What do you think?
Rate this book
The Foundation of Augustinian-Calvinism
"Wilson's book is ground-breaking and thought-provoking, and indispensable for every serious student of hugely influential core aspects of Augustine's thought." -- Professor Karla Pollman, University of Bristol on Dr. Ken Wilson's "Augustine's Conversion". This book summarizes Dr. Wilson's "ground-breaking" doctoral thesis at the University of Oxford which was published by Mohr Siebeck in 2018 as "Augustine's Conversion from Traditional Free Choice to 'Non-free Free Will': A Comprehensive Methodology". With a new audience in mind, Dr. Wilson presents his extensive research on free will in ancient and early Christian thought in a shorter and more accessible format with translations of the ancient and modern foreign languages in plain English. Dr. Wilson first provides readers with essential background information on free will in the ancient philosophies and religions of Stoicism, Gnosticism, Neoplatonism, and Manichaeism. He then guides his readers through the writings of the earliest Christian authors who wrote on free will. Finally, Dr. Wilson explores a curious split between St. Augustine's early and later writings and shows how the ideas presented in Augustine's later writings became the foundation for modern Calvinist (Reformed) theology, also known as Augustinian-Calvinism.
145 pages, Kindle Edition
Published July 30, 2019
124 people are currently reading
146 people want to read
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 28 of 28 reviews
February 27, 2022
Isaiah 55:8-9
A word on my own perspective / background / bias. I was raised in a Reformed Church and then moved to a Wesleyan (Arminian) church in my teens. I have attended churches across the spectrum of Christianity, from charismatic to Catholic. My adult church life has mostly been spent in theologically conservative congregations tending toward non-denominational, dispensationalist and baptist theology. I am not interested in defending "Augustinian-Calvinism," or any other Christian theological construct per se, but I am interested in how these constructs compare with The Bible, our only final measure of Truth.
This book was given to me by a close friend; I would not have read it otherwise. The book is mostly a discussion about the issue of free-will vs. determinism using Augustine's later writings vs. his earlier writings. The author finds Augustine's later writings to be infected with pagan views in favor of determinism, and at odds with every other church father. I would be interested to know Wilson's path to this thesis, and what his background is.
To start with, I believe Calvinism’s strength has always also been its weakness – the manner of its emphasis on the sovereignty of God. Most other branches of Christianity have erred in the opposite direction, in while not denying the sovereignty of God, they place too much emphasis on free will.
There is no way we can reconcile these 2 concepts from scripture. They are both true and supported by scripture. This is a paradox of the faith, one of many. God hardened Pharaoh's heart, and whom He foreknew He also predestined, etc. Also: for whosoever shall call upon the Name of the Lord, and Abraham obeyed God, etc. The Christian Faith cannot be fully understood by even those in relationship with the Father. There is still undisclosed mystery. Faith and Hope are meaningless otherwise. I will just add I have read the teachings of other religions, materialistic science and atheistic philosophies and have found myself next to Peter prostrate in the dust before Jesus: “Lord, to whom shall we go? You have the words of eternal life.”
My chief complaint with this book is the lack of time spent engaging with the relevant Biblical scriptures themselves. Any scripture is dealt with in passing, as Wilson delves deeply into pagan views, Patristic views and Augustinian views. Often, scripture that disrupts his thesis is declared to be taken out of context and discarded, while scripture references he likes are always in context and recommended to the reader. I am not saying he is always wrong, but in many places I do disagree with him.
This problem of sovereignty vs. free will is adjacent to the issue of Theodicy, which the author acknowledges but does not explore (which is fine, as he is wisely staying focused on his primary thesis). I mention it only to illustrate that there are several theological-philosophical walls Christians confront that cannot be reconciled “cleanly.” It is our duty to be honest about that.
As far as Wilson's treatment of the pagan philosophies/religions he states came to govern late writings by Augustine, I would say that many of the passages can be read in 2 ways (at least in English, I cannot read original Coptic, Koine Greek, and have only a passing familiarity with Latin). I have read the translations of the Nag Hammadi codices, Buddhist teaching, and the early Church fathers, and I do not agree with the author’s conclusions.
Again, there may be some truth to the author’s contentions, but it is impossible to know. In any event, it is also true that just because a pagan philosophy or religion teaches a certain thing, that by itself does not make that specific thing false. There are truths in many non-Christian philosophies and religions. Simply put, 2 things can be similar and true without one being dependent on the other. Put another way, just because a stoic may believe something that orthodox Christianity believes, not not make that orthodox Christian belief heretical.
The author states that no one should enter into criticism of this synopsis/abstract of his work without engaging with the entirety of the work on which it is based. While I am a little sympathetic to that request, if he wished no one to engage with this smaller summary, perhaps he shouldn’t have published it. He makes very plain his conclusions in this book, and it seems to encompass the larger work very confidently.
Wilson creates the acronym DUPIES (Divine Unilateral Predetermination of Individuals' Eternal Destinies) to represent Augustine's later erroneous interpretation of Christian determinism vs. the "correct" view of Christian free-will. He states initially he does this for reasons of brevity, but most of the time the acronym and the description are both included in the text, and the way it's used makes it appear to be an attempt at mockery (DUPIED sounds like DUPED, and the brain of the reader makes that connection, which I'm certain the author well knows). Honestly, juvenile tools like this are distracting and cheapen arguments. This is a personal irritant of mine, and applies to all authors who use this device. Wilson is very intelligent, and should be above this.
Wilson briefly discusses Augustine's views on infant baptism and its relation to perseverance. I very much agree with him on this topic. Infant baptism has never made any sense to me from a scriptural perspective.
Wilson's views on original sin and inherited sin are a problem for me. The impression I get from his writing (perhaps I am mistaken) is that we are not damned by default, but only once we commit our 1st chargeable (my word) sin. I think his views of the "bondage of sin" are also at variance with my own. Wilson has a much more exalted view of human capacity for self-directed good works and virtue than I do, and I think I'm on far more solid ground scripturally (and in observed reality). It crosses my mind that his views on this issue may be one of the original drivers behind his thesis.
Strangely, Wilson doesn't ever actually address what I think is the crux of his argument, which is, WHY did Augustine's views on determinism evolve? After reading this I still don't know! The Augustine of The Confessions would not change his views because he suddenly returned to the embrace of Mani. Most of us gain knowledge and wisdom as we age. I certainly wouldn't view my own early views as superior to my views of today! Wilson treats Augustine as if he went off the rails later in life (which some people do). WHY?! Could it be Augustine felt he had gone too far down the path of free-will and needed to even things out? I confess I don't know.
