Comments on "Young, Restless, No Longer Reformed"

I read this short account of conversion to and from Reformed theology on a colleague's recommendation. I found Fischer to write engagingly. He uses metaphors throughout in compelling ways.

As the title indicates, this is the story of a personal journey of belief. Thus, as Kevin DeYoung notes, it's extremely light on exegesis and substantive, nuanced interaction with the Calvinist positions Fischer finds inadequate. As a Wesleyan-Arminian, Fischer's objections to Calvinism echo some I've felt and heard, but his lack of methodical engagement with key arguments would likely be frustrating to a Calvinist reader. 

The primary problem Fischer encountered in Calvinism is the reprehensible nature of God's actions. He acknowledges God's transcendence and consequential inscrutability, but argues that if God's goodness encompasses creating individuals and predestining them for Hell, then God's definition of goodness is apparently meaningless to humans. If God's definition of goodness is so different from ours, it is conceivable that He may define other key terms differently -- for example, truthful or faithful. If any term God uses to describe Himself is effectively meaningless, any or all other terms are equally meaningless. The Word of God itself would then be meaningless.

Reformed thinkers will push back against that presentation of Calvinism (again, see DeYoung). Fischer's representation is often harshly reductionistic, talking about ultimate implications without mentioning intermediate nuance-giving factors. If it were my theology, I would be unhappy with the result. It does appear, however, from my Wesleyan-Arminian vantage, that Fischer gets the ultimate implications right.

Fischer devotes some space to mentioning the problems Arminianism has to deal with, though again, he is light on argumentation and exegesis, instead citing the conclusions of others (N. T. Wright, Karl Barth, Jurgen Moltmann, Dallas Willard, Scot McKnight and Roger Olson). Regarding the problem of free will implying the possibility of boasting (according to Reformed thinking), he offers several illustrations that I found helpful. While I agree with and affirm many of the cited conclusions, Reformed readers will find the lack of argumentation underwhelming. 

Bottom line: Fischer will likely encourage a Wesleyan-Arminian reader, reminding him/her vividly of the beauty of his/her conception of God. Fischer will probably frustrate a Reformed reader, representing the ultimate implications of the Calvinist image of God as a capricious and cruel person.