himself, he will never choose Christ unless God first changes the inclination of his soul by the immediate and supernatural work of regeneration. Only God can liberate the sinner from his bondage to his own evil inclinations.
The following chapters are theologians who took the road of either belief, monergistic or synergistic: Martin Luther, John Calvin, James Arminius, Jonathan Edwards, Charles Grandison Finney and Lewis Sperry Chafer. Their views are explored in respect to the theme of Willing To Believe.
Willing To Believe is organized well, it has solid explanations of the various views with respect to the subject; and the book itself has clarity and strength.
Complimentary copy from Baker Books.
February 1, 2016
Very informative historical survey of the development of theological views regarding free will, original sin, depravity, and salvation. Looks at the teachings of Augustine, Pelagius, Luther, Calvin, Arminius, Edwards, Finney, and others.
Some of Sproul's books are a bit on the simple side for me, but this was substantial and well researched. As always, Sproul is careful when describing "the other side's" viewpoint, which is one of my favorite things about his teaching.
Some of Sproul's books are a bit on the simple side for me, but this was substantial and well researched. As always, Sproul is careful when describing "the other side's" viewpoint, which is one of my favorite things about his teaching.
March 6, 2018
R.C. Sproul died at the end of 2017, and as a way of honoring his legacy Baker Books republished his Willing to Believe: Understanding the Role of the Human Will in Salvation. Sproul marches through two thousand years of dogmatic history as it pertains to questions of salvation, determinism, and freedom. He finds much to appreciate in the Augustinian-Calvinist tradition, which informs much of his reading of the related history.
The work is structured so that nine figures important to the development of theological answers to questions of salvation--Pelagius, Augustine, the "Semi-Pelagians," Luther, Calvin, Arminius, Edwards, Finney, and Chafer--are each given roughly twenty pages worth of treatment. In this respect, Willing to Believe gives readers an interpretation for each theologian that could be digested over half an hour, which makes for a (mostly) invaluable contribution to accessible scholarship. Sproul makes it a point to clearly and lucidly explain the contributions of and differences between the individuals--although at times this leads to reductionistic readings (notably, the chapter on Arminius and his influence).
Where appropriate, Sproul spent time articulating the way in which the figures under investigation have retained an influence in the contemporary world. Throughout the book, then, the reader moves from a lesson on the history of dogma to contemporary application then back to dogma. It may have perhaps made for a more effective work had Sproul not chased these rabbit trails. The one incidence in which this was most striking was when Sproul attributed the emergence of Open Theism to the influence of Arminius, which as a matter of history may be fine and dandy but as an indictment on Arminius himself and on self-styled "Arminians" today is inappropriate--precisely because the aberrative fruit of a tradition is not in itself evidence that a tradition is in itself at fault. (One would have to wonder whether Sproul would have as willingly maligned Calvin for Christian determinists who deny any "freedom of the will" howsoever defined.) The association between Arminians and Open Theists, at this point, seems more contrived for the sake of polemics than undertaken for the sake of proper appraisal.
Willing to Believe is a work that begins well but trails off as its length increases. The early chapters on Pelagius and Augustine are easily the strongest, followed not too distantly by the chapter on Edwards. But much of the rest is fair enough--not stellar, in other words. They can be valuable insofar as one does not have great familiarity with the subject matter--and insofar as one reads widely, from a tradition other than Augustinian Calvinism for alternative interpretations.
I do want to make a note or two about Sproul's introduction to the work. There are a number of points made by the author over the course of the introduction that are troubling. First, Sproul grimly remarks that Arminians are "barely" Christian by virtue of "a felicitous inconsistency," which differentiates them "from Rome on crucial points" (24). In nearly a single breath, he has dismissed Arminian theology as such and Catholic doctrine as Christian, both of which moves are presumptuous. Second, Sproul issues a broadside against "accommodation" insofar as presenting the gospel is concerned (16-18). It will suffice, for the purposes of this review, to remark that every articulation of the gospel is itself an accommodation to the culture, because we speak in a culture's language and to a culture's people with a culture's forms and expectations. Yes, we hope to round the edges of their expectation, but we still teach in a manner intelligible to somebody for whom "Christ and him crucified" is incomprehensible.