In conclusion, even the Church Fathers Wilson cites are quite clear that both and are true. Sovereignty and Free Will are not to be fully reconciled to human minds, and efforts to do so have tied men like Wilson (and myself, honestly) in knots. Scripture teaches BOTH, and so we must believe both, and give glory to our Creator who made us in His image. Charging completely in one direction at the expense the other leads to heresies of different types. We must remember that “now we see through the glass darkly.”
Soli Deo Gloria
A word on my own perspective / background / bias. I was raised in a Reformed Church and then moved to a Wesleyan (Arminian) church in my teens. I have attended churches across the spectrum of Christianity, from charismatic to Catholic. My adult church life has mostly been spent in theologically conservative congregations tending toward non-denominational, dispensationalist and baptist theology. I am not interested in defending "Augustinian-Calvinism," or any other Christian theological construct per se, but I am interested in how these constructs compare with The Bible, our only final measure of Truth.
This book was given to me by a close friend; I would not have read it otherwise. The book is mostly a discussion about the issue of free-will vs. determinism using Augustine's later writings vs. his earlier writings. The author finds Augustine's later writings to be infected with pagan views in favor of determinism, and at odds with every other church father. I would be interested to know Wilson's path to this thesis, and what his background is.
To start with, I believe Calvinism’s strength has always also been its weakness – the manner of its emphasis on the sovereignty of God. Most other branches of Christianity have erred in the opposite direction, in while not denying the sovereignty of God, they place too much emphasis on free will.
There is no way we can reconcile these 2 concepts from scripture. They are both true and supported by scripture. This is a paradox of the faith, one of many. God hardened Pharaoh's heart, and whom He foreknew He also predestined, etc. Also: for whosoever shall call upon the Name of the Lord, and Abraham obeyed God, etc. The Christian Faith cannot be fully understood by even those in relationship with the Father. There is still undisclosed mystery. Faith and Hope are meaningless otherwise. I will just add I have read the teachings of other religions, materialistic science and atheistic philosophies and have found myself next to Peter prostrate in the dust before Jesus: “Lord, to whom shall we go? You have the words of eternal life.”
My chief complaint with this book is the lack of time spent engaging with the relevant Biblical scriptures themselves. Any scripture is dealt with in passing, as Wilson delves deeply into pagan views, Patristic views and Augustinian views. Often, scripture that disrupts his thesis is declared to be taken out of context and discarded, while scripture references he likes are always in context and recommended to the reader. I am not saying he is always wrong, but in many places I do disagree with him.
This problem of sovereignty vs. free will is adjacent to the issue of Theodicy, which the author acknowledges but does not explore (which is fine, as he is wisely staying focused on his primary thesis). I mention it only to illustrate that there are several theological-philosophical walls Christians confront that cannot be reconciled “cleanly.” It is our duty to be honest about that.
As far as Wilson's treatment of the pagan philosophies/religions he states came to govern late writings by Augustine, I would say that many of the passages can be read in 2 ways (at least in English, I cannot read original Coptic, Koine Greek, and have only a passing familiarity with Latin). I have read the translations of the Nag Hammadi codices, Buddhist teaching, and the early Church fathers, and I do not agree with the author’s conclusions.
Again, there may be some truth to the author’s contentions, but it is impossible to know. In any event, it is also true that just because a pagan philosophy or religion teaches a certain thing, that by itself does not make that specific thing false. There are truths in many non-Christian philosophies and religions. Simply put, 2 things can be similar and true without one being dependent on the other. Put another way, just because a stoic may believe something that orthodox Christianity believes, not not make that orthodox Christian belief heretical.
The author states that no one should enter into criticism of this synopsis/abstract of his work without engaging with the entirety of the work on which it is based. While I am a little sympathetic to that request, if he wished no one to engage with this smaller summary, perhaps he shouldn’t have published it. He makes very plain his conclusions in this book, and it seems to encompass the larger work very confidently.
Wilson creates the acronym DUPIES (Divine Unilateral Predetermination of Individuals' Eternal Destinies) to represent Augustine's later erroneous interpretation of Christian determinism vs. the "correct" view of Christian free-will. He states initially he does this for reasons of brevity, but most of the time the acronym and the description are both included in the text, and the way it's used makes it appear to be an attempt at mockery (DUPIED sounds like DUPED, and the brain of the reader makes that connection, which I'm certain the author well knows). Honestly, juvenile tools like this are distracting and cheapen arguments. This is a personal irritant of mine, and applies to all authors who use this device. Wilson is very intelligent, and should be above this.
Wilson briefly discusses Augustine's views on infant baptism and its relation to perseverance. I very much agree with him on this topic. Infant baptism has never made any sense to me from a scriptural perspective.
Wilson's views on original sin and inherited sin are a problem for me. The impression I get from his writing (perhaps I am mistaken) is that we are not damned by default, but only once we commit our 1st chargeable (my word) sin. I think his views of the "bondage of sin" are also at variance with my own. Wilson has a much more exalted view of human capacity for self-directed good works and virtue than I do, and I think I'm on far more solid ground scripturally (and in observed reality). It crosses my mind that his views on this issue may be one of the original drivers behind his thesis.
Strangely, Wilson doesn't ever actually address what I think is the crux of his argument, which is, WHY did Augustine's views on determinism evolve? After reading this I still don't know! The Augustine of The Confessions would not change his views because he suddenly returned to the embrace of Mani. Most of us gain knowledge and wisdom as we age. I certainly wouldn't view my own early views as superior to my views of today! Wilson treats Augustine as if he went off the rails later in life (which some people do). WHY?! Could it be Augustine felt he had gone too far down the path of free-will and needed to even things out? I confess I don't know.
In conclusion, even the Church Fathers Wilson cites are quite clear that both and are true. Sovereignty and Free Will are not to be fully reconciled to human minds, and efforts to do so have tied men like Wilson (and myself, honestly) in knots. Scripture teaches BOTH, and so we must believe both, and give glory to our Creator who made us in His image. Charging completely in one direction at the expense the other leads to heresies of different types. We must remember that “now we see through the glass darkly.”
Soli Deo Gloria
February 14, 2020
A Review of Dr. Ken Wilson’s “the Foundation of Augustinian-Calvinism” by Rudolph P Boshoff
Intro:
Dr. Ken Wilson summarise his Doctoral thesis titled: “Augustine’s conversion from traditional free choice to ‘non-free Free Will’: A comprehensive methodology” (Mohr Siebeck 2018) in an easily readable seven chapters. Wilson contends that the earliest Christian Fathers (95-400 CE) before St. Augustine of Hippo (386-411 CE) held to a “libertarian free will” and a free choice in salvation. Augustine later reverted to a then pagan, “non-free Free Will,” or, as Wilson calls it, “divine unilateral determinism of eternal destinies (pg.1).” Wilson concludes that Augustinian-Calvinism is not an essential Biblical deduction, but rather formulated by an influence of “pagan syncretism (pg.2).”
