PDF / Epub ✅ Debating Calvinism: Five Points, Two Views Author Dave Hunt – Thomashillier.co.uk


Debating Calvinism: Five Points, Two Views A Centuries Old Belief System Is Put To The Test As Two Prominent Authors Examine And Debate The Subject Of Calvinism From Opposing Viewpoints James White, Author Of The Potter S Freedom, Takes The Calvinist Position Dave Hunt, Author Of What Love Is This, Opposes Him The Exchange Is Lively And At Times Intense As These Two Articulate Men Wrestle Over What The Scriptures Tell Us About God S Sovereignty And Man S Free Will This Thought Provoking, Challenging Book Provides Potent Responses To The Most Frequently Asked Questions About CalvinismIs God Free To Love Anyone He Wants Do You Have Any Choice In Your Own Salvation It S Time To Find Out Calvinism Has Been A Topic Of Intense Discussion For Centuries In This Lively Debate, Two Passionate Thinkers Take Opposing Sides, Providing Valuable Responses To The Most Frequently Asked Questions About Calvinism Only You Can Decide Where You Stand On Questions That Determine How You Think About Your Salvation Story Behind The BookThe Subject Of Calvinism Has Been Hotly Debated For Many Years, And Now Two Prominent Authors And Researchers Will Debate This Controversial Topic In A Book Debate This Project Came About When Mr Hunt Wrote What Love Is ThisCalvinism S Misrepresentation Of God Mr Hunt Was Challenged By Many On The Calvinist Bench And He Eventually Agreed To Do A Debate In A Book Format The Books Purpose Is To Get You To Think And Come To Your Own Conclusions


10 thoughts on “Debating Calvinism: Five Points, Two Views

  1. says:

    This is a good book if you re a new Calvinist or an Arminian beginning to study the issue.White demolishes Hunt at every turn Hunt offers some of the most ridiculous and emotive arguments I ve seen in a theological discussion What we have here is confirmation of what seems to almost always be the case Calvinists are just simply better theologians and exegetes than Arminians.Due to Hunt s ridiculous and libelous approach to Calvinism in this book, one can get annoyed fairly quickly It s becau This is a good book if you re a new Calvinist or an Arminian beginning to study the issue.White demolishes Hunt at every turn Hunt offers some of the most ridiculous and emotive arguments I ve seen in a theological discussion What we have here is confirmation of what seems to almost always be the case Calvinists are just simply better theologians and exegetes than Arminians.Due to Hunt s ridiculous and libelous approach to Calvinism in this book, one can get annoyed fairly quickly It s because of Hunt that I gave it three stars The debate would have been much better with arespectful and scholarly Arminian than Hunt.Debate boiled down White Text, exegesis, rebuttal of anticipated objections to contrary exegesis.Hunt Calvin was a big meany and if your exegesis were true then God would be a big meany too God is not a big ole meany, therefore your exegesis cannot be true White Well here s an argument that the text does mean that.Hunt Whatever it means, it can t mean that


  2. says:

    Nothing sums up the debate in this book better than Dr White s own final quotation of preaching great C H Spurgeon, so allow me to quote his quoting We must observe that there is nothing upon which men need to beinstructed than upon the question of what Calvinism really is The most infamous allegations have been brought against us, and sometimes, I must fear, by men who knew them to be utterly untrue and, to this day, there are many of our opponents, who, when they run short of ma Nothing sums up the debate in this book better than Dr White s own final quotation of preaching great C H Spurgeon, so allow me to quote his quoting We must observe that there is nothing upon which men need to beinstructed than upon the question of what Calvinism really is The most infamous allegations have been brought against us, and sometimes, I must fear, by men who knew them to be utterly untrue and, to this day, there are many of our opponents, who, when they run short of matter, invent and make for themselves a man of straw, call that John Calvin and then shoot all their arrows at it We are not come here to defend your man of straw shoot at it or burn it as you will, and, if it suit your convenience, still oppose doctrines which were never taught, and rail at fictions which, save in your own brain, were never in existence We come here to state what our views really are, and we trust that any who do not agree with us will do us the justice of not misrepresenting us If they can disprove our doctrines, let them state them fairly and then overthrow them, but why should they first caricature our opinions and then afterwards attempt to put them down I got this book because I did not know what Calvinism is, apart from something that most people I ve ever known think is scary and heretical Lately, discovering TULIP and analyzing the Westminster Confession in light of Scripture, I ve found that not only are these the same straightforward tenets found in the Bible itself, but they are, for the most part, beliefs I myself have always held without knowing the language to express them I was only missing the I of the TULIP the belief that man has libertarian free will and the power to alter God s behavior was ruining my life More about that here So, wondering why Calvinism so frightened everyone I d ever talked to, I decided this book would be an excellent gateway What better way to figure out what Calvinism states and what the alternative is than by listening to one defending his beliefs in a debate Unfortunately, the book is prevented from being that by the willful incoherence of Dr White s coauthor Dave Hunt spends his half of the book condemning beliefs no one holds and arguing against a doctrine that doesn t exist He never offers a positive biblical alternative to the Five Points, and wastes most of his paper in bad eisegesis, personal attacks, and distracting ellipses For serious, Hunt s machine gun fire ellipses makes me very uncomfortable to know what he s skipping I saw everywhere before I read this book that it was half incoherent, that Hunt s arguments made no sense, that his portions of the book were inexplicable, and I found that to be absolutely the case I can only imagine the painful conversations between editor and author and coauthor, and Hunt only seems to growbelligerent as the arguments go on However, White s portion is enlightening, well written, taut, and extraordinarily patient I can t fault him at all, as he provides better explanations for the alternatives to Calvinism than Hunt does, and offers clear Scriptural proofs.Half solid, half frustrating, the book accomplishes half its purpose But, it has helped me in my explorations of Reformed theology With thanks to Reformed Memes Daily


