Election and Predestination: A Book Review

Election and Predestination by Samuel Fisk seeks to give a middle of the road view of the debate over God's sovereignty and man's free will. Fisk claims to reject both Calvinism and Armenians. He, however, has far more criticism of Calvinism than he dies Armenianism. His criticism of Calvinism is far more scathing than his criticism of Armenianism.

The book contains many quotes from other authors. It has very little of Fisk's own thoughts, but a series of quotes melded together. he only quotes from people who agree with him. He will quote from Calvinist's if they say something that proves his point. He loves to call Calvinist's on their uncalvinistic comments. He also enjoys picking apart people like Spurgeon, who Calvinist's claim as their own. He fails to see that many Calvinists are not Calvinists because famous people are, but because they believe it is close to the Biblical view.

According to Fisk, election is not to individuals, but groups. He says that in the Old Testament, Israel was an elect nation. In the New Testament, the church was elect. He believes that predestination was linked to foreknowledge and good works. He fails to see that calling an predestination in Romans 8:30 are two different things. Calling is not associated with good works.

One of the most dangerous aspects of the books is his view on foreknowledge. Throughout the book he presents the fact that God knows what is going to happen. In one of hi9s many appendixes, he suggest that God's foreknowledge is limited. He uses the example of prayer. He says that God knows one outcome, but the outcome changes because he capitulates to people's prayers. He says that God's mind can be changed by prayer.

While Fisk is not a full fledged Armenian, he is closer to Armenianism than Calvinism. This book gives a glimpse into the mindset of centrist Armenians. If you want a thoughtful discussion of election and predestination, this is not it. I would not read it for that purpose.