Why Do I Harp on Arminianism?

In this post, as before, I am using the term Arminianism as an umbrella term for non-Reformed Christianity. I realize that many modern evangelicals do not agree with every point of classical Arminian doctrine such as what’s generally called the doctrine of eternal security, which classic Arminianism denies, however, for the sake of brevity I will use this title. If theology can be divided into categories, the chief point of contention is on the way of salvation, which modern and historic Arminianism are in agreement on, and this will be my focus.

First, before I delve into this, a word about my motivation. Some may wonder why I harp on Arminianism so much, especially when I unwittingly believed its tenets for so long. Well the short answer to that question is because theology matters. What you think about God and the Christian life affects everything. It is for this very reason that I harp on Arminianism, because when your eyes are opened to the truth; you cannot help but speak about what you have seen. Can a blind man, after his eyes are opened, remain silent? Can a deaf man who suddenly hears, not shout for joy? My eyes have been opened to see the truth in God’s word which has always been there, yet I somehow missed. My “conversion” to Reformed theology was so transformational; it was almost as if I was saved all over again. I cannot help talking about it. I cannot stop defending it. I cannot quench the fire burning in my heart to see Reformed, biblical truth proclaimed. I will not!

Doctrine Divides

We hear this over and over; to the point that many people don’t even want to discuss doctrine. They just want to get along. They claim we are splitting hairs over an in-house debate that isn't overly important. The mantra goes something like this: "We should all just love Jesus and love one another." I agree with this wholeheartedly as far as it goes, yet the minute you ask, who is Jesus?, you're up to your neck in doctrine. Yes, doctrine does divide, but that is the whole point. For example: if we take the view that doctrine is divisive and should therefore be avoided, then was there no need for the Protestant Reformation? Didn't the Reformation divide people? Should we just try to get along with Roman Catholics and not discuss the whole reason we are Protestants? No, we should not sweep our theological differences under the rug; we should evangelize Roman Catholics because they are preaching a different gospel.

Was there no need for the apostles to preach the gospel of grace over against the Judaizers? For the sake of unity, should they have ignored the fact that we are not justified by works, but by the righteousness of Christ imputed by faith? Didn't this teaching cause division? Just read the book of Galatians. Even Jesus Himself said He had come to bring a sword, so that family members would be divided against themselves, (Matt. 10:35-36).

Sound doctrine is what separates us from cults and false religions. Mormons and Jehovah's Witnesses believe in Jesus you know. Should we therefore allow them to become members of churches and preach in our pulpits all in the name of unity? Of course not, we should call them to repentance and show them the truth about Jesus, which of course, involves doctrine.

A Gospel Issue

Most Christians today reject Pelagianism and believe that grace is necessary for salvation; however, non-Reformed Christians believe the grace given in salvation can be resisted. In other words, grace is necessary, but not sufficient to save. Reformed Christians believe in saving grace, that is, grace that actually saves. When God effectually calls someone unto salvation, He accomplishes it. His grace does not fail.

If you ask an Arminian if he was saved by grace through faith in Jesus Christ alone, he will emphatically say, “Yes!” Arminians rightly believe in salvation by grace, through faith, in Christ alone. So what's the big deal? Why split hairs? The problem is, they are not consistent. On the one hand they affirm correct soteriology, but on the other hand they champion free will. So their doctrine of salvation leads to the conclusion that we are not really saved by grace alone, because we are saved partly by our own free will.

Many people don’t take their theology to its logical conclusion, but with Arminianism you are forced to conclude that apart from the will of the creature cooperating with the grace of God, Jesus is powerless to save. He wants to save people, but if they won’t give in, then He is thwarted. You are left with an impotent God who is contingent upon the will of His own creations.

Arminians also cannot explain why they believed the gospel but their neighbor didn’t. If we are saved by God’s grace alone, and everyone is receiving this “prevenient” grace; everyone is being "wooed" by the Holy Spirit, then why did you have the power to overcome your sin nature and respond in faith? Why did your neighbor reject the gospel but you embraced it? Arminian theology simply has no answer for this. If you responded positively to the grace of God, but the person in the pew next to you rejected it, then grace wasn’t the cause of your salvation, you were.

I’ve said this before, and I’ll say it again. Either you were saved because you were better than someone, or you were saved because of the sovereign grace of God alone! There is no other option.

