Many non-Reformed people believe in the doctrine of “prevenient grace.” This is a grace that removes the effect of the Fall – the Fall resulting in this per John Wesley:
“I believe that Adam, before his fall, had such freedom of will, that he might choose either good or evil; but that, since the fall, no child of man has a natural power to choose anything that is truly good. Yet I know (and who does not?) that man has still freedom of will in things of indifferent nature” (Works of Wesley, 10:350)
Wesley believed in the effects of the Fall – the effect that no man had the inherent ability to say “yes” to the Gospel. He also, though, believed in prevenient grace, which, per the book The Cross and Salvation: The Doctrine of Salvation (Foundations of Evangelical Theology), by Bruce Demarest, states:
Arminians maintain that “prevenient grace,” a benefit that flows from Christ’s death on the cross, neutralizes human depravity and restores to pre-Christians everywhere the ability to heed God’s general call to salvation. Prevenient grace and the universal call either may be accepted or rejected. Since God restores to all the ability to respond favorably to spiritual promptings, the determining factor as to whether persons heed the Gospel call is their own free decision. (page 208)
The Scriptural basis for this essential change in man’s very nature from the man Wesley describes as unable to truly choose good, to being freed to return to the state Adam was in before the Fall through Christ’s work on the cross is found……..
Still looking……….
Can’t find it………….
Can you?
Just asking………??
Yeah, have you never read 2 Galations. It is a really good book full of great Arminian doctrine. Of course it may not be in YOUR Bible, but we can still assume it to be true because I know it is true in my heart. Just don’t remember that one verse that goes something like, “The heart is deceitful above all things and beyond cure” (Jer 17:9). Well, now that I have proven you officially wrong I am going to go eat lunch and thank highly of myself for defeating one more Calvinist!
Have a great day!
Adam
Let’s read it together, then (I assume you mean the second chapter of Galatians…), from the ESV:
2:1 Then after fourteen years I went up again to Jerusalem with Barnabas, taking Titus along with me. 2 I went up because of a revelation and set before them (though privately before those who seemed influential) the gospel that I proclaim among the Gentiles, in order to make sure I was not running or had not run in vain. 3 But even Titus, who was with me, was not forced to be circumcised, though he was a Greek. 4 Yet because of false brothers secretly brought in—who slipped in to spy out our freedom that we have in Christ Jesus, so that they might bring us into slavery— 5 to them we did not yield in submission even for a moment, so that the truth of the gospel might be preserved for you. 6 And from those who seemed to be influential (what they were makes no difference to me; God shows no partiality)—those, I say, who seemed influential added nothing to me. 7 On the contrary, when they saw that I had been entrusted with the gospel to the uncircumcised, just as Peter had been entrusted with the gospel to the circumcised 8 (for he who worked through Peter for his apostolic ministry to the circumcised worked also through me for mine to the Gentiles), 9 and when James and Cephas and John, who seemed to be pillars, perceived the grace that was given to me, they gave the right hand of fellowship to Barnabas and me, that we should go to the Gentiles and they to the circumcised. 10 Only, they asked us to remember the poor, the very thing I was eager to do.
11 But when Cephas came to Antioch, I opposed him to his face, because he stood condemned. 12 For before certain men came from James, he was eating with the Gentiles; but when they came he drew back and separated himself, fearing the circumcision party. 13 And the rest of the Jews acted hypocritically along with him, so that even Barnabas was led astray by their hypocrisy. 14 But when I saw that their conduct was not in step with the truth of the gospel, I said to Cephas before them all, “If you, though a Jew, live like a Gentile and not like a Jew, how can you force the Gentiles to live like Jews?”
15 We ourselves are Jews by birth and not Gentile sinners; 16 yet we know that a person is not justified by works of the law but through faith in Jesus Christ, so we also have believed in Christ Jesus, in order to be justified by faith in Christ and not by works of the law, because by works of the law no one will be justified.
17 But if, in our endeavor to be justified in Christ, we too were found to be sinners, is Christ then a servant of sin? Certainly not! 18 For if I rebuild what I tore down, I prove myself to be a transgressor. 19 For through the law I died to the law, so that I might live to God. 20 I have been crucified with Christ. It is no longer I who live, but Christ who lives in me. And the life I now live in the flesh I live by faith in the Son of God, who loved me and gave himself for me. 21 I do not nullify the grace of God, for if righteousness were through the law, then Christ died for no purpose.