These comments from Sproul set an unfortunate stage for the work, which, to his credit, Sproul was able to outstrip. Nevertheless, the introduction draws away from an otherwise mostly valuable contribution.
<><><>
Disclosure: I received this book free from Baker Books through the Baker Books Bloggers http://www.bakerbooks.com/bakerbooksb... program. The opinions I have expressed are my own, and I was not required to write a positive review. I am disclosing this in accordance with the Federal Trade Commission’s 16 CFR, Part 255 http://www.access.gpo.gov/nara/cfr/wa....
The work is structured so that nine figures important to the development of theological answers to questions of salvation--Pelagius, Augustine, the "Semi-Pelagians," Luther, Calvin, Arminius, Edwards, Finney, and Chafer--are each given roughly twenty pages worth of treatment. In this respect, Willing to Believe gives readers an interpretation for each theologian that could be digested over half an hour, which makes for a (mostly) invaluable contribution to accessible scholarship. Sproul makes it a point to clearly and lucidly explain the contributions of and differences between the individuals--although at times this leads to reductionistic readings (notably, the chapter on Arminius and his influence).
Where appropriate, Sproul spent time articulating the way in which the figures under investigation have retained an influence in the contemporary world. Throughout the book, then, the reader moves from a lesson on the history of dogma to contemporary application then back to dogma. It may have perhaps made for a more effective work had Sproul not chased these rabbit trails. The one incidence in which this was most striking was when Sproul attributed the emergence of Open Theism to the influence of Arminius, which as a matter of history may be fine and dandy but as an indictment on Arminius himself and on self-styled "Arminians" today is inappropriate--precisely because the aberrative fruit of a tradition is not in itself evidence that a tradition is in itself at fault. (One would have to wonder whether Sproul would have as willingly maligned Calvin for Christian determinists who deny any "freedom of the will" howsoever defined.) The association between Arminians and Open Theists, at this point, seems more contrived for the sake of polemics than undertaken for the sake of proper appraisal.
Willing to Believe is a work that begins well but trails off as its length increases. The early chapters on Pelagius and Augustine are easily the strongest, followed not too distantly by the chapter on Edwards. But much of the rest is fair enough--not stellar, in other words. They can be valuable insofar as one does not have great familiarity with the subject matter--and insofar as one reads widely, from a tradition other than Augustinian Calvinism for alternative interpretations.
I do want to make a note or two about Sproul's introduction to the work. There are a number of points made by the author over the course of the introduction that are troubling. First, Sproul grimly remarks that Arminians are "barely" Christian by virtue of "a felicitous inconsistency," which differentiates them "from Rome on crucial points" (24). In nearly a single breath, he has dismissed Arminian theology as such and Catholic doctrine as Christian, both of which moves are presumptuous. Second, Sproul issues a broadside against "accommodation" insofar as presenting the gospel is concerned (16-18). It will suffice, for the purposes of this review, to remark that every articulation of the gospel is itself an accommodation to the culture, because we speak in a culture's language and to a culture's people with a culture's forms and expectations. Yes, we hope to round the edges of their expectation, but we still teach in a manner intelligible to somebody for whom "Christ and him crucified" is incomprehensible.
These comments from Sproul set an unfortunate stage for the work, which, to his credit, Sproul was able to outstrip. Nevertheless, the introduction draws away from an otherwise mostly valuable contribution.
<><><>
Disclosure: I received this book free from Baker Books through the Baker Books Bloggers http://www.bakerbooks.com/bakerbooksb... program. The opinions I have expressed are my own, and I was not required to write a positive review. I am disclosing this in accordance with the Federal Trade Commission’s 16 CFR, Part 255 http://www.access.gpo.gov/nara/cfr/wa....