Further, I have yet to hear a consistent, biblical answer from a non-Reformed believer as to how an unregenerate person who is dead in sin can freely respond to the gospel and produce saving faith. How can slaves of sin choose righteousness prior to regeneration? Slaves of sin cannot unshackle themselves. Only God can do that. Why do those who love darkness suddenly love light (John 3:19)? Where does their faith come from? If we have the power to repent and believe prior to regeneration, then we aren't totally corrupt. If we aren't totally corrupt, then why do they need grace to believe? But if grace is necessary for salvation, why is it insufficient?

Arminian theology chokes on these questions, and when they really start trying to answer them, they end up sounding like Calvinists, which is highly amusing.

Our will is not unimportant. Reformed Christians certainly believe that we are the ones who willingly choose Christ, but only because He has first chosen us (Eph.1:4-5, 1 John 4:19) and only because we have been regenerated first. As Jesus said in John 3:3, "unless a man is born again, he cannot see the kingdom of God," yet Arminians would have us believe that unregenerate people can not only see, but choose the kingdom while they are still dead in their trespasses and sins.

As I’ve said before John 1:13 should be the end of the discussion forever. Believers are those: “who were born, not of blood nor of the will of the flesh nor of the will of man, but of God.”

Now let me be very clear. I'm not saying Arminian Christians don't preach the gospel, of course they do. Many of them are passionate for souls and are doing great evangelistic works, but if you analyze their theology carefully you find inconsistencies and confusion. As Christians we need to be clear and consistent. We need to be precise in our communication, especially when it comes to the gospel. In Colossians 4:3-4, even Paul himself asks for prayer that he might preach the gospel clearly. If the Apostle Paul was concerned about preaching with clarity, how much more should we be?

I harp on Arminianism for the sake of the gospel, because it must be clear. I bring these things up to make people analyze what they believe and why. As I like to say, theology matters, and Reformed theology matters more.

Impoverished Theology

As R. C. Sproul has said, Arminian theology is an impoverished theology; it is a blight upon the church. In fact, he minces no words and calls it out right heresy. Lest you think he is overstating the case, the Synod of Dort in 1618-19 agreed with this. The entire synod unanimously denounced the teachings of Jacobus Arminius, which were delineated in the Remonstrance of 1610, as heretical. This is no small matter. I find it highly ironic that from a historical perspective, Arminians today are aligning themselves with heresy and they don't even realize it.

I agree with Dr. Sproul, Arminianism is an impoverished theology. It demeans the sovereignty of God, unduly promotes the freedom of man, waters down humanity’s sinful nature, and confuses the gospel of grace. These are serious errors that cannot be ignored. Plus, it is hopelessly inconsistent. As James White often says, "The only consistent Arminianism is open theism." But that is a topic for another post.

Now Arminians, or Semi-Pelagians, or non-Calvinists, or whatever you want to call those who are not Reformed, would deny what I have just said. But if you listen to their teaching carefully, and read their books you will see the fallacies. They claim that God is sovereign, but their view of free will undermines it. They claim God is omniscient, but deny His decree; as if foreknowledge is based upon God passively looking into the future. They claim that man is utterly sinful, but they believe sinners can choose Christ prior to regeneration. They claim to believe in salvation by grace alone, but they believe grace is insufficient.

Finally, Arminianism is a man-centered theology. Again, they will deny this, but when was the last time you heard an Arminian preach a sermon on God’s freedom? I've listened to Arminian preachers for over thirty years and I never once heard a sermon on God’s absolute freedom to do as He pleases in all of creation and save whom He wills; His freedom to manifest His glory through the display of both His mercy and justice, although this is exactly what Romans 9:22-24 teaches. Instead, they are far more interested in their own freedom. In fact, I would say that free will should really be the god of the Arminian, because even the Almighty is subject to it. Even God cannot overcome it. In their view, God has somehow limited Himself because He gave His creatures free will that He cannot violate. Yet if God Himself cannot overcome my free will, how is He then omnipotent? If God limits Himself in any way, He is no longer God.