I am officially confused as to how this chapter refutes Calvinism. If you could educate me with specifics, I’d appreciate it.
Thanks for stopping by.
umm…this is your son-in-law Adam and I was just being sarcastic. I really did mean 2 Galations because it was a joke. Sorry for the confusion…but I will have to say, I had a pretty good laugh when I started to leave your comment.
Anyways, have a great day and see for Thanksgiving!
Hm.
We’ll have to get you an ESV…at least the ESV spells “Galatians” correctly…..
Hi Jeff!
I have a few Arminian friends who enjoy discussing theology, and the thing that frustrates me is the point you made in this blog… While I consistently offer Scripture verses for every statement I make, they offer none. Part of the problem I think is that Arminianism is a result of secular humanism infiltrating the church. In public schools children under ten are agressively indoctrinated in humanistic thought, and these ideas become what Francis Schaeffer referred to as underlying presuppositions–what we commonly call worldview today.
Because these presuppostions are the subconscious gateway to the mind, they are not questioned. I recently sat in a Sunday school class where I asked if God loves everybody. The class offered a unamimous ‘yes’ in response. When I read verses in the Psalms and Proverbs stating that God ‘loves the righteous and hates the wicked’ and several like that, they say what most people say: “Well we know it doesn’t really mean that, so it must mean that God hates sin.” When you spend 13+ years in a school where you are taught a humanistic worldview, then you interpret the Bible through that lens.
This is my first visit to your blog–I will be returning.
Thanks for stopping by.
Diane, I don’t know that we can blame Arminianism completely upon the government schools – the issue has existed since long before there was such an entity, no? It would appear that the issue, when boiled down, is twofold: 1) Man’s inherent desire to retain some form of autonomy, no matter how small, over his “free will,” and 2) A well-meant, but misguided, desire to protect the justice and goodness of God (“How can God hold anybody responsible if they aren’t “free” to respond? That’s not fair!?!?!?” Of course, Paul addresses this very issue in Romans 9).
When asking people – as I have done in past Sunday Schools at the Arminian church I used to attend, “Is God sovereign?” they always answer “Yes.” When you dig deeper they’ll say He is sovereign over everything. Going even farther, though, they will then deny that God can be (or is even “allowed” to be (!)) sovereign over man’s will. I will then counter that in that case, God is not sovereign. They’ll say He is. I’ll then say, “So He’s sovereign over everything except those things He isn’t sovereign over, like the “free will” of man?” “Well, yes.” They just don’t understand the inherent contradiction in their own statements because they so desperately want man to be free – even free from God. It’s like the several people I’ve heard who expound that “nothing” can separate us from the love of God (Rom. 8) – except ourselves. Are we, then “nothing?” To be consistent, they would have to affirm that, but of course, they won’t.
Thanks again and God Bless.
Hi Jeff,
I agree with you completely. You correctly point out the motives for believing in the free will of man. I didn’t mean to say that Arminianism can be blamed completely on public schools. It actually began as a philosophy back in the 4th century when a group of monks in Africa decided to come up with a compromise between Calvinism which was not popular and Pelagianism. Now it is known as Semi-Pelagianism or Amimianism, since Arminius popularlized it during the Reformation. I’m sure you already know all that.
But the public schools do play a major role by indoctrinating students in humanist philosophy while a child’s worldview is still being formed. They are taught principles of the Enlightenment that are based on the supposition that man is born free. As students incorporate this into their worldview, it becomes a “self-evident truth” that cannot be questioned. Add to that the fact that they confuse what is voluntary with true freedom. The fact that something is voluntary creates a very powerful illusion of freedom. So when we take the two motives you pointed out, plus indoctrination in false presuppositions, plus a powerful illusion that supports the theory, it is a wonder that anybody believes in the sovereignty of God.
Agreed. We began homescholing in 1992, to much consternation by the local government school.
As Voddie Baucham says, “If you send your children to Caesar’s schools, don’t be surprised when they come back as Romans.”
Thanks.
Good writing helping me to understand. Waiting for your next article.