Chapter 1:
Wilson sets off by defining these influential philosophies as ‘Stoicism, Neoplatonism, Gnosticism, and Manicheanism’ that all gave life to Augustine’s later theology, coining what Wilson describes as “divine unilateral predetermination of individuals’ eternal destines” or “DUPIED” (pg.5) in short. Wilson mentions that for the Stoics, there was assumed freedom that was ultimately “hidden within a mere façade of “free will (Pg.7)”. For Neoplatonists, a free choice meant that there is a need for the restoration “by divine infusion to restore the will (pg.9).” For Gnostics, “all works are predestined, discipline and abstinence effect nothing, and the elect are saved by knowing that they are saved (pg.12).” Lastly, for Manicheans, man’s “‘enslaved will’ cannot choose – it is damned until unilaterally released” by God’s own initiative (pg.14). In summation, Wilson notes that all these philosophies “requires the divine being to unilaterally awaken a “dead soul” who then only can respond to the divine person (pg.16).”
In conclusion, Wilson notes (pg.17-18) that all these philosophies: “require divine micromanagement,” “substitute the Jewish and Christian residual ‘imago Dei’, “teach humanities ‘free will’ was destroyed or died,” “a unilateral infusion of grace, faith and/or love.” All these presuppositions “micromanaging providence” merits those who are “elect and divine.”
Chapter 2:
Wilson holds that the earliest Christian Fathers (95-400 CE.) unanimously affirmed “relational divine eternal predetermination.” God chose or elected persons by His foreknowledge of their individual free choice. What is critical in Wilson’s definition is that he states that all the Christian Fathers before Augustine had this definition of ‘predestination’ (pg.19). Wilson then proceeds to give ample examples from the “Apostolic Fathers and Apologists (95-180 CE)” in the Epistle to Barnabas (100-120 CE), The Epistle of Diognetus (120-170 CE), Justin Martyr and Tatian (pg.21), Theophilus, Athenagoras, and Melito (pg.22) and “Christian Authors (180-250 CE)” like Irenaeus of Lyons (pg.24), Clement of Alexandria and Tertullian (pg.26), Origen of Alexandria (pg.27), and Cyprian and Novatian (pg.29). Some noteworthy Christian authors in a later dispensation (250-400 CE), Hillary of Poitiers (pg.30), the Cappadocian Fathers: Gregory Nazianzus, Basil of Caesarea, Gregory Nyssen (pg.31); as well as Methodius, Theodore, and Ambrose, all held to this definition of predestination. Wilson concludes that for hundreds of years before Augustine, “the loving Christian God allowed humans to exercise their God-given free will (pg.35).” This is clearly not a new perspective Wilson is contending for and contemporary scholars have recognised these elements influencing the earliest Christian Fathers as well. Theologian, George Park Fisher wrote:
“In harmony with the foregoing views as to human freedom and responsibility, conditional predestination is the doctrine inculcated by the Greek Fathers.”[1]
There is a general assumption by some Calvinist scholars that the t.u.l.i.p. system was evident in the earliest Christian dispensation[2](90-400 CE) especially from notable scholar John Gill, but upon closer scrutiny of the use of some of these earlier fathers this assumption seems to falter.[3]Puritan scholar C. Matthew McMahon also gives an account of Augustine’s ‘Calvinism’ in his own doctoral thesis[4]and a conversation with Wilson’s publication will definitely be a solemn endeavour if there was ever a possibility for conversation. In my own opinion I affirm what lay scholar Jacques More noted, when he assumes that the earliest Fathers did not emphatically explicate the five points of Calvinism and any such a notion is but a long shot. He writes:
“I received a letter from a believer of unconditional predestination which stated: 'Until Augustine, nobody doubted the Calvinistic view he propounded, so it was not until it was questioned did he have to write it down in detail, just as all the great creeds have been written down in defense of the faith when various heretics have come along thinking they know better.' I understand the strong feeling this Christian brother has in defending what he believes. It is sad, however, since to me this seems more out of a desire to believe it than out of a reading of the evidence, and the aim of this leaflet is to share some of the clear pointers that the early church did not have unconditional predestination as a creed.”[5]
Chapter 3:
In this chapter, Wilson attempts to show that Augustine's earlier traditional theology (386-411 CE) was aimed to refute any Manichean understanding of ‘predestination and free will (pg.37).” I think Wilson is right in that Augustine placed a high tax on free will, defending the understanding of God against any deterministic causal evident in both gnostic and Manichaean philosophies (pg.39). When you read Augustine, I agree, none of Augustine’s later, “gnostic-Manichaean divine unilateral determinism,” could be found in the first 25 years (pg.43-44) except for two instances (cf. “Lib. Arb.3.47-54 (On Free Will)” & “The Letter to Bishop Simplicianus”).
Renowned scholar Richard W. Muller gives an appraisal of the first Christian Fathers up until Augustine and shows a clear difference in their theological assumptions about God’s Sovereignty and foreknowledge. Muller wrote;
“In the tradition prior to Augustine’s letter to Simplician, Christian writers grounded God’s Sovereignty in God’s foreknowledge.”[6]
What is clear from Muller’s thesis is that the pre-Augustinian Fathers believed that God predestined mankind informed by His foreknowledge of man’s free will. An Augustinian definition of ‘predestination’ introduced the fact that God elects some men based on His will. This is a crucial difference with numerous implications.
Chapter 4:
Wilson shows that Augustine reverted to his earlier “non-free Free Will” (pg.58) views in 412 CE because of his conflict with Pelagius (pg.57). When Pelagius challenged him because the Church baptizes infants, Augustine concluded that infants were baptized “because of their inherent guilt (reatus) from Adam’s first sin (pg. 58).” Augustine admittedly relied upon the Manichaean concept of 'total inability' in infants because of their inherent guilt, needing God’s unilateral choice for true freedom of the will (pg.59). Wilson quotes Ballock (1998), remarking that “Augustine admitted he had abandoned the centuries-old Christian doctrine of human free-choice”[7] as do famous scholar Jaroslav Pelikan[8] (pg.60).
