ARMINIAN THEOLOGY: MYTHS AND REALITIES

Written by Roger Olson Reviewed By Martin Povey

John Wesley is well known for his statement that: ‘To say: “This man is an Arminian,” has the same effect on many hearers, as to say, “This is a mad dog.” ’ In Arminian Theology Olson is in full agreement. He contends that Arminianism is often misunderstood and misrepresented at both an academic and popular level by both its proponents and its detractors. He therefore sets out to extirpate the myths associated with Arminian theology and to clarify the pivotal historical Arminian doctrines. In his own words, Olson explains that this book: ‘is not a polemic against Calvinism. Nor is it intended so much as a defence of Arminianism as a statement of true Arminian theology’ (43).

After an insightful preamble to Arminianism, the attendant chapters follow a consistent pattern. They each offer an explanation of a common myth associated with Arminianism, which is countered by an historical evangelical Arminian reality. These are substantiated by appeals to key Arminian thinkers from the Remonstrance through to the twenty-first century. The more notable theological appellations include: Jacob Arminius, John Wesley, Richard Watson and Thomas Oden. The ten chapters are as follows:

Myth 1: Arminian Theology Is the Opposite of Calvinist/Reformed Theology

Myth 2: A Hybrid of Calvinism and Arminianism Is Possible

Myth 3: Arminianism Is Not an Orthodox Evangelical Option

Myth 4: The Heart of Arminianism Is Belief in Free Will

Myth 5: Arminian Theology Denies the Sovereignty of God

Myth 6: Arminianism Is a Human-Centered (sic) Theology

Myth 7: Arminianism Is Not a Theology of Grace

Myth 8: Arminians Do Not Believe in Predestination

Myth 9: Arminian Theology Denies Justification by Grace Alone Through Faith Alone

Myth 10: All Arminians Believe in the Governmental Theory of the Atonement

The book is written for the most part in an irenic spirit, making it accessible to those who would either disagree or agree with the theology of Arminians. Olson is keenly aware of the need to present historically correct definitions rather than allowing popular usage to define theological terms. With these factors combined, Olson’s handling of Arminius and Wesley et al is enriching. However, some may wish to call into question Olson’s interpretation of the Princeton theologian Benjamin Warfield. Olson contends that Warfield is consistently vitriolic in tone in his treatment of Arminianism. Another issue of concern is Olson’s acceptance of Pinnock’s Open Theism as ‘a legitimate evangelical and Arminian option’ (p. 198, f. 65).

The greatest strength of Arminian Theology is no doubt the lucid way in which Olson makes use of both primary and secondary sources to arrive at his conclusions in respect to what Arminians believe. Some of the more important doctrinal issues include the following well documented assertions:

Arminianism has always been at pains to distance itself from any form of Pelagianism (including semi-Pelagianism/Finney) as Pelagianism contradicts the doctrines of total depravity and prevenient grace. In fact, Olson argues that Arminianism is a thoroughly evangelical synergism.

The paramount concern in Arminian theology is God’s goodness not man’s freedom.

In respect to the human will Arminians believe in the ‘freed will’ not ‘free will’.

In conclusion, Arminian Theology should prove to be a seminal text in understanding the historical contours of Arminianism. It is an excellent starting point for anyone who wants to gain a cogent and perspicacious introduction to historical, evangelical Arminian theology.


Martin Povey

Stockport