Reformed theology on the other hand is a vast, deep, biblically faithful, God-glorifying theology. It has a rich historical tradition, a wealth of literature, and some of the greatest theologians, evangelists, and teachers in church history. We begin and end with God; God's glory, God's purposes, God's self revelation, and the display of all His attributes culminating in the redemption of a people unto Himself through the incarnation, death and resurrection of the Lord Jesus Christ. The Reformers weren't inventing something new, they were recapturing something old. They recovered the teachings of Paul and the Apostles and Jesus Himself. In short, Reformed theology is synonymous with biblical theology. Anyone who faithfully reads their Bible, lays down their presuppositions, and uses a consistent hermeneutic will see this.

Born of the Spirit

"That which is born of the flesh is flesh, and that which is born of the Spirit is spirit," (John 3:6).

This was Jesus' response to Nicodemus' question, “How can a man be born when he is old? Can he enter a second time into his mother's womb and be born?” (John 3:4). But Jesus wasn't talking about physical birth; He was talking about spiritual birth. He was describing a birth that is accomplished by the Spirit of God alone. The phrase "born again" literally means, "born from above." This is what John makes so clear in the very first chapter of his Gospel.

"But to all who did receive him, who believed in his name, he gave the right to become children of God, who were born, not of blood nor of the will of the flesh nor of the will of man, but of God," John 1:12-13.

Which Came First the Chicken or…?

Which comes first, the faith or the regeneration? Arminianism rightly believes that we are saved by grace, through faith, but erroneously contends that faith comes before regeneration. A person believes and then they are born again. This is what many Christians are taught and it sounds perfectly fine on the surface. But the problem with faith preceding regeneration is that it fails to explain how someone who is dead in their trespasses and sins, hostile to God, and not yet renewed by the Holy Spirit is able to produce faith.

The burden of proof is on the Arminian to show from Scripture how someone in the flesh (prior to regeneration) can initiate genuine faith. Any "faith" they produce will be a work of the flesh. Jesus said what is born of the flesh is flesh. Further He said, "It is the Spirit who gives life; the flesh profits nothing," (John 6:63). So the flesh produces flesh, it profits nothing, and only the Spirit gives life. Yet Arminianism would have us believe that someone who is spiritually dead can generate saving faith prior to the Spirit's work in their hearts. No, Arminianism has it backwards.

Regeneration Precedes Faith

Regeneration must precede faith. This is the only real option because those who are in the flesh cannot please God (Rom. 8:8). They can't initiate saving faith because everything they do proceeds from the flesh. Again, only the Spirit gives life.

When discussing the ordo salutis (order of salvation), Reformed theology is not teaching a temporal progression as much as a logical progression. Regeneration is instantaneous. All we are saying is that logically, an unregenerate person cannot have genuine faith because they are still in the flesh. The Spirit must quicken them first so that they are able to respond in repentance and faith.

"And those whom he predestined he also called, and those whom he called he also justified, and those whom he justified he also glorified," (Rom. 8:30).

In Romans 8:30, we see a logical progression in God's work of salvation. Notice that these are the actions of God, not man. God calls, God justifies, etc. And everyone who is called is justified. There are no drop outs along the way. If you are predestined and called, then that calling is efficacious and results in justification. Remember, we are not talking about a chronological order but rather a logical order in God's decree to save His people, (2 Tim. 1:9).

 Jesus answered him, “Truly, truly, I say to you, unless one is born again he cannot see the kingdom of God,” (John 3:3).

If you cannot see or enter the kingdom unless you are first born again, how in the world can faith precede the new birth? Where does this faith come from I wonder? Moreover, how can the Arminian avoid taking some credit (however little) for believing in Jesus? I know they virulently deny this, but if, in their view, faith is not a gift of God, but rather conjured up somehow by spiritually dead people, then consistency should force them to admit they contributed to their own salvation.

This is why Arminian soteriology doesn't have a leg to stand on. So instead of trying to prop it up; it simply needs to be abandoned. Salvation is the work of God alone.

Why Does it Matter?

You might be thinking: why does it matter how we are saved, so long as we are saved? Well the simple answer to that question is because theology matters. How we view God and salvation has eternal ramifications. In the final analysis, either you were saved because you were better than others, (you had faith and they didn't) or you were saved because of God's grace alone. Knowing that we had nothing to do with it guards our hearts from taking any credit and causes us to give all the glory to Jesus who is the author and finisher of our faith, (Heb. 12:2).

Glorious Grace

Most Christians are well aware of what the word grace means. We have heard it described as unmerited favor. Instead of getting what we deserve, we are given mercy. There is nothing we can do to earn or deserve the grace of God. He freely bestows it upon us in Christ. We are saved by grace alone. This is a glorious truth, and there is no one more gracious than God. In this post however, I want to focus on an aspect of grace that we often forget; myself included.