Wilson concludes, “Augustine now teaches, “God foreordains human wills… God gives the gift of perseverance to only a few baptized infants (pg.63).” Wilson shows that Augustine now holds that “only those elect who believed in Christ had their sins forgiven” and not that Christ had died for everyone, as he earlier held (pg.66).” Other scholars agree with Wilson and distinguished scholar Henry Chadwick (“The Early Christian Church”) observed that Augustine's contemporaries accused him of this Manichean influence: “Julian bishop of Eclanum expressed that Augustine was causing trouble because he 'brought his Manichee ways of thinking into the church... and was denying St Paul's clear teaching that God wills all men to be saved' [9]
Chapter 5:
Wilson goes on to illustrate how Augustine reverted to a Manichaean interpretation of Scriptures showing that “personal faith was no longer required (pg.71)” and “every man is… spiritually dead and, guilty, and damned at birth (pg.74).” Wilson noted that Augustine drew upon limited scripture to validate his new doctrine of original sin [cf. John 3:5, Rom.5:12, 1 Tim.2:4, John 14:6 and 16:65, Ps.51:5, Eph.2:3,8-9]. On 1 Timothy 2:4 Augustine changes the words “God wills” to “provides an opportunity,” or as Wilson notes, God provides “different (unequal) opportunities (pg.75).” In John 14:6 & 6:65, Wilson shows that Augustine uses these passages using “the Manichaean interpretations to prove his new total inability/incapability for human faith (pg.76).
As for Psalm 51:5 Augustine and the earliest Church Fathers perception follow that it shows that “everyone born of a woman becomes a sinner in this world, without fail (pg.76).” But later (412 CE) Augustine used this passage to show that “babies are born damned from Adam’s Sin” (pg.76) and the same with Ephesians (2:3 and 2:8-9) where Augustine adds that babies are born “under wrath and damnation inherited from Adam’s sin with no ability to respond to God as grown adults (pg.77).” Wilson also mention in passing Augustine also taught “proxy salvation” in that someone else’s faith can save you” (pg.78).
Chapter 6:
In Chapter 6, Wilson now shows the determinism and predestination Augustine taught and how it was “precisely the manner in which Stoics, Gnostics, and Manichaeans presented their versions of determinism (pg.82).” Wilson then shows the essential elements Stoicism in that “souls have neither free will…” and “we are free to choose only what our corrupt will determines.” Further, for Platonists, “providence controls every minuscule cosmic detail; nevertheless, the One (God) provides limited freedom for some events and persons.” Wilson laments, “Augustine’s later theology incorporated all of these pagan ideas” (pg.83-84). The early Church held to the idea that God was a relational entity, “relational and responsive to human choices” (pg.86). The Church, therefore, rejected Stoic and Manichaean ‘unilateral determinism’ (pg.87) because the Judeo-Christian God “chose persons for salvation based upon his foreknowledge of “future” human choices” (pg.88).
Chapter 7:
Wilson gets to the “when” and “why” of Augustine’s reversion to determinism and recognizes three separate stages describing the stages of salvation.
Stage 1: (386-394 CE) Augustine’s acceptance of “foreseen merit of works.”
Stage 2: (395-411 CE) Augustine’s affirmation of “no foreseen merit of works but only God’s foreknowledge of faith alone.”
Stage 3: (412-430 CE) Augustine’s “Divine unilateral predetermination of individual eternal destinies (pg.91).”
Wilson tracks Augustine’s regress and communicates ten factors that influenced his final systematic theology (pg.95). Some of these points could be deemed speculative, but the fact of Augustine’s perceived change in his theology leaves me with little doubt as to his end destination. Wilson delimit the most prominent reasons for Augustine's modification of theology to ardent determinism, pointing to three key elements: “infant baptism, Stoicism, and Manicheanism (pg.97).” Serious scholars of Church History and Systematic theology cannot but recognize a definite progression (or regression for others) in the theology of Augustine over his lifetime that was seemingly influenced by his own given environment and contextual challenges.
Conclusion:
The idea that Augustine adopted ideas from various philosophies is nothing new. L.H. Hackstaff in his introduction to “Saint Augustine: On Free Choice of the Will” writes:
“Indeed, it is not too great an exaggeration to say that Neo-Platonism provided Augustine and the Christian Platonists who followed him with the theoretical substructure on which their theology was built. It seems that Augustine never abandoned the Platonistic matrix of his Christian theology.”
Similarly, Peter Nathan[10]writes:
“During the course of Augustine’s lifetime, the blurred boundaries between Christianity and paganism, and between faith and philosophy, were redrawn. Paradoxically, this created a world in which paganism seemed simply to disappear.” Nathan adds: “Augustine’s adoption of the new philosophy [dualism] was wholehearted. The new world of dualism aroused in him a desire to retreat from society to a life focused on the pursuit of the spiritual and, with it, of the truth he believed philosophy could provide.”
It is important to note that Wilson is not claiming that all Calvinists are Gnostics, Stoics, or even Manichaeans. This will simply commit the genetic fallacy which is clearly not the central axis of this book. In my estimation Wilson is trying to show the contemporary influence that prejudiced Augustine’s definitions and theology about God’s Sovereignty and his meaning of predestination moving away from the earliest Christian communities. Some scholars have attempted to show that there is a disparity between Augustine and Calvinism, but this is done by looking at the earlier espoused ideas of this Church father.[11]Other popular ministers have shown that John Calvin was definitely influenced by Augustine’s later ideas.[12]I think Wilson is attempting to reclaim the earliest definition the Church Fathers held about predestination and the free volition of man as reduced by the Sovereign God’s will. In closing, this book has challenged my conceptions as a scholar that is involved full-time with two Christian seminaries where we always try to esteem the ‘solas’ of the reformation.
Selah,
Rudolph P. Boshoff.
[1] History of Christian Doctrine. T&T Clark. Pg.165.
[2] https://www.apuritansmind.com/arminia...
[3]The scope of this article will not look at the merits of these supposed deduced concepts.
[4] http://www.puritanpublications.com/st...
[5] http://jarom.net/greekdad.php
[6]Abraham’s Dice: Chance and providence in the monotheistic traditions. Pg.150. R.W. Muller’s article “Chance and providence in earliest Christianity.”
[7] “Sin” in the Encyclopaedia of Early Christianity, New York, NY: Routledge, 1998).
[8] The Christian Tradition: A History of the development of Doctrine, vol.1. University of Chicago Press. Pg.278-280.
[9] The Early Christian Church, Pg.233.
[10] https://www.vision.org/augustines-poi...
[11] https://www.patheos.com/blogs/justand...
[12] https://www.t
Intro:
Dr. Ken Wilson summarise his Doctoral thesis titled: “Augustine’s conversion from traditional free choice to ‘non-free Free Will’: A comprehensive methodology” (Mohr Siebeck 2018) in an easily readable seven chapters. Wilson contends that the earliest Christian Fathers (95-400 CE) before St. Augustine of Hippo (386-411 CE) held to a “libertarian free will” and a free choice in salvation. Augustine later reverted to a then pagan, “non-free Free Will,” or, as Wilson calls it, “divine unilateral determinism of eternal destinies (pg.1).” Wilson concludes that Augustinian-Calvinism is not an essential Biblical deduction, but rather formulated by an influence of “pagan syncretism (pg.2).”