July 2, 2018
In order to properly digest this feast of a book, you need some prior understanding of Calvinistic and Arminian theology. This is not the book to get you acquainted, as Sproul jumps right in to tearing through different ideologies regarding sin, sovereignty, and free will. This is certainly not a critique of the book, simply a little advice to readers who might not know what they’re getting themselves into. Although unabashedly Calvinistic, Sproul does a good job of revealing the truth and uncovering the pitfalls in all philosophies. Whatever philosophy a person may align with, everyone should understand the implications of their beliefs.
December 28, 2018
I liked how he started back with Augustine and Pelagius and did a survey of the response to their thoughts, leading all the way up to the present. This is more of a history than an attempt at persuasion from Sproul himself, so I left this book wanting a little more. I did appreciate the image at the end of the book discussing one of the main objections to Calvinism, namely, that God is not being loving in violating ones will by determining salvation. Sproul says “ the monergistic regeneration of Reformed theology, however, does not violate the sinner’s will. Indeed it is a change of the sinner’s will wrought by the sovereign agency of God. It is precisely this work of God that liberated the sinner from slavery. It is a strange thing to deem the liberation of an enslaved will as a violation of freedom. It is God’s work of freeing, not violating, that is in view.”
April 1, 2019
I really enjoyed going through this book and learning the history of the debate about the role the will has in salvation. This has helped me to hone what I believe about this topic. Would definitely recommend, especially if someone is interested in the history of church theology.
February 26, 2018
What is the role of man’s will in his salvation? How fallen is fallen man? Has the fall ruined our ability to respond to God, or has the fall merely damaged that ability greatly? These questions have been asked throughout theological history, and the debate still carries on.
In Willing to Believe, R. C. Sproul does the scholar’s work of gathering for his readers the arguments of a set of theologians throughout the history of the church regarding the issue of the human will. Each chapter of this work summarizes the view of a different important figure in the development of theology. Some names are more familiar and some less so. But all the men mentioned in this work have brought something new to the table, for good or for ill.
Where this work is valuable is in the summary of the development of Christian doctrine. If a reader wants to see how people from as early as the 4th century or as late as the 20th century have thought about the issue of man’s will and the impact of the fall, this work is very helpful. Students needing to write about the issue of free will could not have a much more helpful volume. And any Christian who hears a name such as Edwards, Calvin, Augustine, or Pelagius, could quickly turn to the appropriate chapter in this book to find out how each figure contributed to the development or confusion regarding the issue of God’s sovereignty and our salvation.
This work could, however, leave readers disappointed. If a student wants to see how Sproul would interact with each scholar, she might find the treatments thin. While Sproul points out errors from time-to-time, he does not thoroughly critique each man’s view in such a way that the critique is simple, clear, and powerful. Other works by Sproul offer his own take on the issue of man’s will. And, yes, this book will let you in on Sproul’s view, but there is not, as one might have wanted, a nice summary chapter from Sproul to help his readers wade through the controversy to a simple and clear conclusion.
** I received a free copy of this work from the publisher in exchange for an honest review.
In Willing to Believe, R. C. Sproul does the scholar’s work of gathering for his readers the arguments of a set of theologians throughout the history of the church regarding the issue of the human will. Each chapter of this work summarizes the view of a different important figure in the development of theology. Some names are more familiar and some less so. But all the men mentioned in this work have brought something new to the table, for good or for ill.
Where this work is valuable is in the summary of the development of Christian doctrine. If a reader wants to see how people from as early as the 4th century or as late as the 20th century have thought about the issue of man’s will and the impact of the fall, this work is very helpful. Students needing to write about the issue of free will could not have a much more helpful volume. And any Christian who hears a name such as Edwards, Calvin, Augustine, or Pelagius, could quickly turn to the appropriate chapter in this book to find out how each figure contributed to the development or confusion regarding the issue of God’s sovereignty and our salvation.
