Classical Arminianism: A Theology of Salvation (Shorter Review)

Forlines, F. Leroy. Classical Arminianism: A Theology of Salvation. Nashville: Randall House, 2011.

This massive systematic theology by F. Leroy Forlines is a godsend to Christians

everywhere. It is designed to accurately portray what Classical (Reformed) Arminianism is and to show how biblically faithful and theologically accurate this system is to the various subfields within theology.  There are a few chapters that I find most commendable about this book, which are revealed below.

First, in chapter two,  Forlines discusses “the three basic assumptions of Calvinism”: (1) the sovereignty of God necessitates unconditional election; (2) total depravity eliminates a human response of faith in salvation; and (3) the free gift of salvation destroys conditional election. Contrary to the three basic assumptions, Classical Arminianism posits that the sovereignty of God does not necessitate unconditional election, but makes it possible. The question is not, “What is God sovereign enough to do?” but “What has God in His sovereignty decided to do?”.  Since the choice is up to God regarding how He saves individuals, He could choose to save them by His own choice (unconditional election) or to save them by the condition of faith (conditional election). Either way, the choice is God’s---and we should glean the Scriptures to discover the nature of God’s sovereign choice.

As for Calvinistic assumption #2, total depravity does not eliminate a human response of faith; rather, it allows the human response of faith. There is no contradiction involved in man being unable to save himself and God choosing to enable man to believe the gospel and exercise faith in Christ.

With Calvinistic assumption #3 (the free gift of salvation eliminates conditional election), this is not the case. What does the word free mean? Calvinists argue that the free gift excludes conditional election because they interpret free to mean “without condition” or “without work.” Calvinists equate “condition” and “work”; Arminians, however, disagree. The Scriptures themselves point to faith in God as the condition which justifies man before God...but faith itself is not a work (see Romans 4). For the Classic Arminian, then, free means “apart from works or human merit.” It seems to me at least that this is the consistent message of Scripture itself.

 Another strength of Professor Forlines’s work is his chapter titled “Proof Texts for Unconditional Election: Romans 9.” This is where Forlines proves himself to be a theological genius. Having written his Master of Theology thesis on “Jesus and the Pharisees” at the Chicago Graduate School in 1970, Forlines was able to gather great insight on the contextual background of Romans 9. The Jews held to a sort of eternal security (that every Jew is guaranteed salvation) but also held to a doctrine of apostasy (that, by not fulfilling the works of the law, one could be excluded from the nation of Israel).  Paul’s words in Romans 9 help to resolve this tension: the problem was not the Jewish doctrine of apostasy, but the nature of apostasy (that is, apostasy is conditioned on unbelief, not deeds of the law). In addition, Forlines also demonstrates the incorrect Jewish presupposition that every Jew was automatically guaranteed salvation (corporate eternal security). Paul’s argument in Romans 9 emphasizes individual, conditional election (and thus, individual, conditional salvation). Along the way, Forlines tackles the argument of John Piper on Romans 9 and shows how Piper’s assumption affects his interpretation of the passage. This chapter (Chapter 3) of Forlines’s work is a unique and significant contribution to any proper discussion of soteriology. I have never ever read a chapter like this in the 80-100 plus works I have encountered on the Calvinism/Arminianism debate.

Chapter nine, titled “The Perseverance of the Saints,” is where Forlines sets out his doctrine of apostasy. He provides the discussion question of the chapter: “Is it possible for a person who has once experience the saving grace of God to once again be lost? I am going to take the position that it is possible for a person who has been saved to commit apostasy and become once again lost and under the wrath of God” (303). To this end, he explores the two dominant views of “Once Saved, Always Saved” (OSAS), both Classic Calvinist and popular views. The Classic Calvinist view of OSAS in Perseverance (P) logically follows from the other four points in his system: (1) Total Depravity (T), (2) Unconditional Election (U), (3) Limited Atonement (L), and (4) Irresistible Grace (I). For the Classic Calvinist, unconditional perseverance (or eternal security) is guaranteed for believers because of unconditional election and the sovereignty of God. Believers will pursue holiness because God causes them to pursue it (remember? “cause-and-effect” relationship).  In the popular view, OSAS is slightly different from the Classic Calvinist view: while in the Classic view, one pursues holiness because of cause and effect, in the popular view, one need not pursue holiness at all: “according to this view, once a person is saved he could never do anything that would cause him to be lost again” (306).

 Forlines then examines the biblical evidence that OSAS proponents use in favor of their view: (1) John 10:28-29, (2) Romans 8:35-39, (3) Romans 11:29, (4) Philippians 1:6. In each case, Forlines shows that Calvinist interpretations of these passages often overlook the context in which these passages are located. Dismantling the views of OSAS proponents, Forlines then presents his case for conditional security by looking at irrefutably clear evidence for apostasy: (1) Hebrews 6:4-6, (2) Hebrews 10:26-29, (3) 2 Peter 2:20-22, (4) Colossians 1:21-23, and (5) John 15:2, 6. While passages such as Hebrews 6:4-6 are heavily disputed, 2 Peter 2:20-22 is extremely clear in its stance: there will be those who “have escaped the pollutions of the world through the knowledge of the Lord and Savior Jesus Christ,” but become entangled again in their sin and overcome. In order for one to become “again entangled” in sin (NKJV) and overcome, one had to have come out of his or her sin in the first place. The passage then, is irrefutably referencing those who became Christians but the abandon their faith. Such passages cannot be explained away. 

Last but not least, there is Forlines’s chapter ten, titled “Apostasy and Assurance: Doctrinal and Practical Considerations.” Here, Forlines provides a section on the assurance of salvation which I think is necessary and important in the espousal of such a controversial doctrine. Can one hold to apostasy and still be assured of his or her salvation? Yes. In the same way that signs are used to prevent someone from running into a flooded bridge, so are the warnings of Scripture used to prevent believers from “shipwrecking” their faith. Are the signs indicative of real possible consequences? Yes; however, such signs are not intended to frighten the believer into constant worry over his or her salvation. Rather, the signs are given so that believers can avoid shipwreck. Believers can maintain confidence in their walk with God because God gives the warnings and believers heed them.

Classical Arminianism: A Theology of Salvation is a book that should be read by both Calvinist and Arminian alike. This book should clear up the constant misrepresentations and misconceptions Classical Arminianism has been given in the world at large.