Chapter 1:
Wilson sets off by defining these influential philosophies as ‘Stoicism, Neoplatonism, Gnosticism, and Manicheanism’ that all gave life to Augustine’s later theology, coining what Wilson describes as “divine unilateral predetermination of individuals’ eternal destines” or “DUPIED” (pg.5) in short. Wilson mentions that for the Stoics, there was assumed freedom that was ultimately “hidden within a mere façade of “free will (Pg.7)”. For Neoplatonists, a free choice meant that there is a need for the restoration “by divine infusion to restore the will (pg.9).” For Gnostics, “all works are predestined, discipline and abstinence effect nothing, and the elect are saved by knowing that they are saved (pg.12).” Lastly, for Manicheans, man’s “‘enslaved will’ cannot choose – it is damned until unilaterally released” by God’s own initiative (pg.14). In summation, Wilson notes that all these philosophies “requires the divine being to unilaterally awaken a “dead soul” who then only can respond to the divine person (pg.16).”
In conclusion, Wilson notes (pg.17-18) that all these philosophies: “require divine micromanagement,” “substitute the Jewish and Christian residual ‘imago Dei’, “teach humanities ‘free will’ was destroyed or died,” “a unilateral infusion of grace, faith and/or love.” All these presuppositions “micromanaging providence” merits those who are “elect and divine.”
Chapter 2:
Wilson holds that the earliest Christian Fathers (95-400 CE.) unanimously affirmed “relational divine eternal predetermination.” God chose or elected persons by His foreknowledge of their individual free choice. What is critical in Wilson’s definition is that he states that all the Christian Fathers before Augustine had this definition of ‘predestination’ (pg.19). Wilson then proceeds to give ample examples from the “Apostolic Fathers and Apologists (95-180 CE)” in the Epistle to Barnabas (100-120 CE), The Epistle of Diognetus (120-170 CE), Justin Martyr and Tatian (pg.21), Theophilus, Athenagoras, and Melito (pg.22) and “Christian Authors (180-250 CE)” like Irenaeus of Lyons (pg.24), Clement of Alexandria and Tertullian (pg.26), Origen of Alexandria (pg.27), and Cyprian and Novatian (pg.29). Some noteworthy Christian authors in a later dispensation (250-400 CE), Hillary of Poitiers (pg.30), the Cappadocian Fathers: Gregory Nazianzus, Basil of Caesarea, Gregory Nyssen (pg.31); as well as Methodius, Theodore, and Ambrose, all held to this definition of predestination. Wilson concludes that for hundreds of years before Augustine, “the loving Christian God allowed humans to exercise their God-given free will (pg.35).” This is clearly not a new perspective Wilson is contending for and contemporary scholars have recognised these elements influencing the earliest Christian Fathers as well. Theologian, George Park Fisher wrote:
“In harmony with the foregoing views as to human freedom and responsibility, conditional predestination is the doctrine inculcated by the Greek Fathers.”[1]
There is a general assumption by some Calvinist scholars that the t.u.l.i.p. system was evident in the earliest Christian dispensation[2](90-400 CE) especially from notable scholar John Gill, but upon closer scrutiny of the use of some of these earlier fathers this assumption seems to falter.[3]Puritan scholar C. Matthew McMahon also gives an account of Augustine’s ‘Calvinism’ in his own doctoral thesis[4]and a conversation with Wilson’s publication will definitely be a solemn endeavour if there was ever a possibility for conversation. In my own opinion I affirm what lay scholar Jacques More noted, when he assumes that the earliest Fathers did not emphatically explicate the five points of Calvinism and any such a notion is but a long shot. He writes:
“I received a letter from a believer of unconditional predestination which stated: 'Until Augustine, nobody doubted the Calvinistic view he propounded, so it was not until it was questioned did he have to write it down in detail, just as all the great creeds have been written down in defense of the faith when various heretics have come along thinking they know better.' I understand the strong feeling this Christian brother has in defending what he believes. It is sad, however, since to me this seems more out of a desire to believe it than out of a reading of the evidence, and the aim of this leaflet is to share some of the clear pointers that the early church did not have unconditional predestination as a creed.”[5]
Chapter 3:
In this chapter, Wilson attempts to show that Augustine's earlier traditional theology (386-411 CE) was aimed to refute any Manichean understanding of ‘predestination and free will (pg.37).” I think Wilson is right in that Augustine placed a high tax on free will, defending the understanding of God against any deterministic causal evident in both gnostic and Manichaean philosophies (pg.39). When you read Augustine, I agree, none of Augustine’s later, “gnostic-Manichaean divine unilateral determinism,” could be found in the first 25 years (pg.43-44) except for two instances (cf. “Lib. Arb.3.47-54 (On Free Will)” & “The Letter to Bishop Simplicianus”).
Renowned scholar Richard W. Muller gives an appraisal of the first Christian Fathers up until Augustine and shows a clear difference in their theological assumptions about God’s Sovereignty and foreknowledge. Muller wrote;
“In the tradition prior to Augustine’s letter to Simplician, Christian writers grounded God’s Sovereignty in God’s foreknowledge.”[6]
What is clear from Muller’s thesis is that the pre-Augustinian Fathers believed that God predestined mankind informed by His foreknowledge of man’s free will. An Augustinian definition of ‘predestination’ introduced the fact that God elects some men based on His will. This is a crucial difference with numerous implications.
Chapter 4:
Wilson shows that Augustine reverted to his earlier “non-free Free Will” (pg.58) views in 412 CE because of his conflict with Pelagius (pg.57). When Pelagius challenged him because the Church baptizes infants, Augustine concluded that infants were baptized “because of their inherent guilt (reatus) from Adam’s first sin (pg. 58).” Augustine admittedly relied upon the Manichaean concept of 'total inability' in infants because of their inherent guilt, needing God’s unilateral choice for true freedom of the will (pg.59). Wilson quotes Ballock (1998), remarking that “Augustine admitted he had abandoned the centuries-old Christian doctrine of human free-choice”[7] as do famous scholar Jaroslav Pelikan[8] (pg.60).
Wilson concludes, “Augustine now teaches, “God foreordains human wills… God gives the gift of perseverance to only a few baptized infants (pg.63).” Wilson shows that Augustine now holds that “only those elect who believed in Christ had their sins forgiven” and not that Christ had died for everyone, as he earlier held (pg.66).” Other scholars agree with Wilson and distinguished scholar Henry Chadwick (“The Early Christian Church”) observed that Augustine's contemporaries accused him of this Manichean influence: “Julian bishop of Eclanum expressed that Augustine was causing trouble because he 'brought his Manichee ways of thinking into the church... and was denying St Paul's clear teaching that God wills all men to be saved' [9]
Chapter 5:
Wilson goes on to illustrate how Augustine reverted to a Manichaean interpretation of Scriptures showing that “personal faith was no longer required (pg.71)” and “every man is… spiritually dead and, guilty, and damned at birth (pg.74).” Wilson noted that Augustine drew upon limited scripture to validate his new doctrine of original sin [cf. John 3:5, Rom.5:12, 1 Tim.2:4, John 14:6 and 16:65, Ps.51:5, Eph.2:3,8-9]. On 1 Timothy 2:4 Augustine changes the words “God wills” to “provides an opportunity,” or as Wilson notes, God provides “different (unequal) opportunities (pg.75).” In John 14:6 & 6:65, Wilson shows that Augustine uses these passages using “the Manichaean interpretations to prove his new total inability/incapability for human faith (pg.76).