This work could, however, leave readers disappointed. If a student wants to see how Sproul would interact with each scholar, she might find the treatments thin. While Sproul points out errors from time-to-time, he does not thoroughly critique each man’s view in such a way that the critique is simple, clear, and powerful. Other works by Sproul offer his own take on the issue of man’s will. And, yes, this book will let you in on Sproul’s view, but there is not, as one might have wanted, a nice summary chapter from Sproul to help his readers wade through the controversy to a simple and clear conclusion.
** I received a free copy of this work from the publisher in exchange for an honest review.
January 22, 2020
This wasn't nearly as helpful or engaging as expected. After an introduction, Sproul walks through, and provides commentary on, several historic views on free will as it relates to salvation, held by 8 individuals and a group, which are either Augustinian/Reformed, or semi-Pelagian/Arminian. The chapters are fairly long and difficult to follow. There's good material, but it must be mined.
Notes
Introduction: Evangelicalism and an Ancient Heresy
Arminianism in effect makes faith a meritorious work, because the good response a person makes to the gospel is the determining factor in their salvation.
All leading early Reformers (Luther, Calvin, Zwingli, Bucer, et al.) agreed that humans are helpless in their sin, and God is sovereign in grace.
Either God is sovereign, or humans are autonomous; they are mutually exclusive. If God's sovereignty is limited by human freedom, then humans, not God, would be sovereign.
"Wherever the gospel is preached in its purity, it engenders conflict and controversy." OT and NT prophets were immersed in conflict and controversy because they wouldn't accommodate God's Word to culture. "As much as Paul sought to live peaceably with all men, he found rare moments of peace and little respite from controversy."
We Are Incapable of Obedience: Augustine
When God said Adam and Eve would die if they ate the forbidden fruit, that refers to immediate spiritual death, and the beginning of physical death (aging, decay, illness, etc.).
Faith and true liberty are divine gifts from God (Eph 2:8; Rom 9:16).
"One's view of grace and free will is inseparably related to one's understanding of original sin."
Augustine said that humans always have free will, even after the Fall. But, that will can be good or evil.
"The grace of God operates on the heart in such a way as to make the formerly unwilling sinner willing. … God makes the will righteous bny removing the hardness of heart and converting an opposing will." See Ezek 11:19.
We Are Voluntary Slaves: John Calvin
Luther wrote more extensively than Calvin about the will and predestination, and both continued in Augustinian thought. The Augustinian view has become equated with Calvinism because Reformed churches have done so much to keep Augustinian tradition alive.
Verses: Eph 2:1, 8-10; John 3:3; 6:44; 65; Rom 9:16.
Regeneration is monergistic (done by God alone), but conversion is synergistic (done by God and human together), because the human believes after being enabled by God.
It's necessary for God to be good, but that doesn't mean He doesn't have free will. Likewise, fallen humans necessarily sin, yet sin willfully.
We Are Inclined to Sin: Jonathan Edwards
"As religion is the great business, for which we are created, and on which our happiness depends …" —Jonathan Edwards
We Are Able to Believe: Lewis Sperry Chafer
The monergistic regeneration of Reformed theology (Calvinism) doesn't violate the sinner's will, because it changes the sinner's will. God's work liberates the sinner from slavery.
There's a close relationship between one's view of the Fall, regeneration, and free will.
Notes
Introduction: Evangelicalism and an Ancient Heresy
Arminianism in effect makes faith a meritorious work, because the good response a person makes to the gospel is the determining factor in their salvation.
All leading early Reformers (Luther, Calvin, Zwingli, Bucer, et al.) agreed that humans are helpless in their sin, and God is sovereign in grace.
Either God is sovereign, or humans are autonomous; they are mutually exclusive. If God's sovereignty is limited by human freedom, then humans, not God, would be sovereign.