Free Grace

God is totally free. Have you ever really thought about that? He has no restrictions. He is under no obligations. He is absolutely free to do whatever He pleases, (Psalm 115:3, 135:6, Daniel 4:35). This is also true when it comes to His grace.

The mistake that many make is to assume that because God shows mercy to some, He must therefore show mercy to all. But God is under no obligation to show mercy to anyone. Grace cannot be demanded. The fact that He has mercy on anyone at all should astound us, because we deserve nothing but the fires of hell. The problem is that most people, including many Christians, don't really believe this. We have fallen victim to the entitlement mentality of our culture. We think everyone owes us something, even God. On the contrary, God owes us nothing. The moment we think we deserve God's grace is the moment we misunderstand its meaning.

"...I will be gracious to whom I will be gracious, and will show mercy on whom I will show mercy," Exodus 33:19.

Paul quotes this passage in Romans 9:15 to prove there is no injustice on God's part for choosing Jacob over Esau before they were born. It does not depend on human will or exertion but on God who has mercy (verse 16). Then in verse 18, Paul concludes by saying, "So then He has mercy on whomever He wills, and He hardens whomever He wills."

We must understand that God is God. He has the right to bestow grace as He sees fit. No one can point their finger at Him and say, "You have to be merciful to everyone!" No He doesn't. If He didn't show mercy to one single person on planet Earth He would be doing no wrong. If God were to send everyone to hell it would be perfectly just. The question is: do you really believe that? Would you consider God to be just even if He condemned you to hell?

The question we must ask ourselves is not why does God show mercy to some and not others, but why does He show mercy to anyone?

We must remember that no one deserves forgiveness, redemption, or heaven because no one is good. We have all sinned (Rom. 3:10-11, 23). We have committed cosmic treason against a holy God. No, we do not deserve His grace. And yet, God is still gracious. That is what makes Him so glorious. That is what makes the gospel such good news.

"But God shows his love for us in that while we were still sinners, Christ died for us," Romans 5:8.

Don't you just love the phrase "but God" in the Bible? If it wasn't for the free grace of God in Christ we would have no hope. We would be lost, forsaken; eternally condemned. But thanks be to God that for the sake of Christ, we were granted repentance and faith (1 Cor. 1:30, Phil. 1:29, Eph. 2:8).

Holiness

We will never appreciate the grace of a God until we begin to grasp the holiness of God and the utter wretchedness of our own hearts. God is not like us. He is altogether other. He is holy beyond imagination. When we read about God striking down Nadab and Abihu because they brought strange fire, or Uzzah because he tried to steady the Ark of the Covenant, or the sudden death of Ananias and Sapphira, we gasp in disbelief. And if we were honest, we are appalled. We think the severity of the punishment doesn't seem to fit the crime. But isn't this what sin deserves? The Bible says the wages of sin is death (Rom. 6:23 Ezek. 18:20). In fact, the only reason you're still breathing right now is because of the sheer grace of God. God doesn't owe you life and breath. He isn't required to give you health, prosperity, a home, food, and security. We take all these things for granted, especially in America, but God is not obligated to provide them. He does so because of grace.

We tend to compare ourselves to others and as long as we're not committing adultery, theft, or murder, we think we're okay. But God doesn't compare us with others, He compares us to Himself, and His holiness demands perfection. Which one of us has honored God and kept His commandments perfectly? We all know perfection is something we can never attain. Our righteousness is nothing but filthy rags. That is why our only hope is the righteousness of Another imputed by faith.

"He saved us, not because of works done by us in righteousness, but according to his own mercy, by the washing of regeneration and renewal of the Holy Spirit," Titus 3:5.

All Because of Jesus

Until we recognize the depth of our own depravity, we will never truly appreciate grace. If you think you're not that bad, you do not understand the gospel. Only against the darkness of our hopeless condition does the gospel of grace shine so bright. And where better to fix our gaze than upon the Lord Jesus Christ? What better demonstration of grace is there than the work of Christ on the cross? Never in a million years will we be able to repay the debt we owe God. Because of our sin, the very curse of hell hung over our heads by a frayed cord, ready to plunge us into a fiery sea of endless misery until Jesus washed away our guilt with His precious blood. Jesus endured the wrath of the damned for the sake of the elect. Upon the cross, He suffered the full fury of God's righteous anger against sin so that you and I could be forgiven. The very thought should bring us to tears. It should cause our hearts to burst with gratitude; falling to our knees with eternal praise for the glory of His amazing grace!