As for Psalm 51:5 Augustine and the earliest Church Fathers perception follow that it shows that “everyone born of a woman becomes a sinner in this world, without fail (pg.76).” But later (412 CE) Augustine used this passage to show that “babies are born damned from Adam’s Sin” (pg.76) and the same with Ephesians (2:3 and 2:8-9) where Augustine adds that babies are born “under wrath and damnation inherited from Adam’s sin with no ability to respond to God as grown adults (pg.77).” Wilson also mention in passing Augustine also taught “proxy salvation” in that someone else’s faith can save you” (pg.78).
Chapter 6:
In Chapter 6, Wilson now shows the determinism and predestination Augustine taught and how it was “precisely the manner in which Stoics, Gnostics, and Manichaeans presented their versions of determinism (pg.82).” Wilson then shows the essential elements Stoicism in that “souls have neither free will…” and “we are free to choose only what our corrupt will determines.” Further, for Platonists, “providence controls every minuscule cosmic detail; nevertheless, the One (God) provides limited freedom for some events and persons.” Wilson laments, “Augustine’s later theology incorporated all of these pagan ideas” (pg.83-84). The early Church held to the idea that God was a relational entity, “relational and responsive to human choices” (pg.86). The Church, therefore, rejected Stoic and Manichaean ‘unilateral determinism’ (pg.87) because the Judeo-Christian God “chose persons for salvation based upon his foreknowledge of “future” human choices” (pg.88).
Chapter 7:
Wilson gets to the “when” and “why” of Augustine’s reversion to determinism and recognizes three separate stages describing the stages of salvation.
Stage 1: (386-394 CE) Augustine’s acceptance of “foreseen merit of works.”
Stage 2: (395-411 CE) Augustine’s affirmation of “no foreseen merit of works but only God’s foreknowledge of faith alone.”
Stage 3: (412-430 CE) Augustine’s “Divine unilateral predetermination of individual eternal destinies (pg.91).”
Wilson tracks Augustine’s regress and communicates ten factors that influenced his final systematic theology (pg.95). Some of these points could be deemed speculative, but the fact of Augustine’s perceived change in his theology leaves me with little doubt as to his end destination. Wilson delimit the most prominent reasons for Augustine's modification of theology to ardent determinism, pointing to three key elements: “infant baptism, Stoicism, and Manicheanism (pg.97).” Serious scholars of Church History and Systematic theology cannot but recognize a definite progression (or regression for others) in the theology of Augustine over his lifetime that was seemingly influenced by his own given environment and contextual challenges.
Conclusion:
The idea that Augustine adopted ideas from various philosophies is nothing new. L.H. Hackstaff in his introduction to “Saint Augustine: On Free Choice of the Will” writes:
“Indeed, it is not too great an exaggeration to say that Neo-Platonism provided Augustine and the Christian Platonists who followed him with the theoretical substructure on which their theology was built. It seems that Augustine never abandoned the Platonistic matrix of his Christian theology.”
Similarly, Peter Nathan[10]writes:
“During the course of Augustine’s lifetime, the blurred boundaries between Christianity and paganism, and between faith and philosophy, were redrawn. Paradoxically, this created a world in which paganism seemed simply to disappear.” Nathan adds: “Augustine’s adoption of the new philosophy [dualism] was wholehearted. The new world of dualism aroused in him a desire to retreat from society to a life focused on the pursuit of the spiritual and, with it, of the truth he believed philosophy could provide.”
It is important to note that Wilson is not claiming that all Calvinists are Gnostics, Stoics, or even Manichaeans. This will simply commit the genetic fallacy which is clearly not the central axis of this book. In my estimation Wilson is trying to show the contemporary influence that prejudiced Augustine’s definitions and theology about God’s Sovereignty and his meaning of predestination moving away from the earliest Christian communities. Some scholars have attempted to show that there is a disparity between Augustine and Calvinism, but this is done by looking at the earlier espoused ideas of this Church father.[11]Other popular ministers have shown that John Calvin was definitely influenced by Augustine’s later ideas.[12]I think Wilson is attempting to reclaim the earliest definition the Church Fathers held about predestination and the free volition of man as reduced by the Sovereign God’s will. In closing, this book has challenged my conceptions as a scholar that is involved full-time with two Christian seminaries where we always try to esteem the ‘solas’ of the reformation.
Selah,
Rudolph P. Boshoff.
[1] History of Christian Doctrine. T&T Clark. Pg.165.
[2] https://www.apuritansmind.com/arminia...
[3]The scope of this article will not look at the merits of these supposed deduced concepts.
[4] http://www.puritanpublications.com/st...
[5] http://jarom.net/greekdad.php
[6]Abraham’s Dice: Chance and providence in the monotheistic traditions. Pg.150. R.W. Muller’s article “Chance and providence in earliest Christianity.”
[7] “Sin” in the Encyclopaedia of Early Christianity, New York, NY: Routledge, 1998).
[8] The Christian Tradition: A History of the development of Doctrine, vol.1. University of Chicago Press. Pg.278-280.
[9] The Early Christian Church, Pg.233.
[10] https://www.vision.org/augustines-poi...
[11] https://www.patheos.com/blogs/justand...
[12] https://www.t
May 9, 2020
I’ve been reading literature on free-will for going on 3 years now, and after having read this book (loaned to me from an extremely cherished friend), I’m 100% positive I’ll be reading about free-will for the rest of my life. This book is a treasure chest of cited works I plan to visit in the future. I’m buying the book just for that purpose. Thank you Amanda for taking me back to square one!
September 4, 2019
So Much So I Purchased his Full Scholarly Work
Studying the influences on any early church father can be a daunting task for the layman. While Wilson's simplified version of his scholarly work should be commended for its brevity and concision, this piece may still be a heady read for those not familiar with church history or theological terms.
Regardless, his work is of the utmost importance in dissecting the reintegration of heresies decried by the early church (and young Augustine himself) only to be reintegrated into modern reformed theology where it continues to plague modern disciples to this day.
I highly recommend this read.
Studying the influences on any early church father can be a daunting task for the layman. While Wilson's simplified version of his scholarly work should be commended for its brevity and concision, this piece may still be a heady read for those not familiar with church history or theological terms.