"Wherever the gospel is preached in its purity, it engenders conflict and controversy." OT and NT prophets were immersed in conflict and controversy because they wouldn't accommodate God's Word to culture. "As much as Paul sought to live peaceably with all men, he found rare moments of peace and little respite from controversy."
We Are Incapable of Obedience: Augustine
When God said Adam and Eve would die if they ate the forbidden fruit, that refers to immediate spiritual death, and the beginning of physical death (aging, decay, illness, etc.).
Faith and true liberty are divine gifts from God (Eph 2:8; Rom 9:16).
"One's view of grace and free will is inseparably related to one's understanding of original sin."
Augustine said that humans always have free will, even after the Fall. But, that will can be good or evil.
"The grace of God operates on the heart in such a way as to make the formerly unwilling sinner willing. … God makes the will righteous bny removing the hardness of heart and converting an opposing will." See Ezek 11:19.
The sinner is both free and in bondage at the same time, but not in the same sense. He is free to act according to his own desires, but his desires are only evil. … This corruption greatly affects the will, but it does not destroy it as a faculty of choosing.We Are in Bondage to Sin: Martin Luther
Pharaoh's heart is hardened by necessity, but not because God created fresh evil within it or because God coerced Pharaoh to sin. Rather the hardening was the natural result of Pharaoh's internal corruption as it met up with God's persistent will and command.John 3:16 says that whoever believes will not perish. It doesn't say anything about who will or can believe.
We Are Voluntary Slaves: John Calvin
Luther wrote more extensively than Calvin about the will and predestination, and both continued in Augustinian thought. The Augustinian view has become equated with Calvinism because Reformed churches have done so much to keep Augustinian tradition alive.
Verses: Eph 2:1, 8-10; John 3:3; 6:44; 65; Rom 9:16.
Turretin grants that men can and do resist God's grace. What irresistible means is that the grace of regeneration accomplishes what God intends. … This grace is irresistible in that it is a divine act of re-creation in which God gives the sinner a new heart. God imparts to the sinner the very act of willing.Humans are sinful from birth, spiritually dead in sin, opposed to God, unable to choose God (Gen 6:5; 8:21; Ps 14:3; Rom 3:10; 8:6; 2 Cor 3:5).
Regeneration is monergistic (done by God alone), but conversion is synergistic (done by God and human together), because the human believes after being enabled by God.
It's necessary for God to be good, but that doesn't mean He doesn't have free will. Likewise, fallen humans necessarily sin, yet sin willfully.
We Are Inclined to Sin: Jonathan Edwards
"As religion is the great business, for which we are created, and on which our happiness depends …" —Jonathan Edwards
The will is always free to act according to the strongest motive or inclination at the moment. … To be able to choose what one desires is to be free in this sense. When I say the will cannot be free, I mean the will cannot choose against its strongest inclination.Humans are morally incapable of choosing God until God changes the disposition of their soul. Left to themselves, humans will never choose God, because in their fallen state they have no inclination to do so. Because a human can't act against their strongest inclination, they won't choose God unless God changes their inclination through regeneration.
We Are Able to Believe: Lewis Sperry Chafer
The monergistic regeneration of Reformed theology (Calvinism) doesn't violate the sinner's will, because it changes the sinner's will. God's work liberates the sinner from slavery.
There's a close relationship between one's view of the Fall, regeneration, and free will.
January 13, 2025
Solid book covering the historical debate of 'free' will. A must-read for those interested in the debate stemming back centuries ago and its impact on the contemporary view of the will.
February 21, 2018
Book Review: Willing to Believe by: R.C. Sproul
This book was not at all what I was hoping it would be. I grew up in the Christian Reformed Church, but have become Wesleyan pastor. I’ve grown to realize that, in my view, Wesleyan theology seems to better align with the way I interpret the bible. However, I also doubt that either tradition, Calvinist or Arminian, has it 100% correct. I picked this book up hoping that it would present a biblical view of Reformed theology, but I don’t feel that it did that well at all.
This book was mostly long sections of quotes from the early church fathers, past theologians, and Reformed Confessions. I respect tradition and history, and I recognize that there is much to be learned from the leaders who have come before us. On the other hand, it seems logical to me that a theology book would be full of scripture to support the beliefs it is presenting. This book simply approaches theology and the nature of God from a position of logic and past writings, which seems unreasonable and highly irresponsible. When you base your belief of God on the logic of fallen man, you are bound to wind up with problems.
The one redeeming factor about this book is the fact that it presents the view of other faith (Christian) backgrounds. It breaks down everything wrong with other denominational views.
I thought this book was a poor excuse for a theological work. If anything, this book goes to further distinguish the lines between denomination, and cause further separation. It makes it difficult to find places that the Church (universal) can agree and become unified. If the Christian faith is to make an impact in America we must be unified, and this book does nothing to bring us closer together. In fact in makes some other traditions appear as if they’re sub-human as early as the introduction chapters. I’ll give this book 2 out of 5 stars because I did gain some insight, but nothing I couldn’t have found somewhere else.
This book was not at all what I was hoping it would be. I grew up in the Christian Reformed Church, but have become Wesleyan pastor. I’ve grown to realize that, in my view, Wesleyan theology seems to better align with the way I interpret the bible. However, I also doubt that either tradition, Calvinist or Arminian, has it 100% correct. I picked this book up hoping that it would present a biblical view of Reformed theology, but I don’t feel that it did that well at all.
This book was mostly long sections of quotes from the early church fathers, past theologians, and Reformed Confessions. I respect tradition and history, and I recognize that there is much to be learned from the leaders who have come before us. On the other hand, it seems logical to me that a theology book would be full of scripture to support the beliefs it is presenting. This book simply approaches theology and the nature of God from a position of logic and past writings, which seems unreasonable and highly irresponsible. When you base your belief of God on the logic of fallen man, you are bound to wind up with problems.
The one redeeming factor about this book is the fact that it presents the view of other faith (Christian) backgrounds. It breaks down everything wrong with other denominational views.
I thought this book was a poor excuse for a theological work. If anything, this book goes to further distinguish the lines between denomination, and cause further separation. It makes it difficult to find places that the Church (universal) can agree and become unified. If the Christian faith is to make an impact in America we must be unified, and this book does nothing to bring us closer together. In fact in makes some other traditions appear as if they’re sub-human as early as the introduction chapters. I’ll give this book 2 out of 5 stars because I did gain some insight, but nothing I couldn’t have found somewhere else.
February 9, 2018
Willing to Believe: Understanding the Role of the Human Will in Salvation by R. C. Sproul discusses the debate between free will and determinism as the author explores our sin and our salvation. The book is definitely an educational one; we learn about the views of Pelagius (and the Semi-Pelagians), Augustine, Martin Luther, John Calvin, James Arminius, Jonathan Edwards, Charles Grandison Finney, amd Lewis Sperry Chafer. Because we learn about these various historical figures throughout the text, the book is not only a theological work, but it also serves as a history book (and one that can be thankfully finished in 206 pages!). The chapter that I found to be most interesting was the one that focused on James Arminius, though I also really enjoyed reading about dispensationalism in the chapter about Lewis Sperry Chafer.
*I received this book for review*
*I received this book for review*
August 28, 2012
In "Willing to Believe", R.C. Sproul has done the church a service by tracing out in plain language and accessible format the historic debate over human free will and the sovereignty of God, particularly in salvation. What makes this book of particular value is that it is easily accessible to folks who would not normally pick up a tome of church history or historical theology, much less read the various works of theology and the biographies of each of the men covered by this book. Sproul has done the heavy lifting for us and has sifted and synthesized each view into an overall package that really holds the reader's interest. Rather than an in-depth systematic treatment of each perspective, Sproul hits the highlights and major points of each person's views, including just enough theological detail and direct quotes to get a decent feel for each man's stance on whether or not people are capable of participating in and cooperating with God in their own salvation. There is enough biographical detail on each of the men discussed to give insight into some of the influences on their thinking and we also see some of the practical implications of how their various positions worked themselves out in their lives and ministries.