  3. says:

    This book contains a mismatched debate, and one not particularly glorifying to God Not having read any other books by Hunt, I suspect he had bitten off muchthan he could chew when he wrote What Love is This and when he agreed to participate in this debate I also suspect that many professing Arminians would disagree with Hunt s position He just wasn t a good choice to represent that set of views.But, knowing what I do about White, it s only because of Hunt s publishing What Love tha This book contains a mismatched debate, and one not particularly glorifying to God Not having read any other books by Hunt, I suspect he had bitten off muchthan he could chew when he wrote What Love is This and when he agreed to participate in this debate I also suspect that many professing Arminians would disagree with Hunt s position He just wasn t a good choice to represent that set of views.But, knowing what I do about White, it s only because of Hunt s publishing What Love that this book exists at all White is making a career for himself as a high profile apologetics debater I have no idea what White is like at his real job of being an Elder at his local congregation But he comes across as a bit superior in this debate That he is the better theologian and the better debater is beyond doubt He consistently refers to scripture with sound exegesis to back up his position, and at least tries to engage Hunt directly But he is unable to do this because Hunt simply won t engage, or acknowledge that the argument has progressed.I think this book fails to lay out a fair view of the Arminian position I think there is far too much animosity evident in the language used In my opinion, Why I m Not an Arminian is a far superior book of this type In saying that, I haven t read the companion volume Why I m not a Calvinist but I want to.This debate is very important But it is done no favours by this book.I ve given two stars purely because if you are interested in the group of doctrines often called Reformed or Calvinism , White does a good job of presenting them here, despite the unsavoury tone of the entire book


  4. says:

    Having come to this book with the expectation of siding with both authors at times, since I was only at most a 4 point Calvinist TUIP , I was surprised to come away from it with the 5th point firmly in my own pocket White does a good job of explicating Calvinist doctrine, while Hunt continually demonstrates a lack of even understanding the system of faith he is trying to dismantle In that regard, the purpose of the book as a debate is undermined You cannot truly critique what you do not unde Having come to this book with the expectation of siding with both authors at times, since I was only at most a 4 point Calvinist TUIP , I was surprised to come away from it with the 5th point firmly in my own pocket White does a good job of explicating Calvinist doctrine, while Hunt continually demonstrates a lack of even understanding the system of faith he is trying to dismantle In that regard, the purpose of the book as a debate is undermined You cannot truly critique what you do not understand Another downfall to Hunt s tactics is that he returns to the same arguments over and over again While this highlights the heart of the debate between these opposing viewpoints, it grows quite tiresome for the reader, as I imagine it did for White Hunt also engages in a number of rhetorical no no s straw men, red herrings, ad hominem attacks, and the like White is not above these, perhaps since his position is one of defense in this debate All in all, I m glad that I found and read it, as someone who was on the fence and needed to see the linesclearly drawn so that I might purposefully choose a side or realize that I m chosen, perhaps


  5. says:

    From the title, I expected a book where each side would present their key texts, and then the other would attempt to refute them show the errors This was definitely not what I found Instead of the scholarly debate I expected, I found a schoolyard name calling contests By the end of the book I was so frustrated, because the same arguments were being used over and over and over White did a fairly good job to make a good, Scriptural debate except for the name calling , but Hunt didn t even see From the title, I expected a book where each side would present their key texts, and then the other would attempt to refute them show the errors This was definitely not what I found Instead of the scholarly debate I expected, I found a schoolyard name calling contests By the end of the book I was so frustrated, because the same arguments were being used over and over and over White did a fairly good job to make a good, Scriptural debate except for the name calling , but Hunt didn t even seem to try He didn t understand the position he was refuting, and wouldn t change his perceptions when it was pointed out that he misunderstood His exegesis was also definitely not strong like White s That is, when he did use Scripture at all There was at least one chapter in his seven that used no scripture at all He also never presented a solid presentation of what he did believe, always attacking Calvinism instead For someone on either side merely looking to bolster their own view, this book may be of benefit For someone who is truly searching out the issues, however, it is a joke