Regardless, his work is of the utmost importance in dissecting the reintegration of heresies decried by the early church (and young Augustine himself) only to be reintegrated into modern reformed theology where it continues to plague modern disciples to this day.
I highly recommend this read.
March 7, 2022
I am perhaps shocked by the misuse of church history and the false claims of where Augustine got his theology from. Should we take this book seriously? I recommend people look up James White's responses to Ken Wilson, what you see there will refute the attempted presentation that was made here.
February 1, 2022
I think this is an excellent overview of Wilson's complete book, "Augustine's Conversion from Traditional Free Choice to Non-Free Will: A Comprehensive Methodology." Wilson exposes the fraud of elevating Augustine and Calvin, his disciple, for what they are. Non-Biblical philosopher's who have introduced pagan philosophy into their biblical exposition to the harm of all, believers and non-believers.
The real problem with the cut down version of Wilson's Ph.D writing is it clearly does not go far enough. Wilson introduces the background of Augustine and shows how it corrupted his mind and theology and how the Reformed have continued this tradition. I recommend the book, but if you want to get a deeper exposition on the topic, I recommend buying the actual book for the complete discovery of the depths of Augustine's depravity.
I can only hope as more Christians are being torn and drawn to the follow the money and convert to Augustinian Calvinism, they will take the time to read this book and others available on the market to discover the gross error of the Calvinistic philosophy and the damage it does to God's reputation.
The real problem with the cut down version of Wilson's Ph.D writing is it clearly does not go far enough. Wilson introduces the background of Augustine and shows how it corrupted his mind and theology and how the Reformed have continued this tradition. I recommend the book, but if you want to get a deeper exposition on the topic, I recommend buying the actual book for the complete discovery of the depths of Augustine's depravity.
I can only hope as more Christians are being torn and drawn to the follow the money and convert to Augustinian Calvinism, they will take the time to read this book and others available on the market to discover the gross error of the Calvinistic philosophy and the damage it does to God's reputation.
December 3, 2019
Excellent read when it comes to the Calvinism debate. Shows what the early church believed and it wasn't what the Protestant church believes today. It was cool to see much of the early references too.
January 12, 2022
Historically illiterate. I can’t imagine a man of the authors education level could make a blunder this big. Basic conflations of Manichaeism with Calvinism, claiming beliefs Augustine didn’t hold, etc. Calvinists, Lutherans and Catholics alike will agree that this work is poorly researched.
November 1, 2019
Makes you think
This book will make search deeper and make you think if you really are a 5 point Calvinist. Interesting work.
This book will make search deeper and make you think if you really are a 5 point Calvinist. Interesting work.
July 16, 2020
This book gives you a really solid understanding of the formation of Augustinian-Calvinism. Due to the historic and academic nature of it though, it’s not an easy read (in my opinion).
October 12, 2020
Magnificent...impossible for someone to remain Calvinist after reading this
September 3, 2023
Background: I'm someone who is an 'Augustinian-Calvinist' and wouldn't normally care to ever read this book, but did so based on a challenge from a family member who is extremely anti-calvinist. I gave him the benefit of the doubt. I was hoping this book would be a little more... intelligent and gracious in its substance. Don't get me wrong, it's certainly written 'heady' enough, almost too much so with just as many footnotes as text. But it's not as intelligent as Wilson wants you to think. The Book is full of more opinion than he would care to admit (especially if you follow the footnote quotes to other authors who have done similarly). He starts off even saying its not worth reading his summation (which this is), but to read his whole work. It makes me wonder... He also goes on about how he was 'talked' into writing this work from one of the more extreme 'anti' calvinists out there (Leighton Flowers), who's life mission seems to be to rid earth from Calvinism and all its beliefs. The book reads a little like that too, trying to convince you that ANY belief stemming from Augustine and hence Calvin (who apparently worshipped the ground he walked on) needs to be completely discarded as heretical. Basically, the book's premise is that Augustine, who was saved later in life, used all his earlier influences when he dabbled in Gnosticism, Manicheism and several other isms to "make up" his very own Christianity, which of course was adopted by Calvin and brought us Reformed Theology. Very little scripture is used at all in this work, which is unfortunate because the Bible has A LOT to do with the subject. He also fails to address or acknowledge that just because something IS a belief from a 'heretical group', doesn't follow that the belief is wrong. Atheists believe in treating neighbors with civility, should we NOT because of who also believes this? Wilson appeals to the mystery of Augustine changing his entire theology in 412 Ad as being a major problem. But never answers WHY. All of us change our theology over time; and as we get older, it becomes more refined; why should his theology not change as he learns and experiences more? Ultimately, WILSON tries to sound like an authority on the subject of early church fathers and Christianity, and while I cannot claim to be, I know enough to know he is NOT and has greatly misinterpreted or misrepresented numerous beliefs and facts from that time period, leading to a grossly disappointing rambling about the evils of believing anything from Augustine or Calvin. And subsequently also failing to share what then to fill our minds with instead, or how to reconcile all the numerous Scriptures in support of the theology from these two (and many others beyond) great, intelligent men of faith.
January 19, 2021
This is a seminal work on the historical analysis of the person and philosophy of Saint Augustine, Bishop of Hippo written by one of only two (I believe?) scholars who have read all of Augustine's writings in chronological order. As a result, Dr. Wilson presents a very compelling case for the strong Manichean, Gnostic, and Stoic influences that severely affected his theology after 412CE.
This book is short, but not so sweet: in the sense that, although Dr. Wilson attempted to simplify the material from his monumental doctoral thesis, it is still a bit difficult to read through if you're not familiar with the subject matter. This, in no way, detracts from the book, in my opinion! I just had to work a little harder to capture all the historical information and theological logic.
The structure of the book is straightforward and well organized. There are references following nearly all (if not all) of Wilson's summary of Augustine's claims to the relevant writings. Dr. Wilson also does well to include copious endnotes which I found very informative.
Seriously a fantastic read if you're at all interested in the historical truth behind the development of Augustine's views and how they were resurrected in the Protestant reformation by the Calvinists.
This book is short, but not so sweet: in the sense that, although Dr. Wilson attempted to simplify the material from his monumental doctoral thesis, it is still a bit difficult to read through if you're not familiar with the subject matter. This, in no way, detracts from the book, in my opinion! I just had to work a little harder to capture all the historical information and theological logic.
The structure of the book is straightforward and well organized. There are references following nearly all (if not all) of Wilson's summary of Augustine's claims to the relevant writings. Dr. Wilson also does well to include copious endnotes which I found very informative.
Seriously a fantastic read if you're at all interested in the historical truth behind the development of Augustine's views and how they were resurrected in the Protestant reformation by the Calvinists.