Grace, grace, a thousand times grace! May we never, ever take it for granted, for it was not cheap. It cost Jesus everything.

Israel or True Israel?

As with many of my posts, I know this is not going to make me popular, but the current situation with Israel has sparked a desire to share some thoughts on the subject and hopefully shed light on misunderstandings many people have with regard to Israel.

First, I want to say that this will not be a political post. If fact, I dislike politics in general, and I think many Christians today need to realize that while politics are important, they will never solve the problems of this world. Politics are not the answer; the gospel is. Only the return of Christ and the consummation of His kingdom will ultimately put all wrongs to right. Second, my purpose is to attempt to look at this situation from a biblical perspective and try to show why unconditional support for the nation of Israel may not always be wise. Now before you light torches to burn me as a heretic, hear me out.

Race or Remnant?

Many Christians are under the misapprehension that Israel is God's chosen people based upon race. The Bible says otherwise. One of the texts often quoted is Deuteronomy 7:6-7:

“For you are a people holy to the Lord your God. The Lord your God has chosen you to be a people for his treasured possession, out of all the peoples who are on the face of the earth. It was not because you were more in number than any other people that the Lord set his love on you and chose you, for you were the fewest of all peoples."

Yes, this is absolutely true, but notice the reason for God's choice. It wasn't because Israel was so special, but because "the Lord set his love" on them. God chose to love them for His own purposes. Yet how many times did Israel disobey the Lord? How many times did they provoke Him to anger because of their idol worship? The texts would be too numerous to cite. Anyone who has read the Old Testament knows this. They continuously rebelled against God and broke His covenant over and over. God, however, continued to set His love upon them. In fact, Deuteronomy 7 sounds an awful lot like the doctrine of unconditional election.

I find it ironic that many who champion the modern state of Israel are diametrically opposed to the doctrine of election. They have no problem with God distinguishing Jews from other people, but cannot bear the thought that God would unconditionally choose the elect before the foundation of the world. What do you think election is if not choosing a particular people? I'm sorry to say this, but to affirm the Jews are God's chosen people, but deny that God chooses His elect for salvation is hypocritical. The key factor to recognize is that God's choice is not based on ethnicity, but according to the purpose of His will (Eph. 1:5, 11).

Now I realize that during Old Testament times, the vast majority of Gentile nations were left in darkness, however, there was a mixed multitude that left Egypt in the Exodus (Exod. 12:38). And there were laws that applied to Israelites as well as to aliens and sojourners (Exod. 20:10, Lev. 16:29, 22:18). Further, many Israelites were apostate. But God kept for Himself a faithful remnant, (Rom. 11:4, 1 Kgs. 19:18) which is true Israel; not a specific nation, but rather, people from every tribe, tongue, and nation.

And they sang a new song, saying, “Worthy are you to take the scroll and to open its seals, for you were slain, and by your blood you ransomed people for God from every tribe and language and people and nation," (Rev. 5:9).

These are God's chosen people, from every race under heaven that have been purchased by the blood of the Lamb.

Not All Israel is Israel

In Romans chapter 9 Paul says, "But it is not as though the word of God has failed. For not all who are descended from Israel belong to Israel," (Rom. 9:6). What in the world does that mean Paul? What are you talking about? Well, in the rest of the chapter, Paul goes on to show that God's choice was not based upon race. Rather, "the children of the promise are counted as offspring," (Rom. 9:8). God chose Isaac over Ishmael, Jacob over Esau, why? Paul tells us in verse 11, "…in order that God's purpose of election might continue, not because of works but because of him who calls."

In the book of Galatians Paul explains that whether you are a Jew or a Gentile is irrelevant. In Galatians 3:16 he says the promises were made to Abraham's offspring, who is Christ, and then in verses 28 and 29 he says, "There is neither Jew nor Greek, there is neither slave nor free, there is no male and female, for you are all one in Christ Jesus. And if you are Christ's, then you are Abraham's offspring, heirs according to promise." God told Abraham he would be the father of many nations (not Israel only) and that through his offspring (Jesus) all the nations of the earth would be blessed (Gen. 12:3, 22:18, etc.).

