Journal: Emmaus Journal
Volume: EMJ 15:1 (Summer 2006)
Article: Whose Theology Is This? Dave Hunt’s Misrepresentation Of Calvinism
Author: Mark R. Stevenson

EMJ 15:1 (Summer 2006) p. 3

Whose Theology Is This? Dave Hunt’s Misrepresentation Of Calvinism

Mark R. Stevenson

Mark Stevenson is a faculty member at Emmaus Bible College and the Book Review Editor of The Emmaus Journal.

Introduction

The debate over divine sovereignty and human freedom has exercised the church for centuries. Every generation produces new voices that advance the polemics and keep the debate alive. Some voices offer more insight than others. Occasionally the controversy is conducted in a fair and even helpful manner. At other times, the disagreement becomes so heated that, sadly, damage is done to relationships and churches. In a manner of speaking, Christians struggle to maintain their sanctification when the subject turns to issues of Calvinism and Arminianism.

In recent years retired businessman Dave Hunt has entered the fray. Hunt has expended a great deal of energy in an attempt to debunk Calvinism. He has published several books1 and numerous monthly newsletters2 on the subject. My analysis of Hunt’s work is based primarily on the updated and expanded

EMJ 15:1 (Summer 2006) p. 4

edition of his book What Love Is This? Calvinism’s Misrepresentation of God, released in 2004 and self-published by his ministry, “The Berean Call.”3 Not surprisingly, the first edition was met with strong objections from Calvinists. As one reviewer put it, “The debate over God’s sovereignty in salvation has reached a new low with the publication of this book.”4 Others called it, “the most egregious misrepresentation of Calvinism in print today.”5 Such assessments need not be revised in connection with the expanded edition.

My thesis is that while Dave Hunt condemns Calvinism as unbiblical, often what he attacks is not historic Calvinism at all but his own distortion and misrepresentation of it. Furthermore, I contend that in his attempts to correct Calvinism’s “errors,” Hunt leaves a trail of theological problems unresolved.

I do not feel compelled to defend “Calvinism” as a system of theology—and certainly not Hunt’s portrayal of it. My loyalty is to Christ and the authority of Scripture. My concern however is that, in Hunt’s zeal to discredit Calvinism, he engages in tactics that do not promote understanding or healthy dialogue over important biblical issues, which in turn leads to further discord within the church. Thus, I will lay out a number of concerns regardin...