This is a great introduction to the debate over free will and the sovereignty of God in salvation. It will demonstrate for some that this historic and often heated debate is not a mere matter of semantics that can be dismissed as the unimportant argument of a few stuffy shirted theologians - this is important stuff that affects the way we worship, work and think. For others, it will encourage further study into the lives and works of those covered in this book. While some will wish for more detail at times, the book is meant as a brief overview of this running debate centered around some of its most well known participants. This the book does well without its treatment becoming shallow.
This is a great introduction to the debate over free will and the sovereignty of God in salvation. It will demonstrate for some that this historic and often heated debate is not a mere matter of semantics that can be dismissed as the unimportant argument of a few stuffy shirted theologians - this is important stuff that affects the way we worship, work and think. For others, it will encourage further study into the lives and works of those covered in this book. While some will wish for more detail at times, the book is meant as a brief overview of this running debate centered around some of its most well known participants. This the book does well without its treatment becoming shallow.
August 12, 2011
From Pelagius to Lewis Sperry Chafer, and even modern-day dispensationalists like Dr. Norman L. Giesler, Dr. R.C. Sproul covers it all. Dr. Sproul finds no need to be build straw man caricatures in order to slander non-Reformed positions on the will of man. Instead he tackles the prevailing thoughts on the will throughout history and pulls it up by its roots. What I love about reading Dr. Sproul is that he finds no need in establishing what has already been said. In defending his views he presents what men like Augustine, Martin Luther, John Calvin, Francis Turretin, Jonathon Edwards, and John H. Gerstner have already said. Then proceeds to expound and evaluate the opposing view in light of the clear teaching of Scripture.
If you have grown up holding to a tradition of men that teaches man's moral ability to take part in his own salvation, I recommend you wrestle with the men of the Reformation and late-Augustine, their precise logic, and consistent exegesis of Scripture.
If you have grown up holding to a tradition of men that teaches man's moral ability to take part in his own salvation, I recommend you wrestle with the men of the Reformation and late-Augustine, their precise logic, and consistent exegesis of Scripture.
February 1, 2018
This book was incredible writing and compelling to read with also help and offering us a chance to understand and learning from the main of a deep of the Christian history and discovery of how the debate will affect our understand if God’s righteousness, and grace. All of these are vital to Christian theology. This will be greatly demean the full character of God as revealed in Scripture. I highly recommend to everyone must to read this book. “ I received complimentary a copy of this book from Baker Books Bloggers for this review”.
January 3, 2013
Beginning with the heretical bishop, Pelagius, Sproul traces Christian thought concerning free will by focusing on the views of Augustine, the Semi-Pelagians, Luther, Calvin, Arminius, Edwards, Finney, and Chafer. I appreciate that Sproul as usual works hard to accurately state the position of those with whom he disagrees, which made his chapter on Arminius one of my favorites. The chapter on Chafer and dispensationalists is the weakest because Sproul does not focus enough on primary sources for his information on dispensationalists. This left me wondering if he was fair to the dispensational view. The book would have been better too if it had a conclusion that summarized the material, developed where the church is at now with this issue, and suggested action for encouraging a more biblical view of man and his will.
May 8, 2017
This book functions as a primer on the controversy over free will. Key points: Augustine distinguishes between free agency (Arbitrium Liberium) and moral ability (libertas). Luther built on these in The Bondage of the Will. Calvin wrote little on predestination compared to Luther. Edwards builds on Luther and Augustine's construct by distinguishing between moral ability and physical ability. Edwards deconstructed Arminians terms to show that they do not know what they are talking about, and if they did, they would abandon it because of the "pile of absurdities" that results. Edwards's book is easier to understand than this book's truncated summary of it.
Memes made using this book here: https://calialcaro-erutano.tumblr.com...
Memes made using this book here: https://calialcaro-erutano.tumblr.com...
December 10, 2010
I usually love R.C. but this was not one of my favorites. Not that I don't agree with him because I do, but this book was just hard to read. Most of his stuff is very readable and accessible even for the theologically challenged, but not this one. Probably because it is heavy on Jonathan Edwards and 18th century English is just hard to read.
That said, if you are willing to plow through it, WILLING TO BELIEVE explains the whole "free will" issue very well from Edwards, Luther, and Sproul's positions.
That said, if you are willing to plow through it, WILLING TO BELIEVE explains the whole "free will" issue very well from Edwards, Luther, and Sproul's positions.
January 13, 2016
R.C. Sproul traces various beliefs through history on the free will of man and the question of whether faith in God ultimately comes from God Himself or from man. Individual chapters are devoted to the different views of Pelagius, Augustine, Semi-Pelagians, Luther, Calvin, Arminius, Edwards, Finney and Chafer. Sproul seems to give an honest representation of the different views while still representing his own Reformed views. This book gives a good overview of the issue and related areas of theology and how these are viewed by different camps.
January 29, 2018
I read this nearly 20 years ago, but I thought if I was going to read more about the Calvinism-Arminianism-Molinism debate again, I had better reread this. I'm glad I did. Sproul provides an even-handed historical and theological overview of Augustine, Pelagius, Semi-Pelagians, Luther, Calvin, Arminius, Jonathan Edwards,Finney, and Chafer.
July 29, 2015
An enjoyable read, especially the introduction which lays out certain presuppositions and then the chapters on Augustine and Edwards. It was a good refresher on an oft-debated topic. I was a little confused as to what Sproul's last chapter on Chafer and dispensationalism had to do with this issue. Not sure I see the connection nor is it representative of dispensationalists I know. Overall, a helpful synthesis of what major players in the church have believed and taught.
December 4, 2010
This is a great overview that contrasts the Arminian versus Predestinarian (Augustine, Luther, Calvin, etc.) views about salvation. Sproul is not condemning of the Arminians but shows the background and basis for the Arminian view versus the predestinarian view. Sproul is a very accessible author for those who are not familiar with the theology or philosophy behind these issues.
June 4, 2012
The book van R.C. Sproul is in Dutch Vrij wil en genade. It’s a very interesting book if you want to know the thoughts about this subject during history. Sproul gives a good overview and shows inside in the different thoughts about this subject. Free will is not free at all when it is not find grace. Gods grace gives the freedom to the will, to do His will.
I told you this was interesting :-)
January 23, 2018
Willing to Believe: Understanding the Role of the Human Will in Salvation
by R.C. Sproul is an easy to read and understand. This informative read is full of scripture with a non-bias teaching that represents both sides of view on this widely debated topic. A read that is sure to be an eyeopener for many. Sproul writing is full of history and research that helps to shed light on this topic.
by R.C. Sproul is an easy to read and understand. This informative read is full of scripture with a non-bias teaching that represents both sides of view on this widely debated topic. A read that is sure to be an eyeopener for many. Sproul writing is full of history and research that helps to shed light on this topic.
April 27, 2011
Again what a brilliant man. I never get enough of hearing him speak. His teaching on free will sets the record straight. Only in the fictional mind of man can one come to Christ at his own choice on his own terms. Many have tried and not just failed but tried and died.
January 26, 2012
Such a great book! Really enjoyed the approach of looking at the historical development of the conversation on free will and God's sovereignty. Wish there were more books that took this approach in regards to discussing a controversial doctrine.
April 8, 2008
This book was helpful in revealing the unbiblical ideas about free will that are so prevalent in the church today and that rob us of the comfort of the sweet sovereignty of God.
May 3, 2008
A great overview of the evolution of free will in the Christian faith.
October 25, 2011
It lays out the issues but could be fairer with Arminianism.
Displaying 1 - 30 of 65 reviews