In fact, the very language used for Israel in the Old Testament is used by Peter and applied to the church.

"But you are a chosen race, a royal priesthood, a holy nation, a people for his own possession, that you may proclaim the excellencies of him who called you out of darkness into his marvelous light," (1 Pet. 2:9).

Did you know there are Palestinian Christians? That's right; Palestinian Christians. That may come as a shock to some people, but it's true. There are also Jewish Christians. We cannot broad-brush people solely based on their nationality. Nor can we let misinterpreted passages of Scripture cloud our minds. We must understand the Bible clearly. All believers are one in Christ. Listen to what Peter said after his encounter with Cornelius:

So Peter opened his mouth and said: “Truly I understand that God shows no partiality, but in every nation anyone who fears him and does what is right is acceptable to him," (Acts 10:34-35).

After hearing Peter's story, the church in Jerusalem responded by saying, “Then to the Gentiles also God has granted repentance that leads to life,” (Acts 11:18).

God has made the two one. He has broken down the wall of separation (Eph. 2:14) and has grafted Gentiles into His family (Rom. 11:17).

The Promised Land

The land of Palestine is a very touchy subject. I know I am treading on sacred ground here (pun intended). But I am going to say something that may shock some people. The modern state of Israel does not have a divine right to the land of Palestine. Gasp! I realize that there are all kinds of eschatological views on this subject, which I am not going to address, however, Christians seem to forget that the promises God made to Israel concerning the land were conditional. That's right; they were conditional. If Israel followed the Lord and kept His commandments they would be blessed, but if they disobeyed, they would be exiled from the land. And this is exactly what happened with the Assyrian and Babylonian captivities. So why would the modern state of Israel which doesn't keep God's covenants, and has for the most part rejected their Messiah, have a divine right to the land? Again, the promises were based upon obedience to the covenant God made with them.

Moreover, the temporal land promises were actually fulfilled. Wait a minute. The land promises were fulfilled? Yes, they were fulfilled. Let's look at a few passages of Scripture.

"Thus the Lord gave to Israel all the land that he swore to give to their fathers. And they took possession of it, and they settled there. And the Lord gave them rest on every side just as he had sworn to their fathers… Not one word of all the good promises that the Lord had made to the house of Israel had failed; all came to pass," (Joshua 21:43, 45).

"Solomon ruled over all the kingdoms from the Euphrates to the land of the Philistines and to the border of Egypt. They brought tribute and served Solomon all the days of his life," (1 Kings 4:21).

Now don't those borders sound familiar? Yes, they do. This is exactly what God promised to give Abraham (Gen. 15:18, etc.). So before you tar and feather me, please read your Bible. God fulfilled His promise. Further, the writer of Hebrews tells us that Abraham "was looking forward to the city that has foundations, whose designer and builder is God," (Heb. 11:10). The Promised Land foreshadowed the rest believers will enjoy someday in the new heaven and the new earth (Rev. 21:1).

We must understand that the land, the temple, the choosing of Israel; all the types and shadows of the Old Testament find their fulfillment in Christ (Matt. 5:17).

Conclusion

So does Israel have the right to exist as a nation? Of course. Should they protect their borders? Yes. Do they have the right to defend themselves against unjust attacks? Absolutely! We should support Israel, but our support must be filtered through the pages of Scripture. The Bible teaches that anyone, whether Jew or Gentile, who is not a follower of Christ is under the wrath of God unless they repent and believe (John 3:36, Eph. 2:3). What Jewish people need is the gospel. It isn't about nationality; it's about spirituality, those who are united to Christ through His death and resurrection. God will always have a remnant, chosen by grace (Rom. 11:5). Therefore, the Jews are only God's chosen people in so far as they have placed their faith in Jesus the Messiah.

Pray Like a Calvinist

If you are someone who believes free will is the ultimate decisive factor in whether or not someone will be saved, I would like to ask you a question. Why bother praying for your hard-hearted loved ones? You're not praying to change God's mind, right? Doesn't He already desire their salvation? If so, and you are praying for God to change the heart of your loved one, and you believe that He can in fact overcome their resistance to the gospel, then you don't really believe in free will. Rather, Christians pray believing that God is sovereign and more than able to melt hearts of stone, and turn the vilest of sinners into lovers of Christ. You see, when it comes to prayer, all Christians pray like Calvinists.