September 16, 2022
This book is very informative about the Early Church Fathers, known as the Patristic Fathers. Ken Wilson (please note his bio on Goodreads is NOT correct), there is another Ken Wilson out there. He has his doctorate from Oxford and is a premier Augustinian scholar and this book traces Augustines throughts namely his influences - Manicheanism, Stoicism, and Platonism. Wilson traces Augustines thought processes and explains how his views were against Manicheanism (Divine Determinism) for 25 years but then went back to his early teachings and incorporated that into his theology creating Augustinian-Calvinism. Before judging the work look at the Church Fathers and the data he presents.
January 26, 2021
A brief and interesting study of the ancient philosophical, pagan, and heretical concepts and teachings that influenced Augustine and his novel theological teaching. This book is helpful for those who want to learn about Stoicism, Neoplatonism, and Manichaeism and how these pagan philosophies were imported into Christianity by Augustine. The author does an effective job of making these topics accessible while building his case that Augustinian-Calvinism is a theology “built on a bed of pagan sand.”
January 10, 2024
Fascinating book, highly recommend for anyone interested in the free-will controversy, whether from the days of Augustine, the days of Calvin or the current day. Short, accessible, and concise. Ken Wilson’s doctoral thesis is published in long form too which is now on my to read list for a follow up of the same arguments in more detail.
Summary of the argument of the book:
(1) Augustine’s ideas are the foundation of what is now known as Calvinism, namely: (a) initial faith as a divine gift, (b) inherited damnable guilt from Adam; (c) the divine gift of perseverence; (d) divine unilateral predestination of individual eternal destinies (DUPIED); (e) denial of God’s universal salvific will and provision for humanity.
(2) No Christian author before Augustine had taught these, rather orthodox witness before Augustine was unanimously opposed to any such deterministic ideas as heresies originating from Greek Gnosticism.
(3) After holding to the traditional free will and simple foreknowledge perspective which had been the “rule of faith” of the early church since the apostles and teachings this consistently for the first 20 years of his ministry, Augustine switched in 412 CE, co-opting such ideas from his former Manichaeism to defeat the Pelagians and so introducing such fatalism into orthodox Christian theology for the first time (though his ideas continued to be unanimously rejected by the Eastern church as they are to this day).
(4) Augustine deduced these ideas from his pre-existing commitment to infant baptismal regeneration.
Summary of the argument of the book:
(1) Augustine’s ideas are the foundation of what is now known as Calvinism, namely: (a) initial faith as a divine gift, (b) inherited damnable guilt from Adam; (c) the divine gift of perseverence; (d) divine unilateral predestination of individual eternal destinies (DUPIED); (e) denial of God’s universal salvific will and provision for humanity.
(2) No Christian author before Augustine had taught these, rather orthodox witness before Augustine was unanimously opposed to any such deterministic ideas as heresies originating from Greek Gnosticism.
(3) After holding to the traditional free will and simple foreknowledge perspective which had been the “rule of faith” of the early church since the apostles and teachings this consistently for the first 20 years of his ministry, Augustine switched in 412 CE, co-opting such ideas from his former Manichaeism to defeat the Pelagians and so introducing such fatalism into orthodox Christian theology for the first time (though his ideas continued to be unanimously rejected by the Eastern church as they are to this day).
(4) Augustine deduced these ideas from his pre-existing commitment to infant baptismal regeneration.
April 23, 2025
This book by Dr. Wilson is one that I would recommend to anyone that is interested in following calvinist doctrines from the early church fathers to today. The detail that Dr. Wilson is able to communicate in such easy to grasp, bite sized pieces is amazing. If you are looking for a deeper yet simple way to understand the foundations of calvinism, this is the book for you. Thank you Dr. Wilson for all of the work you put in for our benefit.
July 23, 2021
Thoroughly documented book regarding the origins of Augustinian theology
Thoroughly documented book regarding the origins of Augustinian theology.
This book exposes the relationship between Augustinian determinism and Manichaean, Gnostic and Neoplatonic thought, very recommended, specially for Calvinists.
Thoroughly documented book regarding the origins of Augustinian theology.
This book exposes the relationship between Augustinian determinism and Manichaean, Gnostic and Neoplatonic thought, very recommended, specially for Calvinists.
October 15, 2024
Dr. Wilson provides reasonable historical context for consideration.
There is nothing new in Dr. Wilson’s observations concerning Augustinian theology. However, his chronological reading and presentation of Augustine’s writings help to provide a developing theology that did regress due to syncretism.
There is nothing new in Dr. Wilson’s observations concerning Augustinian theology. However, his chronological reading and presentation of Augustine’s writings help to provide a developing theology that did regress due to syncretism.
January 15, 2024
Augustinian-Calvinism house built on pagan sand!
It is disheartening to realize that this 'pagan' house has murdered and slandered those who represented true and historic Christian doctrine and continue to do so today.
It is disheartening to realize that this 'pagan' house has murdered and slandered those who represented true and historic Christian doctrine and continue to do so today.
Currently reading
February 11, 2024I just started reading this book because I am trying to understand the roots of Calvinism and why Christians today are Calvinists.
I don't have much to say yet but I did notice that the author named above on Goodreads is not the same Ken Wilson who wrote this book.
I don't have much to say yet but I did notice that the author named above on Goodreads is not the same Ken Wilson who wrote this book.
January 24, 2024
Extremely important book for those wanting to understand where Calvinism came from, how we know the early Christians didn't hold to Calvinism, and why Calvinism is unbiblical.
May 2, 2024
A good read for understanding Augustine's theological and settled theology, which greatly affects Calvinism.
May 13, 2025
a must read for every calvinist
January 27, 2020
This is a terrific overview of the numerous phases of and influences on the theology of Augustine.
December 14, 2023
This answers questions tracing the stream of Calvinism back to Augustine and where these things
August 14, 2019
Few works can be considered thorough, succinct, and accessible. This is one of those works. Dr. Wilson admits that this particular work is not to be considered thorough at a scholarly level, but the shadows of his earlier more thorough scholarly work are clearly seen on the pages of this book. While it is very direct and even blunt in some cases, the feel of the book is not as if it is attacking, but boldly and firmly standing for arduously researched truth. This is an important work to read at this time as Augustinian-Calvinism is in a demonstrable rise in the evangelical community. Dr. Wilson clearly links the influence Stoicism, Gnosticism, Neoplatonism, and Manichaeism held on Augustine, how it influenced his theology, and how his rhetorical training and abilities allowed him to infuse Christianity with his syncretic beliefs. Yet, he does not dismiss Augustine or seek to write him out of church history, rather he seeks to allow the reader to understand him more fully. Read it, and recognize that just as Solomon intimated, there is nothing new under the sun, even in the theological debates raging in modern theology.
January 17, 2020
this book is excellent
Displaying 1 - 28 of 28 reviews