In this source, Don’t Hate Me Because I’m Arminian, author Robert Olson (theologian and author of Christianity Today Magazine) is writing to other believers on either side of the debate on predestination, urging them to work with one another, rather than against. Olson starts by claiming that despite the decrease in the understanding of complicated theology by many regular congregants and believers, debates over Arminian and Calvinist perspectives are still often hotly debated when they arise today. With the increase of new charismatic Christian movements, such as the Holiness-Movement and the Pentecostal Movement, Olson states that there has been a renewed sense of tension between the Arminians-- who believe that God’s grace is always available and freely accepted, and the Calvinists-- who believe that God’s grace is predestined to reach an individual whether they care for it or not (however, they will be enlightened/sanctified, making it impossible for them to not want the grace of God). Ultimately, Olson decides that while Calvinists believe Arminian doctrine produces too much humanity within salvation, Arminians believe Calvinists produce too much condemnation. Additionally, Olson gives a brief history of the beliefs-- Arminian doctrine comes from Jacob Arminius and spread/developed over time in Europe after the protestant movement..
The most important things I got out of Don’t Hate Me Because I’m Arminian was a more detailed and current (as in not 1500 reformation) timeline and history of how Arminians established their doctrines. Arminians came from Arminius himself, and after his death and rejection from Holland at the Synod of Dort, they began practicing in more inclusive environments, where their doctrine spread (Olson 88). The “five points [of Reformed faith]” or the TULIP model-- which is Total Depravity, Unconditional Election, Limited Atonement, Irresistible Grace, and Perseverance of the Saints, is practiced by Calvinists while a focus on grace doctrine is practiced by Arminians (Olson 88). More sections I found interesting and important include Olson’s (who is Arminian) belief that, “God would eventually win the cosmic spiritual war and that Satan could only wreck as much havot now as God allowed him to” (Olson 90). This is Olson talking about his beliefs as they developed. He also states later talks of his personal fear that his Arminian doctrine seems hollow and over-simplistic compared to that of a Calvinist, while also discussing that Calvinists seem overly focused on the consequences of sin and the majesty of God, rather than His love (Olson 90).
This information is very helpful to my topic and really helped clear up a lot of confusion that I still had after reading my first source on Calvinism. I find it questionable/problematic that Olson believes God will ultimately work everything out, but doesn’t believe in predestination on the small scale. Assuming there is a God, is it more likely that His ultimate movements cannot be figured out by mortal man and his nuanced nature would call us to look deeper into our own beings? Such a belief is similar to that assigned to Martin Luther and John Calvin in my first source by Van Wyk. It is important to note that Arminianism can seem flimsy and lead to ill-advised practices when compared to the rigidity of Calvinist predestination. I really enjoy the openness Olson uses to help highlight this fact and bring a modern viewpoint to my research, as it also establishes a solid base for further research that may become more complicated (i.e. the TULIPS model, etc.) What is the current situation today concerning Armenian and Calvinist doctrinal conflicts? Are more churches continuing to adopt progressive “liberal” salvationist policies rather than legalistic ones such as Calvinism? How are these ideals being passed on today, ten years after the article was written?
Olson, Roger E. “Don’t Hate Me Because I’m Arminian.” Christianity Today, 1999, pp. 87–94.