Inconsistency

I cannot tell you how many times I have heard Arminians (or anyone who opposes Reformed theology) pray things like, "Oh Lord please change his heart!" Or say things such as, "We cannot convert anyone, all we can do is share the gospel and pray. Only the Holy Spirit can change the heart." Wait a second...what did you just say? That sounds an awful lot like Calvinism to me.

I just want to go on record as saying that I agree with these sentiments wholeheartedly. They are entirely biblical. Only God can change a person's heart. The problem is, it doesn't follow consistently with Arminian theology.

Simply put, those who promote free will and reject the doctrines of grace believe that God is "trying" to save everyone, but it is up to each individual to exercise their will and respond to the gospel. Yes, everyone is commanded to respond to the gospel, but as I addressed in a previous post, this doesn't mean unconverted people have the ability to do so. Jesus said that no one has the ability to come to Him unless the Father grants them that ability, (John 6:44, 65). The real question Arminians need to answer is why some respond to the gospel and others do not. This is their Achilles heel.

When someone with no desire for Christ hears the gospel, what is it that changes their mind exactly? Do they come to Christ on their own? Of course not; all Arminians believe that it is impossible to be saved apart from the grace of God. They just don't go far enough. They say grace is necessary for salvation, but not sufficient. The problem here, is that if everyone receives what they call "prevenient grace" why is this grace effectual in the hearts of some and ineffectual in others? What exactly makes someone willing? It seems like the only logical response is to say the human will has the ultimate decisive power. God's grace doesn't get the job done. You may have heard preachers say, "God is voting for you, and Satan is voting against you, but you have the final vote. If this is true, then salvation is contingent upon the human will, not upon God.

In the final analysis, although Arminians would never say this, this makes God powerless. He may desire to save someone, but is unable to do so because their free will thwarts Him. This makes man sovereign because he can thwart the very purposes of Almighty God. Again, Arminians wouldn't say this, but this is the logical conclusion of their theology.

Prayer

The irony comes into play when those who espouse this kind of philosophy pray for God to save someone. Doesn't that require God to violate a person's free will? If they believe prayer can actually change someone's heart, then they are conceding that God intervenes by His sovereign power to change the disposition of men's hearts, yet this is antithetical to free-willism.

Those who oppose Reformed theology often accuse us of futility when it comes to prayer. The argument goes something like this: "Why do you Calvinists bother praying at all? If God has chosen from all eternity to save someone; He's going to save them no matter what. So why bother praying for their salvation? Why bother even preaching the gospel?" This kind of reasoning shows a fundamental misunderstanding of what Reformed theology teaches. We believe that God uses means to accomplish His eternal purposes. So God may have chosen to save Johnny unconditionally before the foundation of the world, but my prayers and witness may be the means by which Johnny is brought into the kingdom. He has not only ordained Johnny's salvation, but the means by which it is brought about. No one knows the identity of the elect; in fact, the identity of the elect is totally irrelevant to evangelism. We simply do what the Bible tells us to do. We preach the gospel and command people to repent and believe. Faith comes by hearing (Rom. 10:17) so God uses the means of preaching and prayer to bring about the salvation of His elect people.

"For Jews demand signs and Greeks seek wisdom, but we preach Christ crucified, a stumbling block to Jews and folly to Gentiles, but to those who are called, both Jews and Greeks, Christ the power of God and the wisdom of God," 1 Cor. 1:22-24.

What is it in this passage that makes the preaching of Christ crucified cease to be a stumbling block or foolishness? "...those who are called," that's the difference. To the ones who are called, Christ crucified is no longer foolishness, but wisdom. When God calls someone unto salvation, He does so effectually (John 6:37, Rom. 8:30).

Conclusion

So if you're an Arminian and you are praying for a change of heart in the life of an unbeliever, I commend you. Just be aware that it is inconsistent with your theology. You're actually praying like a Calvinist; like a Christian ought to pray, because we trust that God is omnipotent. He is able to remove hearts of stone and replace them with hearts of flesh (Ezek. 36:26). We pray with confidence knowing that nothing is impossible for God. No amount of resistance to the gospel can hinder the power of the Holy Spirit. Whether the hardest atheist or the most wicked murderer, no one is beyond the grace of God.