Lennox is a professor of mathematics at Oxford University and has become well known in evangelical circles for his books and debates with atheists. One tribute honours him as âone of todayâs finest evangelical mindsâ.
Lennox states that his objective in writing is âto challenge deterministic arguments that claim to be based on something I do not challenge: the biblical doctrines of the sovereignty of God and human responsibilityâ (p.357).
The first chapter puts the discussion of human free will in the context of philosophical concepts. He argues that we have free will and that God has not determined our choices. He is persuaded that both morality and love are dependent on free will.
He confronts âtheological determinismâ, by which he means the Calvinistic view of Godâs sovereignty. He uses the term âtheological determinismâ, because he considers it unbiblical to describe anyone as either a Calvinist or an Arminian. However, it should be noted that he is personally gracious towards his Reformed brothers, while bold to name and critique the likes of Luther, Calvin, Edwards, Lloyd-Jones, R. C. Sproul, Grudem, Piper and Carson.
He is appreciative of the Reformed theological heritage and fondly remembers reading Calvinâs sermons in the original French as a student. He comments, âIt is that sense of indebtedness, together with the awareness of my own inadequacies, that has made me hesitate for a very long time before deciding to write this bookâ (p.49).
Lennox does have a high view of Scripture, acknowledges human sinfulness, and rejoices in the doctrine of justification by faith. He affirms that we are saved by grace: âGod is the initiator and source of salvation that no human can meritâ, but he could be described as a four-point Arminian.
He writes: âGod has provided a salvation that is available to all, and whether a person is saved or not depends on two factors: on Godâs part, on the provision of that salvation; and on our side, on our faith, not our merit â on whether or not we will avail ourselves of that salvation, with the capacity for exercising trust that God has given usâ (p.279).
He refers to the familiar acronym TULIP. He rejects Total Depravity. While agreeing that all are sinners who cannot merit salvation, he affirms that we are able to respond to the gospel without the need of the regenerating power of the Holy Spirit. He states that we are not to interpret Scripture âin such a way as to undercut human free willâ. He continues: âGod will do everything in his power to help us, but he cannot decide for usâ (p.142). He denies that Romans 5:12 teaches that all humanity stands guilty following Adamâs sin.
He rejects Unconditional Election: âWe see Godâs purpose is to have mercy on all, not just on some chosen subset of people, whose fate is determined without any reference to them, but mercy on all who are willing to respond to his offerâ (p.307). In a brief comment, he also rejects Limited Atonement.
In a rather simplistic manner he dismisses Irresistible Grace when referring to Israelâs unbelief: âThey are guilty of resisting Godâs grace. Hence Godâs grace is resistibleâ (p.288).
However, he does affirm the Perseverance of the Saints: âI hold that God does âpreserve the saintsâ, in the sense that a genuine believer cannot be lost; but ⌠the reason is not found in the notion of unconditional electionâ (p.319).
The majority of the book engages in biblical exegesis. Attention is given to John 7-10 and Romans 9-11. A concluding section shows that assurance of salvation can be built on the gospel without affirming unconditional election. Having defended his position philosophically and theologically, Lennox aims to demonstrate that Scripture is best interpreted within this âfree willâ paradigm.
I was not impressed by his exegetical skills or his conclusions. Although he writes clearly and the book is well structured, his brilliant mind fails to explain or accept the true paradox of Godâs sovereignty and human responsibility.
Nathan Pomeroy
Nottingham