  6. says:

    This book was two guys engaging in a debate The one guy gave a strong positive argument for his position along with tackling the strongest arguments against it The other guy was disappointing, to me saddening, in the way he lobbed offensive grenades at various straw man positions without heeding clarifications from his opponent , while any hint of a positive argument was surface level defensiveness It s historically meaningful and interesting to see the positions of both men and the way the This book was two guys engaging in a debate The one guy gave a strong positive argument for his position along with tackling the strongest arguments against it The other guy was disappointing, to me saddening, in the way he lobbed offensive grenades at various straw man positions without heeding clarifications from his opponent , while any hint of a positive argument was surface level defensiveness It s historically meaningful and interesting to see the positions of both men and the way they argued and thought, but this is possibly not the very best book for readers on either side to sharpen challenge their arguments It s also quite painful to read


  7. says:

    I got a lotout of the first half when James White was presenting his arguments affirming Calvinism, mainly because I don t care for Dave Hunt s writing After a while the whole thing just felt incredibly repetitive It could have been 1 4 the length and said the same amount.


  8. says:

    The premise of this book is interesting Two prominent Christian authors, who have very different theological views, publishing a book together in an attempt to clearly articulate the opposing sides of the age old debate about the system of soteriology the doctrine of salvation known as Calvinism The book is presented as a written word formal debate, where each author writes half the book Each point is presented, followed by a response, a defense, and closing remarks from each writer The The premise of this book is interesting Two prominent Christian authors, who have very different theological views, publishing a book together in an attempt to clearly articulate the opposing sides of the age old debate about the system of soteriology the doctrine of salvation known as Calvinism The book is presented as a written word formal debate, where each author writes half the book Each point is presented, followed by a response, a defense, and closing remarks from each writer The debate was over what Calvinists call the doctrines of grace , known by the acronym TULIP Total depravity, Unconditional election, Limited atonement, Irresistible grace, and Perseverance of the saints.White presents the Calvinist viewpoint, while Hunt represents an though certainly not the only opposing view From a debating standpoint, the two were not a good match White is by far the stronger debater, as Hunt rarely if ever responds directly to White s points Regardless of one s personal views of Calvinism, I believe an objective judge of debates would have to award the win to White.That being said, my personal views on soteriology were neither changed nor strengthened by this debate I can t say that I recommend the book, though White s explanations of the five points of Calvinism are a good introduction to the doctrines of grace for someone who may never have given them consideration


  9. says:

    A friend gave me this book, knowing that I like reading Theology and whatnot, so I gave it a chance I didn t learn much from it It typefies what I really don t like about some pockets of Christian theology There is a lot of self righteous, cocky, condescending attitude on both sides of the debate and absolutely no feeling of brotherly love or mutual respect I felt like the point of this book was for each of the writers to appear smarter than the other rather than to uncover any truth or even A friend gave me this book, knowing that I like reading Theology and whatnot, so I gave it a chance I didn t learn much from it It typefies what I really don t like about some pockets of Christian theology There is a lot of self righteous, cocky, condescending attitude on both sides of the debate and absolutely no feeling of brotherly love or mutual respect I felt like the point of this book was for each of the writers to appear smarter than the other rather than to uncover any truth or even perspective The debate came across as very divisive and I think it would confuse and upset Christians who are new to the ideas central to the debate I know that it is a divisive topic already, but I think two Christians debating anything should be able to see that at the end of the day, Christ is bigger than our differing ideas about what God is or does I was disappointed that the debate and the writers being perceived as smart and right seemedimportant than the gospel and the glory of our God


  10. says:

    This is the first book that I put back on the shelf before finishing in a long time I guess I was expecting an informative and collegial debate It was neither collegial or all that informative The editor really made a mistake in choosing one the authors as the author did not follow the rules of the debate nor was he effectively arguing his side I have seen much better in my limited experience with this debate There are very learned theologians out there on both sides of this discussion that This is the first book that I put back on the shelf before finishing in a long time I guess I was expecting an informative and collegial debate It was neither collegial or all that informative The editor really made a mistake in choosing one the authors as the author did not follow the rules of the debate nor was he effectively arguing his side I have seen much better in my limited experience with this debate There are very learned theologians out there on both sides of this discussion that deeply respect those who disagree them and who recognize that this a discussion that in fact goes back at least to Saint Augustine without resolutionOh well on to the next book


Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *