Critical Spirit, Cancel Culture, and Cage Stage: How to Know if You Are Building Up or Simply Bullying?

“Let no corrupting talk come out of your mouths, but only such as is good for building up, as fits the occasion, that it may give grace to those who hear.” — Ephesians 4:29

Introduction

The church has always been called to contend for the faith. Jude exhorts believers to “contend earnestly for the faith once for all delivered to the saints” (Jude 3). Paul publicly corrected Peter when the truth of the gospel was at stake (Gal. 2:11–14). Jesus Himself rebuked false teachers and religious hypocrisy. Biblical Christianity is not a religion of compromise where truth is sacrificed for the sake of peace.

Yet there is a profound difference between contending for the faith and cultivating a contentious spirit.

In recent years, social media has amplified a troubling phenomenon among Christians. Theological disagreements have increasingly become opportunities for public humiliation, personal attacks, guilt-by-association, and relentless criticism. Some Christians appear to find greater satisfaction in exposing error than in proclaiming Christ. Others seem more eager to cancel fellow believers than to restore them.

Ironically, many who passionately defend sound doctrine often fail to demonstrate one of the very doctrines they claim to cherish — the transforming grace of God.

This essay is not a call to abandon discernment or theological conviction. Rather, it is an invitation to examine our hearts. Are we building Christ’s church, or merely bruising Christ’s people?

When Conviction Becomes a Critical Spirit

Every believer should develop discernment. Scripture repeatedly warns against false teachers and destructive doctrines (Acts 20:28–31; 2 Peter 2:1–3).

But discernment can slowly degenerate into suspicion.

A critical spirit does not merely identify error — it begins looking for error everywhere. It assumes the worst motives. It interprets every ambiguous statement in the least charitable way. It delights in exposing flaws rather than celebrating evidences of grace.

The critical person eventually becomes impossible to satisfy.

Every sermon is criticized.

Every church is labeled as compromised.

Every conference is suspect.

Every leader is secretly dangerous.

Every song is scrutinized as unbiblical.

Every disagreement becomes evidence of apostasy or heresy.

Such individuals often mistake perpetual criticism for spiritual maturity.

It is not.

The fruit of the Spirit includes love, joy, peace, patience, kindness, goodness, faithfulness, gentleness, and self-control (Gal. 5:22–23). Chronic cynicism appears nowhere on that list.

There is a profound difference between contending for the faith and cultivating a contentious spirit. Are we building Christ’s church, or merely bruising Christ’s people?

The Rise of Christian Cancel Culture

“Cancel culture” has become a popular phrase in broader society, but similar tendencies have emerged within Christian circles.

A pastor makes an imprecise statement. A speaker is photographed beside someone controversial. A theologian changes his position on a secondary issue.

Immediately, clips are circulated. Labels are assigned. Warnings are posted. Friendships become grounds for suspicion. Entire ministries become untouchable. Nuance disappears. Context is ignored.

The goal subtly shifts from correction to exclusion.

Certainly, there are occasions when churches must separate from persistent false teaching. Scripture commands such action in serious cases.

But not every disagreement deserves excommunication from the evangelical world.

Not every mistake is heresy.

Not every imperfect sentence deserves public outrage.

Not every brother who disagrees with us has become an enemy of Christ.

The New Testament repeatedly calls believers to bear with one another in love (Eph. 4:2), to restore gently those who have erred (Gal. 6:1), and to maintain the unity of the Spirit (Eph. 4:3).

Truth and charity are not enemies.

The Cage Stage Problem

Many Christians are familiar with the expression “cage stage.”

Originally coined humorously, it describes believers who have recently embraced a theological system and immediately become aggressive advocates for it. Friends become projects. Conversations become debates. Every Bible study becomes an opportunity to convince others.

They have discovered something wonderful.

Unfortunately, they have not yet learned humility.

This phenomenon is not unique to Calvinism, despite the term’s historical association there. Arminians experience it. Provisionists experience it. Cessationists experience it.

Anyone who becomes captivated by a theological framework can become intoxicated with being “right.”

Knowledge increases. Patience decreases.

Certainty expands. Compassion contracts.

The problem is not theological passion.

The problem is spiritual immaturity.

Paul warned precisely about this danger: “Knowledge puffs up, but love builds up” (1 Cor. 8:1).

Knowledge is essential. Love determines how that knowledge is used.

The Difference Between Contending and Bullying

Theological bullying often disguises itself as courage.

It says:

“I just tell the truth.”

“I refuse to compromise.”

“I’m exposing error.”

Or perhaps you simply enjoy winning arguments.

Biblical correction has identifiable characteristics.

· It seeks restoration rather than humiliation.

· It addresses ideas before attacking people.

· It gives others an opportunity to clarify.

· It avoids exaggeration.

· It refuses to bear false witness.

· It does not delight in another believer’s failure.

· It grieves over division instead of celebrating it.

Bullying, by contrast, seeks applause from one’s own tribe.

· It mocks.

· It shames.

· It ridicules.

· It labels.

· It caricatures.

· It isolates.

· It weaponizes social media.

· Its audience is rarely the person being corrected.

· Its audience is everyone else.

Questions Worth Asking

Before posting another critique, consider these questions.

Am I trying to help this person grow, or merely prove that I am right?

Would I say these same words face to face?

Have I represented this person’s actual beliefs fairly?

Have I read their strongest arguments or only their critics?

Have I prayed for them as much as I have criticized them?

Would Christ recognize my tone as consistent with His character?

Am I defending God’s glory — or protecting my own reputation?

These questions do not weaken conviction. They purify it.

Strong Convictions Require Strong Character

Church history is filled with courageous defenders of truth.

Many evangelical leaders have faithfully defended the authority of Scripture against modern skepticism.

Their examples remind us that there are times when firm opposition is necessary.

Yet history also reminds us that conviction without humility can become harsh, and zeal without love can wound fellow believers unnecessarily. The New Testament repeatedly joins truth and love together rather than treating them as competing virtues (Eph. 4:15).

The strongest defenders of biblical truth should therefore strive to display the character of Christ as faithfully as they defend the doctrines of Christ.

Building Up the Church

The New Testament repeatedly emphasizes edification. Paul uses the language of “building up” throughout his letters. The goal of teaching is not merely intellectual victory. The goal is mature disciples.

Healthy churches produce believers who are both doctrinally grounded and spiritually gracious.

They can disagree without becoming disagreeable.

They can debate without becoming divisive.

They can expose error without destroying people.

They know that every Christian — including themselves — is still being sanctified. Humility leaves room for correction. Love leaves room for patience. Grace leaves room for growth.

Conclusion

Every generation faces doctrinal challenges that require courage and clarity. Christians should never abandon truth, dilute the gospel, or pretend that theological differences do not matter.

But Scripture calls us to speak “the truth in love” (Eph. 4:15), to correct opponents with gentleness (2 Tim. 2:24–26), and to let every word be seasoned with grace (Col. 4:6). These commands are not optional virtues reserved for agreeable people; they are marks of Christian maturity.

Before pressing “post” or “publish,” posting another critique, or entering another debate, every believer should pause and ask a simple question:

Will these words strengthen Christ’s church, or merely satisfy my desire to win?

If our theology consistently produces contempt, suspicion, mockery, and division, then our understanding may be more complete than our character.

The church desperately needs men and women who possess both theological depth and Christlike humility — people who love truth enough to defend it, and love people enough to defend it with grace.

May our convictions be firm, our words be gracious, and our lives demonstrate that the gospel we proclaim has first transformed us.

The following essay is written from a Non-Calvinist evangelical perspective and reflects arguments commonly advanced by Arminian, Provisionist, Free Grace, Wesleyan, Free Will Baptist, Pentecostal, or Molinist theologians. Faithful Christians disagree on these issues, and many godly believers remain Calvinists.

While we disagree with many of the finer points of their theology, we still consider many in the Reformed-Calvinist camp as brothers and sisters in Christ. Hence, we ought to become bearers of grace towards fellow believers who differ from our theological persuasions.

Introduction

Throughout church history, theological movements have spread not only through public debate but also through gradual influence within local congregations. Many evangelical churches today have experienced an increasing acceptance of Reformed theology without intentional discussion or congregational discernment. Critics have described this phenomenon as “Stealth Calvinism” — the quiet introduction of Calvinistic doctrines into churches that historically held different convictions regarding salvation, human responsibility, and the universal offer of the gospel.

This essay does not suggest that Calvinists are enemies of the gospel or that they should be treated with hostility. Many Calvinists are sincere fellow believers who love Christ and faithfully preach His death and resurrection. The concern arises when significant doctrinal changes occur without transparency, open theological dialogue, or respect for the church’s existing doctrinal identity.

How, then, can church leaders wisely guard their congregations?

1. Teach Your Church What It Already Believes

The greatest defense against theological confusion is not controversy but biblical instruction.

Many churches become vulnerable because members have never been systematically taught their own doctrinal convictions. If believers cannot explain why they believe Christ died for all, why God genuinely desires everyone to be saved (1 Timothy 2:3–6), or why the gospel invitation is sincerely offered to every person (Isaiah 55:1; Revelation 22:17), they can easily be persuaded by confident presentations of Calvinistic theology.

Pastors should intentionally teach:

• The biblical doctrine of salvation
• God’s universal love
• Human responsibility
• Prevenient or enabling grace (where held)
• The free offer of the gospel
• Assurance grounded in Christ

Healthy churches do not merely react to error; they proactively disciple believers in sound doctrine.

Paul instructed Timothy: “Preach the word… For the time will come when they will not endure sound doctrine” (2 Timothy 4:2–3).

Strong teaching is the first line of defense.

2. Practice Doctrinal Transparency

Every church should clearly communicate its doctrinal convictions.

Problems arise when teachers introduce significant theological positions without acknowledging that they differ from the church’s historic beliefs.

If a church has historically affirmed that Christ died for every person, it should not quietly adopt limited atonement without congregational discussion.

If church leaders begin teaching unconditional election in the Calvinistic sense, they should honestly explain that this represents a significant theological development.

Transparency promotes trust.

Paul wrote: “We have renounced secret and shameful ways; we do not use deception” (2 Corinthians 4:2).

Church members deserve to know what is being taught and why.

3. Evaluate Every Teaching by Scripture Rather Than Popular Teachers

Modern technology has made theological influence more accessible than ever.

Books, podcasts, conferences, YouTube channels, and social media personalities have introduced countless believers to Calvinistic theology. While these resources can be valuable, no teacher should become the final authority.

The Bereans provide the biblical model: “They received the word with all readiness of mind, and searched the Scriptures daily, whether those things were so” (Acts 17:11).

Churches should encourage members to ask questions such as:

• Does this teaching fit the whole counsel of Scripture?
• Does it harmonize with God’s revealed character?
• Does it preserve both divine sovereignty and genuine human responsibility?
• Does it reflect the plain reading of passages inviting all people to believe?

Scripture — not celebrity theologians — must remain the church’s highest authority.

4. Equip Leaders to Recognize Doctrinal Drift

Doctrinal change often occurs gradually.

It may begin with recommended reading, guest speakers, small-group studies, or subtle shifts in terminology. Over time, these influences can reshape the theological identity of a congregation.

Church elders and ministry leaders should therefore study:

• The history of evangelical theology
• Calvinism and Non-Calvinist perspectives
• Historical Baptist, Wesleyan, Free Church, Pentecostal, or other relevant traditions
• Major biblical texts concerning salvation

Paul warned the Ephesian elders: “Savage wolves will come in among you… even from your own number men will arise and distort the truth” (Acts 20:29–30).

The solution is not suspicion of every new idea but careful discernment rooted in Scripture and informed theological understanding.

5. Preserve Unity While Defending Conviction

Perhaps the greatest mistake is assuming that defending doctrine requires attacking people.

Scripture commands believers to “speak the truth in love” (Ephesians 4:15).

Churches should distinguish between sincere brothers and sisters who hold Calvinistic convictions and situations where a church’s doctrinal commitments are being changed without openness or accountability.

Healthy responses include:

• Respectful theological discussion
• Patient teaching
• Open forums for questions
• Careful examination of Scripture
• Transparent leadership
• Maintaining the church’s stated doctrinal standards

The goal is never division for its own sake but faithfulness to God’s Word.

As Jude exhorts believers: “Contend earnestly for the faith which was once for all delivered to the saints” (Jude 3).

Contending for the faith should always be characterized by humility, honesty, and Christian love.

Conclusion

Every generation of Christians must guard the truth entrusted to it. Whether the challenge comes from Calvinism, liberal theology, prosperity teaching, or any other doctrinal movement, the answer remains the same: careful biblical teaching, transparent leadership, informed discernment, and Christlike love.

Churches should neither fear theological discussion nor embrace doctrinal change uncritically. Instead, they should cultivate congregations that know the Scriptures well, understand their own convictions, and evaluate every teaching in light of God’s Word.

Faithful shepherds protect Christ’s flock not by creating unnecessary conflict, but by feeding God’s people with the truth, encouraging honest dialogue, and ensuring that any significant doctrinal developments are examined openly and carefully under the authority of Scripture.

10 Reasons Why Many Christians Are Leaving Calvinism

The following essay is written from a Non-Calvinist evangelical perspective and reflects arguments commonly advanced by Arminian, Provisionist, Free Grace, Wesleyan, Free Will Baptist, Pentecostal, or Molinist theologians. Faithful Christians disagree on these issues, and many godly believers remain Calvinists. The purpose here is to explain why many Christians have concluded that Calvinism does not best represent the biblical portrait of God, salvation, and the Gospel.

While we disagree with many of the finer points of their theology, we still consider many in the Reformed-Calvinist camp as brothers and sisters in Christ. Hence, we ought to become bearers of grace towards fellow believers who differ from our theological persuasions.

Introduction

Over the last several decades, Calvinism has experienced a remarkable resurgence within evangelical Christianity. Through influential pastors, seminaries, conferences, and publishing ministries, Reformed theology has attracted countless believers seeking a deeper understanding of God’s sovereignty and grace.

Yet alongside this resurgence, many Christians — including pastors, theologians, missionaries, and former Calvinists — have begun moving away from Calvinism. Their departure is not usually motivated by emotional reactions, ignorance, or a rejection of God’s sovereignty. Rather, many have concluded through careful study of Scripture that Calvinism does not adequately account for the full biblical witness regarding God’s character, human responsibility, and the universal offer of salvation.

The following are ten of the most common reasons why Christians leave Calvinism.

1. They Become Convinced That God Truly Loves Every Person

One of the most powerful reasons Christians leave Calvinism is their conviction that Scripture presents God’s love as universal rather than selective.

John 3:16 declares: “For God so loved the world…”

Likewise, 1 Timothy 2:4 teaches that God “desires all people to be saved and to come to the knowledge of the truth.”

2 Peter 3:9 states that God is “not wishing that any should perish, but that all should reach repentance.”

Many former Calvinists struggle to reconcile these passages with unconditional election, which teaches that God chose only certain individuals for salvation before creation while passing over the rest.

The logical question becomes: If God genuinely desires all people to be saved, why would He withhold from many the very grace necessary for salvation?

Many Christians conclude that the simplest reading of Scripture is that God’s salvific love extends to every human being.

2. They Believe the Gospel Invitation Is Meant for Everyone

The Bible repeatedly presents salvation as a genuine invitation extended to all.

Isaiah 55:1: “Come, everyone who thirsts.”

Revelation 22:17: “Let the one who wishes take the water of life without cost.”

Jesus declared: “Whoever believes in Him shall not perish but have eternal life” (John 3:16).

The word “whoever” appears naturally and repeatedly throughout Scripture.

Many Christians find it difficult to harmonize these universal invitations with a system in which only the elect have been given the ability to respond positively.

If God sincerely invites all people to come, many argue, then all people must possess a God-given opportunity to respond.

3. They Find Unconditional Election Difficult to Reconcile With Divine Justice

Romans 2:11 teaches: “God shows no partiality.”

Acts 10:34 says: “God is no respecter of persons.”

Many former Calvinists ask whether unconditional election effectively introduces favoritism into God’s dealings with humanity.

If two equally guilty sinners stand before God and one receives irresistible saving grace while the other does not, what explains the difference?

Calvinism answers that God’s sovereign choice alone explains it.

Many Christians become convinced that Scripture portrays God as judging people according to their response to His revelation rather than according to a secret decree established before birth.

4. They Reject the Idea That God Determines Every Human Decision

Many Calvinists affirm meticulous divine sovereignty, the belief that all events ultimately occur according to God’s eternal decree.

Yet Scripture frequently portrays human beings making meaningful choices.

Joshua declared: “Choose this day whom you will serve” (Joshua 24:15).

Jesus lamented over Jerusalem: “How often would I have gathered your children together… and you were unwilling” (Matthew 23:37).

Many Christians conclude that these passages imply genuine human freedom rather than merely predetermined responses.

They believe God’s sovereignty is great enough to allow authentic human choices without losing control of history.

5. They Believe Calvinism Makes God Too Closely Connected to Evil

One of the most serious concerns former Calvinists raise involves the problem of evil.

James 1:13 says: “God cannot be tempted by evil, and He Himself does not tempt anyone.”

1 John 1:5 declares: “God is light, and in Him there is no darkness at all.”

Many Christians struggle with the implication that every sinful act ultimately unfolds according to an eternal divine decree.

If every murder, betrayal, abuse, and act of wickedness was specifically ordained before creation, many ask whether God’s holiness becomes difficult to defend.

They conclude that Scripture better supports the view that God permits evil without determining evil.

6. They Find Limited Atonement Incompatible With the New Testament

Calvinism traditionally teaches that Christ died specifically and exclusively for the elect.

However, many Christians see the New Testament using broader language.

1 John 2:2 states: “He Himself is the propitiation for our sins, and not for ours only but also for those of the whole world.”

Hebrews 2:9 teaches that Jesus tasted death “for everyone.”

2 Corinthians 5:14–15 likewise emphasizes the universal provision of Christ’s work.

Many believers conclude that Christ’s atonement is sufficient for all and intended for all, though effective only for those who believe.

7. They Believe Faith Is a Genuine Human Response Rather Than an Irresistible Result

Ephesians 2:8 teaches salvation by grace through faith.

Throughout the Book of Acts people are repeatedly commanded to repent and believe.

Acts 16:31: “Believe in the Lord Jesus, and you will be saved.”

Many Christians observe that Scripture consistently treats faith as a meaningful response to God’s gracious initiative.

While they affirm that no one can come to Christ apart from grace (John 6:44), they reject the conclusion that grace must therefore be irresistible.

Instead, they see grace as enabling rather than coercing faith.

8. They Read Romans 9 Differently

Romans 9 is often regarded as Calvinism’s strongest biblical text.

Yet many former Calvinists have come to believe that Romans 9 primarily concerns God’s historical choice of nations and covenant roles rather than His unconditional selection of individuals for heaven or hell.

Paul’s examples of Pharaoh, Jacob, Esau, and Israel concern God’s redemptive plan through history.

Romans 9–11 culminates with God’s desire to show mercy to all (Romans 11:32).

Many Christians conclude that Romans 9 is addressing service and vocation within salvation history rather than individual predestination to eternal destinies.

9. They See the Early Church as Less Calvinistic Than Often Claimed

Many believers discover that the earliest Christian writers emphasized human responsibility, free response, and universal Gospel proclamation.

Although the church fathers were not modern Arminians, neither were they consistently Calvinistic in the later Reformed sense.

This historical observation leads some Christians to question whether strict Calvinism accurately reflects the consensus of early Christianity.

They conclude that doctrines such as irresistible grace and unconditional reprobation developed later rather than being universally taught from the apostolic age.

10. They Believe the Character of God Revealed in Jesus Points to a Non-Calvinist Portrait of God

Ultimately, many Christians leave Calvinism because of their understanding of God’s character.

Jesus is the perfect revelation of the Father (John 14:9).

Throughout the Gospels, Christ welcomes sinners, weeps over the lost, invites all to come, and demonstrates compassion toward those who reject Him.

Luke 19:41 records Jesus weeping over Jerusalem.

Matthew 11:28 says: “Come to Me, all who are weary and burdened.”

Many Christians conclude that the God revealed in Jesus genuinely desires the salvation of every person and therefore provides every person with a real opportunity to respond.

For them, the “whosoever will” passages are not rhetorical invitations but sincere expressions of God’s heart for the world.

Conclusion

The movement away from Calvinism is not primarily a movement away from God’s sovereignty. Rather, it is often a movement toward a different understanding of sovereignty — one that seeks to preserve both God’s absolute rule and humanity’s genuine responsibility.

Former Calvinists frequently testify that they continue to affirm God’s omnipotence, omniscience, grace, and providence. What changes is their understanding of how these truths relate to election, free will, and the Gospel invitation.

At the heart of the discussion stands a simple question:

Does God genuinely desire every person to be saved and provide every person a meaningful opportunity to respond to the Gospel?

For many Christians, their answer to that question has led them beyond Calvinism and toward a broader vision of God’s redemptive love — a vision summarized in the words of Scripture:

“Whoever will call upon the name of the Lord will be saved” (Romans 10:13).

Selected Sources

1. Roger E. Olson, Against Calvinism: Rescuing God’s Reputation from Radical Reformed Theology (Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 2011). Olson’s work is one of the best-known evangelical critiques of Calvinism and argues that certain forms of Calvinism misrepresent God’s character.
2. Roger E. Olson, Arminian Theology: Myths and Realities (Downers Grove: InterVarsity Press, 2006). Frequently cited as a modern defense of classical Arminian theology.
3. Leighton Flowers, The Potter’s Promise: A Biblical Defense of Traditional Soteriology (2017). Flowers, a former Calvinist minister, recounts his theological journey out of Calvinism and presents non-Calvinist interpretations of Romans 9, John 6, and Ephesians 1.
4. The historic Calvinist position is classically summarized in the doctrines associated with the Canons of Dort.

Footnotes

1. John 3:16; 1 Timothy 2:4; 2 Peter 3:9.
2. Isaiah 55:1; Revelation 22:17; Romans 10:13.
3. Romans 2:11; Acts 10:34.
4. Joshua 24:15; Matthew 23:37.
5. James 1:13; 1 John 1:5.
6. 1 John 2:2; Hebrews 2:9; 2 Corinthians 5:14–15.
7. Ephesians 2:8–9; Acts 16:31; John 6:44.
8. Romans 9–11, especially Romans 11:32.
9. Roger E. Olson, Against Calvinism; Leighton Flowers, The Potter’s Promise.

There are at least two general streams of soteriological thoughts within the Evangelical Family — the Evangelical Calvinist View (decreetal theology) and the Evangelical Non-Calvinist View (whosoever will theology).

Evangelical Calvinist Views

Human nature is totally sinful and unable to save himself without God’s grace. The work of the Spirit is needed for human salvation. The gift of salvation is given only to the elect (the pre-chosen ones) and there are no conditions.

God loves only the elect. He desires to save only the elect.

Christ died only for all the elect. And the elect will surely be made to believe.

A person goes to heaven because God chose him. A person goes to hell because God did not choose him.

Salvation is God’s work (grace) from beginning to end. No human part.

Humans have no free will at all (determinist view) or they have constrained free will (compatibilist view). God controls and pre-determines all that humans will do by decreeing their actions in advance. All behaviors, beliefs, and desires are already fixed and pre-determined. It was pre-determined that everything would happen exactly as it would.

God is sovereign, in tight control of all and so ultimately the cause of all. God controls actions as God controls desires and their attendant thoughts and actions.

Salvation through predestination for the elect has been decided before the world began and even before humans were born. God grants the gift of salvation only to the elect, and only the elect ones are enabled to believe. The rest of humanity are not given the ability to believe at all.

Evangelical Non-Calvinist Views*

Human nature is totally sinful and unable to save himself without God’s grace. The work of the Spirit is needed for human salvation. The gift of salvation is offered to all people; the only condition is belief in Christ.

God loves every person in the world. He desires to save all people.

Christ died for all people. But only those who believe will be saved.

A person goes to heaven because he chose God. A person goes to hell because he did not choose God.

Salvation is both God’s initiative (grace) and human response (faith).

Humans have free will, and have the freedom to choose without external coercion, and their choices are not pre-determined. Free will allows the existence of the concepts of “good” and “evil” because people have the capacity to do either of those with the ability to have chosen the alternative. Forced love is not love at all.

God sovereignly delegated free choice to His creatures. So human freedom is a God- given power to make moral choices.

Salvation is by grace through faith in Christ. God offers the gift of salvation to everyone and all people are invited to respond in faith. Whosoever believes will be saved and given new life. We cannot initiate, attain, or be the source of our own salvation but we can receive it.

*Non-Calvinist Evangelical Christians are fellow born-again believers from various theological persuasions, which include Provisionists, Molinists, Free Grace, Arminians, Free Will Baptists, General Baptists, Wesleyans, Lutherans, Pentecostals, Methodists, Mennonites, Brethren, Nazarenes, Evangelical Free, Anabaptists, Anglicans, and all believers who embrace “Whosoever Will” theologies.

In recent years, what is commonly called woke ideology has gained cultural influence across education, media, politics, and even churches. While the word woke originally referred to an awareness of injustice — especially racial injustice — it has increasingly come to represent a broader worldview shaped by identity politics, moral relativism, expressive individualism, and ideological activism. Christians are called to care deeply about justice, compassion, and truth. Yet they are also called to test every worldview by Scripture (1 Thess. 5:21). For that reason, thoughtful believers should carefully evaluate and, where necessary, resist aspects of woke ideology that conflict with biblical teaching.

Below are five reasons why Christians should exercise discernment and resistance.

1. Woke Ideology REVISES Truth Away from Scripture

Christian faith rests on the conviction that truth is revealed by God. Jesus declared, “Your word is truth” (John 17:17). Scripture provides the final authority for faith and practice.

Woke ideology, however, often treats truth as socially constructed rather than divinely revealed. It suggests that moral understanding arises primarily from lived experience, social location, or group identity. In this framework, truth becomes fluid and relative rather than objective and universal.

While experience matters, it cannot replace revelation. Christians believe that God — not culture — defines justice, sin, righteousness, and redemption. When any ideology shifts authority from Scripture to social consensus, believers must respond with discernment.

Faithfulness requires humility before God’s Word, not conformity to shifting cultural narratives.

2. Woke Ideology REPLACES Biblical Identity with Identity Politics

The gospel teaches that our primary identity is found in Christ: “There is neither Jew nor Greek… for you are all one in Christ Jesus” (Galatians 3:28).

This does not erase ethnic or cultural differences, but it places them under a greater spiritual unity. Christians are first and foremost children of God.

Woke ideology, by contrast, often organizes people primarily according to categories such as race, gender, sexuality, or class. These identities can become the basis for moral authority, social status, or perceived oppression. Instead of unity in Christ, society is interpreted through competing identity groups.

The danger is subtle but serious. When identity politics replaces gospel identity, believers may begin to view themselves and others through sociological labels rather than spiritual realities.

Christian unity is rooted in grace, not group membership. The church is called to model reconciliation that transcends social divisions — not reinforce them.

3. Woke Ideology REDEFINES Justice in Ways That Conflict with the Gospel

Christians are commanded to pursue justice (Micah 6:8). The Bible consistently calls believers to defend the poor, protect the vulnerable, and oppose oppression. However, biblical justice is grounded in God’s character and moral law.

Woke ideology often defines justice primarily in terms of redistributing power among social groups rather than reconciling sinners with God. It tends to frame society as a struggle between oppressors and the oppressed, where moral responsibility is assigned collectively rather than individually.

Scripture, however, teaches that sin is universal: “All have sinned and fall short of the glory of God” (Romans 3:23).

Biblical justice addresses both personal responsibility and structural wrongdoing, but it never reduces people to permanent moral categories based on group identity. Instead, it calls all people to repentance and restoration through Christ.

True justice flows from the cross, where both truth and mercy meet. ️

4. Woke Ideology RESULTS in Moral Conformity Rather Than Gospel Transformation

Another concern is the way woke ideology often promotes ideological conformity through social pressure rather than persuasion through truth. Public disagreement with certain cultural claims can result in labeling, exclusion, or reputational harm.

Christianity, by contrast, calls for transformation through repentance and renewal: “Be transformed by the renewing of your mind” (Romans 12:2).

The gospel changes hearts before it changes systems. It invites people into grace rather than coercing them into compliance. While Christians should speak against injustice, they must resist adopting methods that silence dialogue or replace compassion with condemnation.

The church must remain a place where truth is spoken in love (Ephesians 4:15), not enforced through fear.

Spiritual transformation cannot be produced by ideological pressure; it comes through the work of the Holy Spirit.

5. Woke Ideology RISKS Replacing the Gospel with Activism

Christians are called to serve the world, love their neighbors, and pursue righteousness in society. Yet activism must never replace the central message of salvation through Jesus Christ.

The apostle Paul wrote: “For I resolved to know nothing while I was with you except Jesus Christ and him crucified” (1 Corinthians 2:2).

In some contexts, churches influenced by woke ideology begin to emphasize social reform more than spiritual redemption. Important conversations about inequality or injustice can gradually overshadow the proclamation of sin, repentance, forgiveness, and eternal life.

When activism becomes central and the gospel becomes secondary, the mission of the church is distorted.

Christians must remember that social healing ultimately flows from spiritual renewal. The greatest injustice in Scripture is not inequality between people — but separation from God. Only the gospel addresses that deepest need.

Conclusion: Discernment, Not Indifference

Resisting woke ideology does not mean ignoring injustice or refusing compassion. Christians are commanded to love their neighbors, defend the vulnerable, and pursue righteousness in society. The Bible calls believers to be both truthful and merciful, courageous and humble.

However, love must be guided by truth. Any worldview — whether political, cultural, or philosophical — that contradicts biblical teaching must be evaluated carefully.

Christians are called not to follow cultural trends but to follow Christ. That means affirming what is good, rejecting what is false, and proclaiming the hope of the gospel in every generation.

Faithfulness requires wisdom, courage, and grace. And in a confused world, the church’s clearest witness remains the same: Jesus Christ is Lord — and His truth sets people free.

1. Woke Ideology REVISES Truth Away from Scripture.
2. Woke Ideology REPLACES Biblical Identity with Identity Politics.
3. Woke Ideology REDEFINES Justice in Ways That Conflict with the Gospel.
4. Woke Ideology RESULTS in Moral Conformity Rather Than Gospel Transformation.
5. Woke Ideology RISKS Replacing the Gospel with Activism.

However, in recent years, some of these young people have begun to distance themselves from Calvinism. This shift or departure from Reformed-Calvinism is an important phenomenon to note and consider, even though the reasons may vary from person to person, and the numbers are inconclusive at the moment [see sources below].

There are several reasons for this transition away from Calvinism. The most important of these are listed below.

1. Tension Between Deterministic Theology and Evangelistic Urgency.

One important factor influencing the shift away from Calvinism is the tension between a strong deterministic theology and the biblical emphasis on human responsibility. Many of those who were initially influenced by Calvinism have come to struggle with how a strong divine sovereignty squares with the universal call of the Gospel. Scriptures that speak of God’s desire for all people to be saved or of Christ’s call to “whoever believes” have led many to question whether a Reformed-Calvinistic predestinarian view of God’s sovereignty does justice to the Gospel's invitation to all sinners and broad appeal in Scripture.

2. Reconsideration of the Character of God in Calvinistic Teachings.

Tied to this was a further theological consideration of God's nature, as revealed through Jesus Christ. Younger evangelicals were beginning to wonder whether teachings on limited atonement or unconditional reprobation were consistent with the Bible’s emphasis on God’s love, mercy, and patience for all humanity. Although Calvinism has traditionally offered satisfactory answers to all of these objections, some evangelicals have come to view those answers as less satisfactory over time and have begun to consider alternative evangelical perspectives on grace and salvation.

3. Reaction to “Cage-Stage Calvinism” and Hateful Attitudes.

A further element was a social one, rather than a strictly theological one. Within the movement, “Cage-Stage Calvinism” was a time of great theological conviction and argumentative zeal, but one from which many evangelicals have not recovered. For a number of these younger evangelicals, their Calvinism came to be identified with divisive attitudes, hate-filled attitudes, arrogance, hateful online arguments, and superiority toward Non-Calvinists.

Many have come to see this time as spiritually toxic, have rejected toxic versions of Reformed-Calvinism, and have come to appreciate more humble and charitable Non-Calvinist theological perspectives.

4. Leadership Failures Within the Movement.

Another factor was leadership failures within the movement as a whole. The reputation of movements is often tied to their leadership. Several high-profile leaders have been embroiled in public scandals, and this has contributed to a lack of respect for the movement as a whole.

The disillusionment with leadership within the movement has led some to further doubts regarding Reformed-Calvinism.

5. A Renewed Interest in the Early Church.

Historical awareness has also played a role in this transition. Young Evangelicals, as they read through the Apostolic Fathers and early Church Fathers, have come across the fact that strict Augustinian-Calvinistic predestination models were not prominent in the early Church. This has had a significant effect on some.

6. Global Christianity Is Largely Non-Calvinist.

Global Christianity has also reshaped theological expectations. Engagement with vibrant churches in Africa, Asia, and Latin America revealed strong biblical commitment alongside Non-Calvinist frameworks of salvation. This exposure challenged the assumption that Calvinism represents the most historically inevitable expression of evangelical theology worldwide.

As they encountered vibrant evangelical communities that were strongly biblical, missionally active, and Non-Calvinist, this weakened their assumption that Calvinism represents the “default” mature theology of the Gospel.

7. A Shift Toward Holistic Biblical Theology.

Pastoral experience has further contributed to the transition for some leaders. Questions about the assurance of salvation, the sincerity of gospel invitations, and how to speak of God’s love for all people in preaching and counselling sometimes led pastors to conclude that alternative theological models addressed these concerns more naturally in congregational life. In some cases, they concluded that alternative theological models such as Arminianism, Molinism, Wesleyanism, and Provisionism handled these tensions more naturally.

Many who once identified strongly with the “Young, Restless, Reformed” have moved toward broader evangelical identity, confessional traditions, or a more historically rooted and less movement-centered faith. In many cases, the shift represents not a loss of conviction but a transition from theological enthusiasm shaped by conferences and online communities to convictions shaped more deeply by local church life and long-term discipleship.

Ultimately, the movement of some younger believers away from Calvinism reflects a complex combination of biblical interpretation, pastoral experience, historical awareness, and spiritual maturation. This departure from Calvinism highlights the ongoing effort within evangelical Christianity to understand how to best hold together God’s sovereignty, human responsibility, and the universal scope of the Gospel.

Read the book by Austin Fischer, “Young, Restless, No Longer Reformed: Black Holes, Love, and a Journey in and Out of Calvinism”. Cascade Books, 2014. https://a.co/d/01NkR4jx

Concluding Thoughts and Some Reflections: Healing from the Trauma of Hateful Reformed-Calvinist Theology

For many believers, theology is not merely intellectual — it is deeply personal. What we are taught about God shapes how we pray, how we hope, how we see ourselves, and how we interpret suffering. When theology presents God as distant, selective in love, or arbitrary in salvation, it can leave wounds that linger long after the doctrinal system itself has been reconsidered. In recent years, more Christians have begun speaking openly about what might be called theological trauma — especially trauma connected to harsh or distorted presentations of Reformed-Calvinist teaching. Healing from such experiences is possible, but it requires time, truth, and rediscovery of the character of God revealed in Christ.

The trauma often begins not with doctrine alone, but with how doctrine is taught. Some believers were told that God created certain people with no intention of saving them. Others were taught that Christ may not have died for everyone, or that their desire to be saved might not mean they were chosen. Instead of producing humility and assurance, these teachings sometimes produced fear, anxiety, and spiritual paralysis. Prayer became uncertain. Evangelism became confusing. Assurance felt fragile. Over time, faith itself began to feel unsafe.

One of the deepest wounds left by such harsh theological systems is the distortion of God’s character. When believers come to see God primarily as selective rather than compassionate, secretive rather than inviting, or sovereign in ways that overshadow His love, their relationship with Him can become strained. Instead of approaching God with confidence, they approach Him cautiously. Instead of resting in grace, they live with suspicion. Instead of hearing the Gospel as good news for all, they begin to wonder whether it is truly meant for them.

Healing begins with recognizing that spiritual confusion is not spiritual failure. Many who struggle after leaving rigid theological frameworks assume something is wrong with their faith. In reality, their struggle often reflects a healthy desire to reconcile what they were taught with what they see in Scripture and in the person of Jesus. Questions are not signs of rebellion; they are often signs of growth. God is not threatened by honest searching hearts.

Another important step in healing is reclaiming the biblical portrait of God’s love. Throughout Scripture, God reveals Himself as patient, compassionate, and eager to save. Jesus welcomes the weary, calls the thirsty, and invites whoever will to come. The cross stands not as a symbol of exclusion but as the clearest declaration that God’s heart is turned toward humanity. Many who once feared they might not belong discover deep freedom when they begin to see that the Gospel invitation is sincere and universal.

Community also plays a vital role in recovery. Those who experienced theological harshness often did so within environments where questioning was discouraged. Finding a church or fellowship where grace is emphasized, where Scripture is handled carefully, and where believers are treated with dignity can restore trust slowly but powerfully. Healing rarely happens in isolation. It grows in spaces where people are reminded that they are loved, heard, and welcomed.

Equally important is learning to separate God from the systems that misrepresented Him. Even when theology causes harm, God Himself remains faithful. Many believers discover that their deepest spiritual instincts — trusting that God loves all people, believing the gospel invitation is genuine, hoping for the salvation of others — were not weaknesses in their faith but reflections of Scripture itself. As these instincts are affirmed rather than suppressed, confidence in God begins to return.

Over time, what once felt like loss can become renewal. Some emerge from theological trauma with a stronger understanding of grace than they ever had before. Others develop deeper compassion for those who struggle with doubt. Still others rediscover the joy of prayer, worship, and evangelism after years of hesitation. Healing does not erase the past, but it transforms its meaning. What once felt like spiritual confinement can become the beginning of spiritual clarity.

Ultimately, recovery from harmful theological experiences is not about winning arguments or rejecting traditions. It is about rediscovering the heart of God. The same Lord who invites the weary to come to Him still speaks words of comfort today. He does not call people into fear. He calls them into life. And those who learn again to trust His goodness often find that faith, once shaken, can become deeper, freer, and more joyful than before.

Sources:

John Harris, “The Fall of New Calvinism: Father Hunger, Brands, and Lost Standards”. https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/the-fall-of-new-calvinism-father-hunger-brands/id1446645865?i=1000744864183

Austin Fischer, “Young, Restless, No Longer Reformed: Black Holes, Love, and a Journey in and Out of Calvinism”. Cascade Books, 2014. https://a.co/d/01NkR4jx

What’s Contributing to the Increase in “X-Calvinists” and Some Testimonies. https://beyondcalvinism.blogspot.com/2015/02/whats-contributing-to-increase-in-x.html

John Harris, “The Ruins of New Calvinism: How a Theological Movement Lost Its Center”. Online Article https://jonharris.substack.com?utm_source=navbar&utm_medium=web

Leighton Flowers. Soteriology 101. “Young, Restless & No Longer Reformed” YouTube https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_SJEDhAFSy4

Jordan Cooper “Is The New Calvinism Dead?” YouTube, https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=l05_V68tUGQ | In this video, Dr. Jordan Cooper discusses the movement once described as the “New Calvinism,” and the question of whether or not it exists today.

Jordan Cooper “Why So Many of the Young, Restless, and Reformed Have Abandoned Calvinism” https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=J-Yw29JviQw&t=1095s | In this video, Dr. Jordan Cooper discusses the “Young, Restless, and Reformed” movement and why so many of those involved are no longer Calvinists.

Kangaroodort “Thought Provoking Article on the Young, Restless and Reformed” Arminian Perspectives, https://arminianperspectives.wordpress.com/2013/06/19/thought-provoking-article-on-the-young-restless-and-reformed/

John Stevens “What Happened to the Young, Restless, and Reformed?” Every Movement has to Mature, Learn, Develop Change or Die. https://theaquilareport.com/what-happened-to-the-young-restless-and-reformed/

Jason Breda and Leighton Flowers, “Why Are So Many Leaving Calvinism?” Soteriology 101, YouTube https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zG1kHSJPxIQ

Baxter Kruger, “Why I Left Calvinism”, https://perichoresis.org/why-i-left-calvinism/

Alana L. “The Psychological Journey of Leaving Calvinism: 6 Years Later”, YouTube https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oTbY9-WU7hI

Austin Fischer, “Young, Restless, No Longer Reformed” a Year Later: Calvinism (Still) Isn’t Beautiful”. Patheos.Com https://www.patheos.com/blogs/rogereolson/2015/02/young-restless-no-longer-reformed-a-year-later-calvinism-still-isnt-beautiful-a-guest-post-by-austine-fischer/

Paul Maxwel, “The Trauma of Doctrine: New Calvinism, Religious Abuse, and the Experience of God” https://a.co/d/06aJvK4M

LifeWay Research, “SBC Pastors Polled on Calvinism and Its Effect” https://research.lifeway.com/2012/06/19/sbc-pastors-polled-on-calvinism-and-its-effect/

Scott Thong, “They Left Calvinism”, https://scottthong.wordpress.com/2020/08/19/they-left-calvinism/?fbclid=IwY2xjawJ3wwNleHRuA2FlbQIxMABicmlkETF2ZkFnTjhDbGF3Qkthd3p5AR6XapLoXcQQRa8R8XRR9J7JliyHee31XZTIsrnQi_5J6yYDl5zDzwL2iI_F2Q_aem_P1kFCRTtS7uknmPpx1DO7Q

John 6:44 “No one can come to Me unless the Father who sent Me draws him; and I will raise him up at the last day.”

This verse points to God’s sovereign work that brings people to Jesus Christ, and from the context of John 6, they evidently believe in Him for eternal salvation. Some think this verse teaches that God draws people in such a way that they cannot resist.

They understand the word “draw” to mean “drag.” But would God force His salvation on people against their will? Is God’s grace irresistible? The passage, its context, and other Scriptures help us understand that God draws people to faith in Christ in a number of ways.

𝟏. 𝐆𝐨𝐝 𝐮𝐬𝐞𝐬 𝐦𝐚𝐧’𝐬 𝐚𝐛𝐢𝐥𝐢𝐭𝐲 𝐭𝐨 𝐫𝐞𝐬𝐩𝐨𝐧𝐝.

This does not diminish God’s sovereignty but recognizes that He has sovereignly designed man to have free will, which allows him to respond to God (for a related discussion on election, see GraceNotes no. 72). Since the Bible teaches that man does not seek God on his own (Rom. 3:11), God must take the initiative. He reveals Himself in creation, and though man knows this, he still refuses to honor God (Rom. 1:19–21). So God, in His love, seeks us out (Luke 19:10; John 3:16; 1 John 4:9–10). But how should we understand the word “draw” as it is used in John 6:44? The range of meaning for the word 𝑒𝑙𝑘𝑢𝑜 includes to “draw,” “pull,” or “attract.” It is found five times in the New Testament, four of those in John. Though the literal uses in John and Acts clearly mean “drag” or “pull” (John 18:10; 21:6; Acts 16:19), the two figurative uses in John 6:44 and 12:32 are better understood as “attract.” The context shows why. In John 6, eternal life is spoken of as a gift that is received by believing in Christ (6:27–29, 32–35, 40, 47, 51). The idea of a gift assumes the freedom to accept or reject it. The motive behind this gift assumes God’s love (John 3:16). This is consistent with how the Greek translation of the Old Testament (Septuagint) sometimes uses elkuo in a context of love’s attraction: “With loving kindness I have drawn you” (Jer. 31:3; see also Song of Solomon 1:3–4). In other ancient Greek literature, this verb is used to describe a mother drawn by love to her sons (4 Maccabees 14:13; 15:11). The idea of God forcing someone irresistibly is contrary to His loving nature and manner. No man getting married wants to force his partner to the altar, but rather woos and loves her to come willingly. So also God does not force people in a direction they are not already inclined to take. His drawing in verse 44 is in the context of those who willingly believe (vv. 40, 47, 65). God’s will does not preclude man’s will and freedom to respond, but includes it. If man does not have this freedom, then why does God judicially blind the Jews or use parabolic language to hide His truth? It would be like putting a blindfold on a corpse.

𝟐. 𝐆𝐨𝐝 𝐮𝐬𝐞𝐬 𝐉𝐞𝐬𝐮𝐬’ 𝐰𝐨𝐫𝐤 𝐨𝐧 𝐭𝐡𝐞 𝐜𝐫𝐨𝐬𝐬.

Jesus explained his role in drawing people to Himself for salvation: “And I, if I am lifted up from the earth, will draw all peoples to Myself. This He said, signifying what death He would die” (John 12:32–33). The word “peoples” is not in the original Greek but is supplied in the English translation. “All” could speak of the extent of Christ’s work providing for all people, both Jew and Gentile. Or it could speak of all people realizing that while all are drawn to some extent, some will resist and refuse to believe. Either way, this is not speaking of compulsion but of a moral pull on the inner person. The cross is proof of God’s love, our sin, His righteousness, and the coming judgment (John 16:8–11). A similar reference to Christ being lifted up in John 3:14–15 refers to the story in Numbers 21:4–9, when those who looked at the bronze serpent on the pole were healed. In both passages, the provision of salvation is available to whoever believes.

𝟑. 𝐆𝐨𝐝 𝐮𝐬𝐞𝐬 𝐭𝐡𝐞 𝐖𝐨𝐫𝐝 𝐭𝐨 𝐭𝐞𝐚𝐜𝐡.

The teaching of God’s Word is designed to draw people to Christ. Following John 6:44, verses 45–46 say, “It is written in the prophets, ‘And they shall all be taught by God.’ Therefore, everyone who has heard and learned from the Father comes to Me.” The quotation from Isaiah 54:13 is in the context of God wooing Israel back to Himself as a woman or wife is wooed (Isa. 54:6). The process is that God teaches, people hear and learn, and then people respond by coming to Christ for salvation (In John, the phrase “come to” Christ obviously refers to coming to him in faith for salvation; cf. John 5:40; 6:35, 37, 65; 7:37). Only those who have listened and learned believe. A receptive attitude towards God’s Word is always rewarded with more truth (Mark 4:24–25). Many, however, will reject the truth about Christ just as many rejected Moses’ teaching (John 5:45–47; cf. Luke 16:27–31) and just as the crowd did in John 6 in spite of seeing a great miracle and hearing the greatest Teacher. We also know that Judas Iscariot was constantly taught by Jesus, yet evidently never believed (John 6:64). Today, the Gospel is the power of God to salvation (Rom. 1:16). As we teach and preach it, it draws to Christ those who listen and learn from it.

𝟒. 𝐆𝐨𝐝 𝐮𝐬𝐞𝐬 𝐭𝐡𝐞 𝐇𝐨𝐥𝐲 𝐒𝐩𝐢𝐫𝐢𝐭 𝐭𝐨 𝐜𝐨𝐧𝐯𝐢𝐜𝐭.

According to John 16:8–11, the Holy Spirit convicts of truth (𝑒𝑙𝑒𝑔𝑐ℎ𝑜 can also be understood as “exposes” or “convinces”): “And when He [the Holy Spirit] has come, He will convict the world of sin, and of righteousness, and of judgment.” As Christ draws all men through His work on the cross, the Spirit exposes to all and convinces all (“the world”) of that truth as the Word of God is taught. The Spirit uses divine persuasion to convince, reprove, disturb, draw, and love a person. But that does not guarantee that all who are convinced of the truth will receive it. A person can understand the truth, yet reject it (John 5:39–40). But whoever responds positively and seeks God will be rewarded (Heb. 11:6).

𝟓. 𝐆𝐨𝐝 𝐮𝐬𝐞𝐬 𝐩𝐞𝐨𝐩𝐥𝐞 𝐚𝐬 𝐢𝐧𝐬𝐭𝐫𝐮𝐦𝐞𝐧𝐭𝐬.

God has chosen to use people as agents for teaching the Word of God, which the Holy Spirit uses to convict the world. In addition to His work on the cross, Jesus also taught the gospel. The apostle Paul reminds the Corinthian church that the first thing he made known to them was the gospel (1 Cor. 15:3). He reasons with the Romans, “How then shall they call on Him in whom they have not believed? And how shall they believe in Him of whom they have not heard? And how shall they hear without a preacher? (Rom 10:14).

𝟔. 𝐆𝐨𝐝 𝐝𝐫𝐚𝐰𝐬 𝐩𝐞𝐨𝐩𝐥𝐞 𝐭𝐨 𝐂𝐡𝐫𝐢𝐬𝐭 𝐮𝐬𝐢𝐧𝐠 𝐭𝐡𝐞𝐬𝐞 𝐯𝐚𝐫𝐢𝐨𝐮𝐬 𝐦𝐞𝐚𝐧𝐬 𝐢𝐧 𝐜𝐨𝐥𝐥𝐮𝐬𝐢𝐨𝐧; 𝐭𝐡𝐞𝐲 𝐚𝐫𝐞 𝐧𝐨𝐭 𝐢𝐧 𝐜𝐨𝐧𝐟𝐥𝐢𝐜𝐭 𝐰𝐢𝐭𝐡 𝐨𝐧𝐞 𝐚𝐧𝐨𝐭𝐡𝐞𝐫.

Before Jesus speaks of the Father’s drawing in John 6:44, He twice says the Father gives people to Him (vv. 37, 39). The context suggests that the Father gives people to Christ so that they will be secure — in v. 37 Christ will never cast them out, and in v. 39 Christ will not lose any but guarantees their resurrection. In verses 40 and 44 He also guarantees their resurrection. But before that day, v. 40 explains that the Father has given people to Christ that they may “see the Son” and believe in Him for everlasting life. So here we have the collusion of God’s sovereign work directing people to Jesus so that they will believe in Him for salvation. A good example of God drawing someone with various means is the story about Lydia in Acts 16:13–15. Lydia goes to a prayer meeting (Is she drawn by her own initiative or God’s — or both together?) and hears Paul teach (the gospel). We read, “The Lord opened her heart to heed the things spoken by Paul” (v. 14). God worked, Paul taught the gospel, the Spirit convinced, and Lydia responded by believing and so was baptized.

𝐂𝐨𝐧𝐜𝐥𝐮𝐬𝐢𝐨𝐧

God does not force His salvation on anyone. He uses various means to draw people to respond with faith in Jesus Christ. If people have to be dragged to salvation because they have no ability to believe, how could anyone be held responsible for not believing? Their condemnation would be God’s fault, not their own. Ultimately, our seeking after God is our response to Him seeking us. We should therefore preach the gospel of God’s gracious gift of eternal life, relying on the Holy Spirit to convince people of its truth and draw them to Christ.

- — — — -
𝐂𝐡𝐚𝐫𝐥𝐢𝐞 𝐁𝐢𝐧𝐠 earned his Master of Theology (Th.M) and Doctor of Philosophy (Ph.D.) from Dallas Theological Seminary. He pastored Burleson Bible Church in Texas for 19 years before transitioning to his current role as Director of GraceLife Ministries in 2005. He has served as Adjunct Professor of Biblical Studies for LeTourneau University since 1992 and is a former President of the Free Grace Alliance. He is the author of the books “Simply by Grace: An Introduction to God’s Life-Changing Gift“ and “Grace, Salvation, and Discipleship: How to Understand Some Difficult Bible Passages“.

The Gospel of Jesus Christ: An Evangelical Celebration 1999

“The Gospel Of Jesus Christ: An Evangelical Celebration” is copyright © 1999 by The Committee On Evangelical Unity In The Gospel, P.O. Box 5551, Glendale Heights, Il 60139–5551

For God so loved the world that he gave his one and only Son, that whoever believes in him shall not perish but have eternal life. — John 3:16

Sing to the Lord, for he has done glorious things; let this be known to all the world. — Isaiah 12:5

Preamble

The Gospel of Jesus Christ is news, good news: the best and most important news that any human being ever hears.

This Gospel declares the only way to know God in peace, love, and joy is through the reconciling death of Jesus Christ the risen Lord.

This Gospel is the central message of the Holy Scriptures, and is the true key to understanding them.

This Gospel identifies Jesus Christ, the Messiah of Israel, as the Son of God and God the Son, the second Person of the Holy Trinity, whose incarnation, ministry, death, resurrection, and ascension fulfilled the Father’s saving will. His death for sins and his resurrection from the dead were promised beforehand by the prophets and attested by eyewitnesses. In God’s own time and in God’s own way, Jesus Christ shall return as glorious Lord and Judge of all (1 Thess. 4:13–18; Matt. 25:31–32). He is now giving the Holy Spirit from the Father to all those who are truly his. The three Persons of the Trinity thus combine in the work of saving sinners.

This Gospel sets forth Jesus Christ as the living Savior, Master, Life, and Hope of all who put their trust in him. It tells us that the eternal destiny of all people depends on whether they are savingly related to Jesus Christ.

This Gospel is the only Gospel: there is no other; and to change its substance is to pervert and indeed destroy it. This Gospel is so simple that small children can understand it, and it is so profound that studies by the wisest theologians will never exhaust its riches.

All Christians are called to unity in love and unity in truth. As evangelicals who derive our very name from the Gospel, we celebrate this great good news of God’s saving work in Jesus Christ as the true bond of Christian unity, whether among organized churches and denominations or in the many transdenominational co operative enterprises of Christians together.

The Bible declares that all who truly trust in Christ and his Gospel are sons and daughters of God through grace, and hence are our brothers and sisters in Christ.

All who are justified experience reconciliation with the Father, full remission of sins, transition from the kingdom of darkness to the kingdom of light, the reality of being a new creature in Christ, and the fellowship of the Holy Spirit. They enjoy access to the Father with all the peace and joy that this brings.

The Gospel requires of all believers worship, which means constant praise and giving of thanks to God, submission to all that he has revealed in his written word, prayerful dependence on him, and vigilance lest his truth be even inadvertently compromised or obscured.

To share the joy and hope of this Gospel is a supreme privilege. It is also an abiding obligation, for the Great Commission of Jesus Christ still stands: proclaim the Gospel everywhere, he said, teaching, baptizing, and making disciples.

By embracing the following declaration we affirm our commitment to this task, and with it our allegiance to Christ himself, to the Gospel itself, and to each other as fellow evangelical believers.

The Gospel

This Gospel of Jesus Christ which God sets forth in the infallible Scriptures combines Jesus’ own declaration of the present reality of the kingdom of God with the apostles’ account of the person, place, and work of Christ, and how sinful humans benefit from it. The Patristic Rule of Faith, the historic creeds, the Reformation confessions, and the doctrinal bases of later evangelical bodies all witness to the substance of this biblical message.

The heart of the Gospel is that our holy, loving Creator, confronted with human hostility and rebellion, has chosen in his own freedom and faithfulness to become our holy, loving Redeemer and Restorer. The Father has sent the Son to be the Savior of the world (1 John 4:14): it is through his one and only Son that God’s one and only plan of salvation is implemented. So Peter announced: “Salvation is found in no one else, for there is no other name under heaven given to men by which we must be saved” (Acts 4:12). And Christ himself taught: “I am the way, the truth and the life. No one comes to the Father except through me” (John 14:6).

Through the Gospel we learn that we human beings, who were made for fellowship with God, are by nature — that is, “in Adam” (1 Cor. 15:22) — dead in sin, unresponsive to and separated from our Maker. We are constantly twisting his truth, breaking his law, belittling his goals and standards, and offending his holiness by our unholiness, so that we truly are “without hope and without God in the world” (Rom. 1:18–32, 3:9–20; Eph. 2:1–3, 12). Yet God in grace took the initiative to reconcile us to himself through the sinless life and vicarious death of his beloved Son (Eph. 2:4–10; Rom. 3:21–24).

The Father sent the Son to free us from the dominion of sin and Satan, and to make us God’s children and friends. Jesus paid our penalty in our place on his cross, satisfying the retributive demands of divine justice by shedding his blood in sacrifice and so making possible justification for all who trust in him (Rom. 3:25–26). The Bible describes this mighty substitutionary transaction as the achieving of ransom, reconciliation, redemption, propitiation, and conquest of evil powers (Matt. 20:28; 2 Cor. 5:18–21; Rom. 3:23–25; John 12:31; Col. 2:15). It secures for us a restored relationship with God that brings pardon and peace, acceptance and access, and adoption into God’s family (Col. 1:20, 2:13–14; Rom. 5:1–2; Gal. 4:4–7; 1 Pet. 3:18). The faith in God and in Christ to which the Gospel calls us is a trustful outgoing of our hearts to lay hold of these promised and proffered benefits.

This Gospel further proclaims the bodily resurrection, ascension, and enthronement of Jesus as evidence of the efficacy of his once-for-all sacrifice for us, of the reality of his present personal ministry to us, and of the certainty of his future return to glorify us (1 Cor. 15; Heb. 1:1–4, 2:1- 18, 4:14–16, 7:1–10:25). In the life of faith as the Gospel presents it, believers are united with their risen Lord, communing with him, and looking to him in repentance and hope for empowering through the Holy Spirit, so that henceforth they may not sin but serve him truly.

God’s justification of those who trust him, according to the Gospel, is a decisive transition, here and now, from a state of condemnation and wrath because of their sins to one of acceptance and favor by virtue of Jesus’ flawless obedience culminating in his voluntary sin-bearing death. God “justifies the wicked” (ungodly: Rom. 4:5) by imputing (reckoning, crediting, counting, accounting) righteousness to them and ceasing to count their sins against them (Rom. 4:1–8).

Sinners receive through faith in Christ alone “the gift of righteousness” (Rom. 1:17, 5:17; Phil. 3:9) and thus be come “the righteousness of God” in him who was “made sin” for them (2 Cor. 5:21).

As our sins were reckoned to Christ, so Christ’s righteousness is reckoned to us. This is justification by the imputation of Christ’s righteousness. All we bring to the transaction is our need of it. Our faith in the God who bestows it, the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit, is itself the fruit of God’s grace. Faith links us savingly to Jesus, but inasmuch as it involves an acknowledgment that we have no merit of our own, it is confessedly not a meritorious work.

The Gospel assures us that all who have en trusted their lives to Jesus Christ are born-again children of God (John 1:12), indwelt, empowered, and assured of their status and hope by the Holy Spirit (Rom. 7:6, 8:9–17). The moment we truly believe in Christ, the Father declares us righteous in him and begins conforming us to his likeness. Genuine faith acknowledges and depends upon Jesus as Lord and shows itself in growing obedience to the divine commands, though this contributes nothing to the ground of our justification (James 2:14–26; Heb. 6:1–12).

By his sanctifying grace, Christ works within us through faith, renewing our fallen nature and leading us to real maturity, that measure of development which is meant by “the fullness of Christ” (Eph. 4:13). The Gospel calls us to live as obedient servants of Christ and as his emissaries in the world, doing justice, loving mercy, and helping all in need, thus seeking to bear witness to the kingdom of Christ. At death, Christ takes the believer to himself (Phil. 1:21) for unimaginable joy in the ceaseless worship of God (Rev. 22:1–5).

Salvation in its full sense is from the guilt of sin in the past, the power of sin in the present, and the presence of sin in the future. Thus, while in foretaste believers enjoy salvation now, they still await its fullness (Mark 14:61–62; Heb. 9:28). Salvation is a Trinitarian reality, initiated by the Father, implemented by the Son, and applied by the Holy Spirit. It has a global dimension, for God’s plan is to save believers out of every tribe and tongue (Rev. 5:9) to be his church, a new humanity, the people of God, the body and bride of Christ, and the community of the Holy Spirit. All the heirs of final salvation are called here and now to serve their Lord and each other in love, to share in the fellowship of Jesus’ sufferings, and to work together to make Christ known to the whole world.

We learn from the Gospel that, as all have sinned, so all who do not receive Christ will be judged according to their just deserts as measured by God’s holy law, and face eternal retributive punishment.

Unity in the Gospel

Christians are commanded to love each other despite differences of race, gender, privilege, and social, political, and economic background (John 13:34–35; Gal. 3:28–29), and to be of one mind wherever possible (John 17:20–21; Phil. 2:2; Rom. 14:1–15:13). We know that divisions among Christians hinder our witness in the world, and we desire greater mutual understanding and truth- speaking in love. We know too that as trustees of God’s revealed truth we cannot embrace any form of doctrinal indifferentism, or relativism, or pluralism by which God’s truth is sacrificed for a false peace.

Doctrinal disagreements call for debate. Dialogue for mutual understanding and, if possible, narrowing of the differences is valuable, doubly so when the avowed goal is unity in primary things, with liberty in secondary things, and charity in all things.

In the foregoing paragraphs, an attempt has been made to state what is primary and essential in the Gospel as evangelicals understand it. Useful dialogue, however, requires not only charity in our attitudes, but also clarity in our utterances. Our extended analysis of justification by faith alone through Christ alone reflects our belief that Gospel truth is of crucial importance and is not always well understood and correctly affirmed. For added clarity, out of love for God’s truth and Christ’s church, we now cast the key points of what has been said into specific affirmations and denials regarding the Gospel and our unity in it and in Christ.

Affirmations and Denials:

1. We affirm that the Gospel entrusted to the church is, in the first instance, God’s Gospel (Mark 1:14; Rom. 1:1). God is its author, and he reveals it to us in and by his Word. Its authority and truth rest on him alone.

We deny that the truth or authority of the Gospel derives from any human insight or invention (Gal. 1:1–11). We also deny that the truth or authority of the Gospel rests on the authority of any particular church or human institution.

2. We affirm that the Gospel is the saving power of God in that the Gospel effects salvation to everyone who believes, without distinction (Rom. 1:16). This efficacy of the Gospel is by the power of God himself (1 Cor. 1:18).

We deny that the power of the Gospel rests in the eloquence of the preacher, the technique of the evangelist, or the persuasion of rational argument (1 Cor. 1:21; 2:1–5).

3. We affirm that the Gospel diagnoses the universal human condition as one of sinful rebellion against God, which, if unchanged, will lead each person to eternal loss under God’s condemnation.

We deny any rejection of the fallenness of human nature or any assertion of the natural goodness, or divinity, of the human race.

4. We affirm that Jesus Christ is the only way of salvation, the only mediator between God and humanity (John 14:6; 1 Tim. 2:5).

We deny that anyone is saved in any other way than by Jesus Christ and his Gospel. The Bible offers no hope that sincere worshipers of other religions will be saved without personal faith in Jesus Christ.

5. We affirm that the church is commanded by God and is therefore under divine obligation to preach the Gospel to every living person (Luke 24:47; Matt. 28:18–19).

We deny that any particular class or group of persons, whatever their ethnic or cultural identity, may be ignored or passed over in the preaching of the Gospel (1 Cor. 9:19–22). God purposes a global church made up from people of every tribe, language, and nation (Rev. 7:9).

6. We affirm that faith in Jesus Christ as the divine Word (or Logos, John 1:1), the second Person of the Trinity, co-eternal and co-essential with the Father and the Holy Spirit (Heb. 1:3), is foundational to faith in the Gospel.

We deny that any view of Jesus Christ which reduces or rejects his full deity is Gospel faith or will avail to salvation.

7. We affirm that Jesus Christ is God incarnate (John 1:14). The virgin-born descendant of David (Rom. 1:3), he had a true human nature, was subject to the Law of God (Gal. 4:5), and was like us at all points, except without sin (Heb. 2:17, 7:26–28). We affirm that faith in the true humanity of Christ is essential to faith in the Gospel.

We deny that anyone who rejects the humanity of Christ, his incarnation, or his sinlessness, or who maintains that these truths are not essential to the Gospel, will be saved (1 John 4:2–3).

8. We affirm that the atonement of Christ by which, in his obedience, he offered a perfect sacrifice, propitiating the Father by paying for our sins and satisfying divine justice on our behalf according to God’s eternal plan, is an essential element of the Gospel.

We deny that any view of the Atonement that rejects the substitutionary satisfaction of divine justice, accomplished vicariously for believers, is compatible with the teaching of the Gospel.

9. We affirm that Christ’s saving work included both his life and his death on our behalf (Gal. 3:13). We declare that faith in the perfect obedience of Christ by which he fulfilled all the demands of the Law of God in our behalf is essential to the Gospel.

We deny that our salvation was achieved merely or exclusively by the death of Christ without reference to his life of perfect righteousness.

10. We affirm that the bodily resurrection of Christ from the dead is essential to the biblical Gospel (1 Cor. 15:14).

We deny the validity of any so-called gospel that denies the historical reality of the bodily resurrection of Christ.

11. We affirm that the biblical doctrine of justification by faith alone in Christ alone is essential to the Gospel (Rom. 3:28; 4:5; Gal. 2:16).

We deny that any person can believe the biblical Gospel and at the same time reject the apostolic teaching of justification by faith alone in Christ alone. We also deny that there is more than one true Gospel (Gal. 1:6–9).

12. We affirm that the doctrine of the imputation (reckoning or counting) both of our sins to Christ and of his righteousness to us, whereby our sins are fully forgiven and we are fully accepted, is essential to the biblical Gospel (2 Cor. 5:19–21).

We deny that we are justified by the righteousness of Christ infused into us or by any righteousness that is thought to inhere within us.

13. We affirm that the righteousness of Christ by which we are justified is properly his own, which he achieved apart from us, in and by his perfect obedience. This righteousness is counted, reckoned, or imputed to us by the forensic (that is, legal) declaration of God, as the sole ground of our justification.

We deny that any works we perform at any stage of our existence add to the merit of Christ or earn for us any merit that contributes in any way to the ground of our justification (Gal. 2:16; Eph. 2:8–9; Titus 3:5).

14. We affirm that, while all believers are indwelt by the Holy Spirit and are in the process of being made holy and conformed to the image of Christ, those consequences of justification are not its ground. God declares us just, remits our sins, and adopts us as his children, by his grace alone, and through faith alone, because of Christ alone, while we are still sinners (Rom. 4:5).

We deny that believers must be inherently righteous by virtue of their cooperation with God’s life-transforming grace before God will declare them justified in Christ. We are justified while we are still sinners.

15. We affirm that saving faith results in sanctification, the transformation of life in growing conformity to Christ through the power of the Holy Spirit. Sanctification means ongoing repentance, a life of turning from sin to serve Jesus Christ in grateful reliance on him as one’s Lord and Master (Gal. 5:22–25; Rom. 8:4, 13–14).

We reject any view of justification which divorces it from our sanctifying union with Christ and our increasing conformity to his image through prayer, repentance, cross-bearing, and life in the Spirit.

16. We affirm that saving faith includes mental assent to the content of the Gospel, acknowledgment of our own sin and need, and personal trust and reliance upon Christ and his work.

We deny that saving faith includes only mental acceptance of the Gospel, and that justification is secured by a mere outward profession of faith. We further deny that any element of saving faith is a meritorious work or earns salvation for us.

17. We affirm that, although true doctrine is vital for spiritual health and well-being, we are not saved by doctrine. Doctrine is necessary to inform us how we may be saved by Christ, but it is Christ who saves.

We deny that the doctrines of the Gospel can be rejected without harm. Denial of the Gospel brings spiritual ruin and exposes us to God’s judgment.

18. We affirm that Jesus Christ commands his followers to proclaim the Gospel to all living persons, evangelizing everyone everywhere, and discipling believers within the fellowship of the church. A full and faithful witness to Christ includes the witness of personal testimony, godly living, and acts of mercy and charity to our neighbor, without which the preaching of the Gospel appears barren.

We deny that the witness of personal testimony, godly living, and acts of mercy and charity to our neighbors constitutes evangelism apart from the proclamation of the Gospel.

Our Commitment

As evangelicals united in the Gospel, we promise to watch over and care for one another, to pray for and forgive one another, and to reach out in love and truth to God’s people everywhere, for we are one family, one in the Holy Spirit, and one in Christ.

Centuries ago it was truly said that in things necessary there must be unity, in things less than necessary there must be liberty, and in all things there must be charity. We see all these Gospel truths as necessary.

Now to God, the Author of the truth and grace of this Gospel, through Jesus Christ, its subject and our Lord, be praise and glory forever and ever. Amen.

“The Gospel Of Jesus Christ: An Evangelical Celebration” is copyright © 1999 by The Committee On Evangelical Unity In The Gospel, P.O. Box 5551, Glendale Heights, Il 60139–5551

The Drafting Committee

John N. Akers
John Ankerberg
John Armstrong
D.A. Carson
Keith Davy
Maxie Dunnam
Timothy George
Scott Hafemann
Erwin Lutzer
Harold Myra
David Neff
Thomas Oden
J.I. Packer
R.C. Sproul
John Woodbridge

Confirmed Endorsing Committee

(as of May 19, 1999)

Eric Alexander
C. Fitzsimmons Allison
Bill Anderson
J. Kerby Anderson
Don Argue
Kay Arthur
Myron S. Augsburger
Theodore Baehr
Joel Belz
Henri Blocher
Donald G. Bloesch
Scott Bolinder
John Bolt
Gerald Bray
Bill Bright
Harold O.J. Brown
Stephen Brown
George Brushaber
David Cerullo
Peter Cha
Daniel R. Chamberlain
Bryan Chapell
David K. Clark
Edmund Clowney
Robert Coleman
Chuck Colson
Clyde Cook
Lane T. Dennis
David S. Dockery
Stuart Epperson
James Erickson
Tony Evans
Jerry Falwell
Sinclair Ferguson
Dwight Gibson
Wayne Grudem
Stan N. Gundry
Brandt Gustavson
Corkie Haan
Mimi Haddad
Ben Haden
B. Sam Hart
Bob Hawkins, Jr.
Wendell Hawley
Jack W. Hayford
Stephen A. Hayner
Jim Henry
Roberta Hestenes
Oswald Hoffman
R. Kent Hughes
Bill Hybels
Kay Cole James
David Jeremiah
Arthur P. Johnston
Howard Jones
Walter C. Kaiser, Jr.
Kenneth Kantzer
D. James Kennedy
Jay Kesler
In Ho Koh
Woodrow Kroll
Beverly LaHaye
Tim LaHaye
Richard Land
Richard G. Lee
Duane Litfin
Crawford Loritts
Max Lucado
John MacArthur
Marlin Maddoux
Bill McCartney
David Melvin
Jesse Miranda
Beth Moore
Peter C. Moore
T.M. Moore
Richard J. Mouw
Thomas J. Nettles
Roger Nicole
Luis Palau
Earl R. Palmer
Hee Min Park
Phillip Porter
Paul Pressler
Ray Pritchard
Robert Ricker
Pat Robertson
John Rodgers
Adrian Rogers
Doug Ross
Joseph F. Ryan
John Scott
David Short
Ronald J. Sider
Russell Spittler
James J. Stamoolis
Charles F. Stanley
Brian Stiller
John Stott
Joseph Stowell
Stephen Strang
Charles Swindoll
Joni Eareckson Tada
Thomas E. Trask
Augustin B. Vencer, Jr.
Paul L. Walker
John F. Walvoord
Raleigh Washington
Greg Waybright
David F. Wells
Luder Whitlock
Bruce H. Wilkinson
David K. Winter
Ravi Zacharias

We affirm that saving faith is the means for regeneration, and not the result of regeneration. The new birth takes place the moment a person trusts Christ and not before they trust Christ. Faith in Christ is the requirement before an individual can experience spiritual birth. Faith is the instrumental means by which we access the free gift of salvation.

Is “believing in Christ” a condition or a consequence of the new birth? Are we converted because we are already regenerated, or does God regenerate those who repent and believe. Many Evangelical Christians believe that an individual must repent and believe in order to become born again. The moment a person trusts Christ for salvation, only then can he experience the new birth.

We Must Believe In Order To Become Born Again

Because conversion refers to human response to God’s offer of salvation, and regeneration refers to God’s transformation and infusion of new life to individuals who accepted Christ,[1] the logical flow of thought would be that God regenerates those who believe. The New Testament is replete with references that reflect God’s command for all people everywhere to repent and believe in Christ in order to be saved (John 1:12–13; 3:18; 5:24; 6:47; 20:31; Romans 10:9–13; Acts 2:38; 13:38–39; 16:31; 17:30; Revelation 22:17).

John 1:12–13 states, “Yet to all who received Him, to those who believed in His name, He gave the right to become children of God — children born not of natural descent, nor of human decision or a husband’s will, but born of God”. The Greek word pistis “to believe”, came from the root word pisteuo meaning “faith” or “trust”.[2] Among the NT range of meanings, Johannes P. Louw and Eugene A. Nida, in Greek-English Lexicon of the New Testament Based on Semantic Domains, defines faith in this passage as “to believe in the Good News about Jesus Christ”, “to become a follower”, “to be a believer”, or “to be a Christian”. [3] The word “received” is in the active voice implying human responsibility and in the aorist tense denoting summary action that happened in the past. The apostle John further states that those who “believed” (active voice) has been “born of God” (passive voice). He goes on to explain in verse 13 that the nature of this new birth is spiritual and not physical. Thus, faith in Christ is the requirement before an individual can experience spiritual birth.

In The Four Spiritual Laws booklet, Bill Bright wrote, “We receive Christ through faith (Ephesians 2:8–9)… when we receive Christ, we experience a new birth (John 3:1–8)… we receive Christ by personal Invitation… we receive Christ by faith, as an act of the will.” Hence, the “new birth” happens after a person puts his faith in Christ as Savior and Lord, and not the other way around. He further wrote, “The moment that you received Christ by faith, as an act of the will, many things happened, including the following… you became a child of God (John 1:12)… you received eternal life (John 5:24)…”[4]

The apostle Paul affirmed the same idea in Acts 16:31, when the Philippian jailer asked him “what must I do to be saved?”. Paul declared that the only way for a person to be saved is to “believe in the Lord Jesus.”

According to Daniel Wallace, in Greek Grammar Beyond the Basics: An Exegetical Syntax of the New Testament, the word “believe” in this passage is in the imperative mood and in the active voice, which means that the person is being commanded to put his faith in Christ. The use of the conjunction connects the previous imperative clause to the next clause, “and you shall be saved…” denoting that salvation is the consequence of believing in Christ. The word “shall be saved”, is in the indicative mood, which stresses certainty.[5] It is also in the future tense with a passive voice, which means that salvation is a guaranteed promise to those who would believe.[6] The shift in the voice is significant in the interpretation of this passage — “Believe in the Lord Jesus” (active voice) and “you shall be saved” (passive voice). When we trust Christ or receive Him into our hearts as Lord and Savior, God saves us and gives us new life (John 3:16–18; 1 John 5:11–13).

This Non-Calvinist view that conversion precedes regeneration brings us to at least two important points. First, human responsibility is to repent and believe, but regeneration is the work of God. Second, the call to repent and believe is addressed to all unregenerated sinners (not to regenerated saints).

Salvation Requires Both God’s Grace and Human Response of Faith

As a result of Adam’s sin, humanity is fallen, corrupted, and depraved. However, depravity does not mean total inability. Spiritual “death” simply means spiritual “separation” from God. Because the image of God in humanity was not eradicated after the fall, human will is free to choose the gift of salvation. Yet, although man has a free will, he has no capacity for saving himself. God by His grace, through the convicting and illuminating work of the Holy Spirit (John 16:8–11; Revelation 22:17), draws people to Himself. Humans have the responsibility to either accept or resist the prompting of the Holy Spirit (Acts 7:51), thus, no one is ever saved against his will.[7]

Faith is the condition for receiving salvation. That is why John 3:18 says, “Whoever believes in Him is not condemned, but whoever does not believe stands condemned already because he has not believed in the name of God’s one and only Son”. [8] Saving faith is the means for regeneration, and not the result of regeneration. The new birth takes place the moment a person trusts Christ and not before they trust Christ.

But how can a person have the ability to believe the Gospel? How do we explain the dynamic interaction between God’s grace and human response in light of the salvation process?

According to the Bible, humanity’s problem is not inability. Sinners fail to come to Christ not because they cannot, but because they will not: “And you will not come to me, that you might have life” (John 5:40).[9]

Terrence Tiessen, in his book Who Can Be Saved?: Reassessing Salvation in Christ and World Religions, presented a remarkable proposal that gives a balanced approach on the matter:

God gives everyone sufficient grace to enable them to believe in Him… Not only does everyone receive revelation sufficient to lead to salvation if responded to with faith, but at least once in everyone’s life that divine revelation is accompanied by divine enabling that makes a faith response possible, in the sense that people are justly condemned for failing to believe when God is made known to them on that occasion.[10]

This is the reason why Paul, in Ephesians 2:8–9, declares that the gift of salvation came from God (genitive of source), it is based on God’s grace (dative of means), and it is received by means of faith (genitive of means).[11]

Ronnie Rogers, in his article entitled “Anyone and Everyone Can Be Saved by Grace”, talks about how God by His redemptive grace provides or restores the necessary components for every person in the world to have a genuine opportunity to believe unto salvation:

Grace enablements include but are not limited to God’s salvific love for all (John 3:16), God’s manifestation of His power so that all may know He is the Sovereign (Isaiah 45:21–22), and Creator (Romans 1:18–20), which assures that everyone has an opportunity to know about Him. Christ paying for all sins (Luke 22:20; John 1:29), Christ satisfying the just demands of God against all sinners (1 John 2:2), God was in Christ reconciling the world to himself (2 Cor 5:19), Christ tasting death for everyone (Heb 2:9), Christ praying for the salvation of all of lost humanity (John 17:20–21), conviction of the Holy Spirit (John 16:7–11), working of the Holy Spirit (Hebrews 6:1–6), enlightening of the Son (John 1:9), God’s teaching (John 6:45), God opening eyes, minds, and hearts (Luke 24:45; Acts 16:14; 26:17–18;), and the power of the Gospel (Rom 1:16), without such redemptive grace, no one seeks or can come to God (Rom 3:11).

Because of God’s gracious provisions and workings, man can choose to seek and find God (Psalms 50:3; Isaiah 55:6–8; Jeremiah 29:13; Acts 17:11–12). Moreover, no one can come to God without God calling (Acts 2:39) and drawing (John 6:44), and God is drawing all individuals (John 12:32). The same Greek word for draw, helkuō, is used in both verses. “About 115 passages condition salvation on believing alone, and about 35 simply on faith.”[12] Other grace enablements may include providential workings in and through people, such as prayers, situations, and timing or circumstances that are a part of grace to provide an opportunity for every individual to choose to follow Christ.[13]

God’s Command for All Sinners to Repent and Believe

In Acts 17:30, Paul tells us “Now [God] commands all people everywhere to repent”. First John 3:23 also states, “And this is His command: to believe in the name of His Son, Jesus Christ.” The apostle Peter was speaking to an unregenerated crowd when he asked them to believe and repent (Acts 3:19), with the word repent in the imperative mood.[14] If unregenerate sinners were incapable of repenting, why would God command them to do so? Is it consistent for a God of justice and love to require people to repent and believe if He knew that they are not able to, and still hold them culpable for not obeying the command?

To teach that a person must be regenerated first before he is able to believe in Jesus Christ is to contradict biblical evidences showing diverse appeals to unregenerated persons to respond to the gospel.[15] God calls the sinner to give his life to Christ, not because he has already been saved but rather because he is lost and must come to Jesus in order to be saved. All unregenerated sinners, including those who persist in rejecting Him (Romans 10:20), are being invited by God to receive the free gift of salvation with the assurance that “everyone who calls upon the name of the Lord will be saved” (Romans 10:13).[16]

Many Calvinists define total depravity as total inability. They mean the elimination of all human ability to understand or respond to God. For them, sin destroyed man’s ability to accept God’s gift of salvation. The human will is in bondage to sin and cannot respond to the call of God unto salvation. Sinners are not free because they are dead to sin, therefore, the non-elect are unable to believe. They teach that God has to first regenerate the elect and give them faith before they can believe.[17]

Moreover, Calvinists believe that God predestines those who will be saved and those who will be lost. The Westminster Confession put it in these words: “By the decree of God … some men and angels are predestinated unto everlasting life, and others foreordained to everlasting death.”[18] They hold that this predestination is based solely upon the will of God and has nothing to do with the response of humans. For Calvinists, the Holy Spirit extends only to the elect a special inward call, through God’s irresistible grace, that inevitably brings them to salvation. This internal call cannot be rejected. Thus, God’s work of regeneration effected by the Holy Spirit happens before the elect is exclusively given the ability to repent and believe.[19]

Calvinists use many scriptures describing man’s evil heart and practices. None of these scriptures, however, states that a person cannot believe the Gospel unless he is one of the elect and has been given that faith by a sovereign act of God. Nowhere does the Bible say one must be regenerated before one can believe the Gospel. Evangelical Christians have theologically affirmed that being “born again” is the same as being saved. That is why many believers are astounded to learn that Calvinism teaches that one must experience the new birth, before one can be saved.[20] Calvinists teach that “before a person can choose Christ… he must be born again… one does not first believe, then become reborn…”[21] This is mere human reasoning. In fact, the Bible always presents faith as the condition of salvation.

The Bible clearly teaches that the moment one believes in and receives the Lord Jesus Christ as the Savior who died for one’s sins, that person has been spiritually born (regenerated of the Spirit of God) into the family of God and has thereby become a child of God. Surely there are not two kinds of life which God freely gives to sinners through regeneration. The eternal life received as a free gift through believing in Christ can only be the same life one receives upon being born again.[22]

For Non-Calvinists, although we agree that God’s grace is the only solution to man’s incapacity to save himself, we do not agree that the grace needed for salvation is only applied to the elect. Titus 2:11 states, “For the grace of God has appeared for the salvation of all men”.

Calvinism teaches that only the elect will be given “new life” (regeneration) so that only the elect can believe in Christ. In contrast, Non-Calvinism teaches that whosoever believes in Christ will be given “new life” (regeneration). Those who receive Him will be given the right to become children of God (John 1:12).

Furthermore, we do not agree that God’s grace cannot be resisted (Acts 7:51). We believe that God refuses to force against their will, those who do not want to receive divine grace. Love works persuasively, but not coercively.[23] Grace can be rejected by unbelief. Therefore, while salvation depends entirely upon God’s initiative, it is not imposed. Man must open the door of his heart.[24]

Hence, an individual must repent and believe in order to become born again. The moment a person trusts Christ for salvation, only then can he experience the new birth, and not the other way around. Human responsibility is to believe in Jesus, but regeneration is the work of God. The command to repent and believe is addressed to all unregenerated sinners, not to regenerated saints.

Faith Is the Means to Receive the Gift of Salvation

The Bible is very clear that eternal salvation is possible only through faith: “For by grace you have been saved through faith” (Ephesians 2:8). Whoever believes in [Jesus Christ] should not perish but have eternal life (John 3:16). “Faith” and “believe” are usually defined by various words. As a noun, “faith” can mean confidence, persuasion, assurance, or trust. As a verb, “believe” can mean to be convinced, to be persuaded, to accept as true, or to trust in something. More controversial is the nature of faith that saves: Does faith come “from God” to a person as a gift; does faith describe a meritorious work that comes “from a person”; or is faith “a person’s response” to a truth or promise?[25] Faith is not the cause our salvation, but faith is trusting the One who is the cause of our salvation.

Charlie Bing, in his article “Understanding the Faith that Saves”, argues against the Reformed-Calvinist teaching that faith is a gift (that is only given to the elect), and instead he makes the point that salvation is the gift, but faith is the means to receive that gift. He also insists that believing the Gospel is a human responsibility commanded by God:

Some believe that the faith that saves must be a gift from God. This is a view held mostly by those who hold to a strict determinism… They teach that salvation depends only on God’s sovereign will, which excludes human free will and ability to believe. They reason that since a person is totally unable to respond to God, faith must be divinely imparted. Some would use Ephesians 2:8 as support that faith is God’s gift for salvation… But… this does not support the view that faith is the gift mentioned, because the Greek pronoun “that” is in the neuter gender whereas a reference to “faith” would require the feminine pronoun (as would “grace”). However, the neuter pronoun can properly summarize a thought, so the best way to understand the meaning of “that” is to understand that the whole of salvation by grace is the gift. This is certainly supported by the context and emphasis on salvation by grace in Ephesians chapters 1–2 (especially 2:4–9). The phrases “not of yourselves” in verse 8 and “not by works” in verse 9 clarify the emphasis of salvation by grace…

If salvation is totally of God to the exclusion of human participation, why is faith even necessary? And what sense does it make that some people cannot believe unless God gives them that faith? Could we not say that essentially God believes for them?

Furthermore, how can people be condemned for unbelief if ultimately it depends on God’s elective will as to who will be saved and given faith? And if God loves all people, why would He not give faith to all so that all might be saved? People are both commanded to believe and asked if they believe which undermines the idea that their faith is a gift of God (e.g., Matt. 11:25–27; Acts 16:31).

The Bible shows that humans are made in God’s image with the ability to ultimately accept or reject God’s truth in the gospel. To remove this responsibility is to deny the essence of what it means to be human. This is not to say that salvation is only by human will. Rather, we recognize a synergism of God’s will and human will working in congruence. God uses the hearing of His Word, particularly about Christ’s work on the cross, to stir people to faith and salvation (John 3:14–15; 6:44; 12:32–33; Rom. 10:14–17). Of course, the Bible refers to faith as a gift in Romans 12:3 and 1 Corinthians 12:8–9 but those contexts speak of faith given to believers, not the faith that saves unbelievers.[26]

This is the same exegetical argument made by the Greek expert William Mounce, in his article “Antecedents and Faith (Ephesians 2:8–9)”, where he insists that the Greek grammar reveals to us that salvation (not faith) is the gift, and faith is the means to receive that gift.

Paul writes that For by grace (χάριτι) you have been saved through faith (πίστεως), and this (τοῦτο) is not of yourselves, it is the gift of God; it is not of works, so that no one may boast (Eph 2:8–9).

This is one of the main passages used to show that salvation is not based on what we do but; rather, salvation is an unearned gift. Among other things, this means that no one can boast about deserving to be saved. More specifically, it is often used to emphasize that even our faith itself is not something we possess but rather is given to us: faith… this not of yourselves… the gift of God.

The problem with that exegesis of the verse is that this is a neuter pronoun and faith is a feminine noun. While a pronoun’s case is determined by its function in the sentence, it gender and number are determined by its antecedent. Therefore, this cannot be referring back to faith. But grace also is feminine, so it cannot be the antecedent of τοῦτο (this). So, what is?

If you look backwards for an antecedent, you will look in vain. There are neuter nouns, but they make no sense as an antecedent.

The answer is to know a little Greek! When Greek wants to refer back to a general though, perhaps a phrase, the pronoun can be in the neuter. This is not of yourselves does not refer specifically to πίστεως (faith) but rather to the entire salvific process, of which faith obviously is a part. It is the entire salvific process that is God’s gracious gift and is not part of our own doing. It is a gift.[27]

Thus, as Non-Calvinists we believe that the “faith that saves” is simply a human response to the offer of the Gospel. Faith is the means to receive eternal life. We are saved through faith, not through works. Faith is NOT works. Faith is the opposite of works (Romans 4:4–5). Faith is a human response to God’s invitation to eternal salvation. In other words, to believe unto salvation is to be convinced, persuaded, and assured of the truth that Jesus Christ, as the One who died to pay the penalty for sin and rose from the dead, will give eternal life when we believe in Him for that promise. Faith is the instrumental means by which we access the free gift of salvation. Hence, we are saved by grace THROUGH faith.[28]

Faith is Not a Work

In other words, Non-Calvinist Evangelical Christians agree that faith is the means to being regenerated and saved, not the reason for being saved. However, this does not imply that God is held captive to the choice of human beings, but rather it demonstrates God in His wisdom and love chose from eternity to create humans with the ability of choice and to provide a genuine offer of salvation, which can be accepted by grace-enabled faith or be rejected.[29]

It is a gross theological error to assume that faith is a work. A work is something that earns you a wage. A work merits something. When we do the work, we then earn the right to boast because we did the work that merited the wage. If, however, the employer gives you a wage even though you never show up for work nor do anything to contribute toward the company profit, there is nothing to boast in yourself. It is actually humbling to receive that which you did not earn, a gift in which you did not merit, a gift you receive because of the generosity of the boss. It is not a wage, because you did not earn it, therefore it becomes a gift given to you solely on the basis of his grace.[30] That is why the Apostle Paul writes:

“Now to the one who works, his wage is not credited as a favor, but as what is due.” (Romans 4:4, NIV)

“But if it is by grace, it is no longer on the basis of works, otherwise grace is no longer grace.” (Romans 11:6, NIV)

Hence, God in His grace gifted us with salvation in Christ. It’s a free gift (Romans 6:23). However, if you seek to earn it then you are doing so on the basis of works thereby nullifying the receiving it by grace. For you cannot have both, one cancels out the other (Galatians 5:2). Grace earned is no longer grace but a wage.[31]

As Evangelical Christians we affirm the fundamental truth that we are saved by God’s grace (period). Some Calvinists accuse us Non-Calvinists as promoting salvation by work because we believe that “we are saved through faith” as a response to the Gospel. These types of Calvinists make the error of making faith to be a work when it is not.[32] They make faith to be something that earns, or merits to us the grace of God, when it does not:

Faith does NOTHING to earn us salvation. It contributes to the saving in NO way. Faith does not earn us grace. Faith doesn’t force God’s grace as if us having faith obligated God to pay us our due grace. If it did, then grace, that is the free gift of eternal life would no longer be a gift, but a wage as something we earned with faith, thus making faith a meritorious work and… grace earned is no longer grace. By saying faith is a contributing factor to salvation, Calvinists have made it to be a work. In their minds faith is in one of two camps. They say it’s either a work that God does (as part of His grace) or it’s a work that man does. They fail to consider that it’s not a work at all![33]

“Where then is boasting? It is excluded. By what kind of law? Of works? No, but by a law of faith. For we maintain that a man is justified by faith apart from works of the Law. Or is God the God of Jews only? Is He not the God of Gentiles also? Yes, of Gentiles also, since indeed God who will justify the circumcised by faith and the uncircumcised through faith is one.” (Romans 3:27–30, NIV)

Jeremy Myers, in his article “Faith is NOT a Work”, defined faith as “being convinced or persuaded that something is true. As such, we cannot choose to believe. Faith is not a work and is not meritorious because faith happens to us. We are convinced, we are persuaded, as God reveals Himself to us through His various forms of revelation.”[34] This means that God has taken the first step in our salvation, and we respond in faith:

In fact, God has taken more than just the first step; He has taken the first billion steps. He provides revelation through creation, conscience, Scripture, dreams, visions, and angelic messengers. He sends prophets, missionaries, pastors, teachers, and evangelists to share the Gospel. He sent Jesus to fully reveal His character and nature to humanity. He sends the Holy Spirit to convict the world of sin, righteousness, and judgment, and uses the Holy Spirit to draw all people to Himself (John 6:44; 12: 32; 16:7–11; Acts 16:14, 29–30; 24:25).

He sends forth His grace and mercy upon all people (John 1:9; Titus 2:11). He forgives all sin, and is patient, loving, and kind to all. These steps, and countless more specific steps in the life of each and every person, are the sorts of things God has done on our behalf to call each of us to believe in Jesus for eternal life. Human faith, then, is not the first step, or even the millionth step, in the process of coming to God or believing in Jesus for eternal life.

People are able to believe in Jesus for eternal life because God has first done absolutely everything that is within His power, made everything available to us by His grace, and flung open the door to eternal life by His will. It is only because of this multitude of “first steps” by God toward us that anyone and everyone who wants to receive God’s offer of eternal life may do so by simply and only believing in Jesus Christ for it.[35]

Faith is Decision to Trust Christ

The words “faith” and “believe” are usually defined by various ways. As a noun, faith can mean confidence, persuasion, assurance, or trust. As a verb, believe can mean to be convinced, to be persuaded, to accept as true, or to trust in something. So, “faith that saves” can be described as a decision to trust Christ or to be convinced to trust Christ.[36]

A decision for Christ means that someone decided (chose) to trust Christ as Savior. Indeed, Revelation 22:17 says, “Whosoever wills, let him receive of the water of life freely” (KJV), and John 5:35–40 emphasizes to “be willing” as implicit in “believing.” Faith is pictured in John 1:12 and Revelation 22:17d as “receiving” a gift. The Greek word for “freely” (δωρεὰν) is the same one used (in noun form) to emphasize the absolutely free nature of the gift of grace given in Romans 5:15 and 17. Hence, a person can decide to receive the gift or reject it.[37]

For Non-Calvinists faith is defined as “trust,” “confidence,” “reliance,” and “appropriation.” Some theologians agree that faith can be divided into an element of the mind (notitia), and element of the emotions (assensus), and an element of the will (fiducia). we believe the volition of man plays a significant role in the essence of faith. However, saving faith needs to be anchored to the person and work of Jesus Christ.[38]

Though saving faith begins as an assessment of revealed truth — most notably, God’s promises — it is not consummated until one trusts those promises. One must appropriate those promises for himself and be fully persuaded and confident in those promises as his only hope for life eternal. Such faith is not a casual, detached, intellectual process and conclusion. It is an act of trust, whereby one puts the full weight and consequences of his sins on the cross of Christ to open the gates of heaven.[39]

- — — — — — — -
Non-Calvinist Evangelical Christians are fellow born again believers from various theological persuasions which include Provisionists, Molinists, Free Grace, Arminians, Freewill Baptists, General Baptists, Wesleyans, Lutherans, Pentecostals, Methodists, Mennonite, Brethren, Nazarene, Evangelical Free, Anabaptists, Anglican, and all believers who embrace “Whosoever Will” theologies.

𝗚𝗿𝗮𝗰𝗲 𝗳𝗼𝗿 𝗔𝗹𝗹 𝗖𝗼𝗮𝗹𝗶𝘁𝗶𝗼𝗻 is a cross-denominational collaboration of various Evangelical Christian pastors, theologians, scholars, church leaders, and believers from all theological stripes who affirm and teach that God has provided the means of salvation for all people through the life, death, and resurrection of the Son of God. So that all who trust in Jesus Christ are saved by grace through faith. We believe that the Gospel (εὐαγγέλιον) is asserting that God actually loves the entire world and that God sincerely desires every person to gain eternal life through Jesus Christ. God offers the free gift of salvation to all sinners and invites all humanity to respond in believing faith. The saving grace of God is sincerely offered to every person, not decreed to a preselected few. We desire to be a theological voice against teachings that limit the saving grace of God only to a chosen few, against theologies that teach that Christ did not die for all of humanity, and against doctrines that say that the Gospel is actually good news only to preselected individuals, not for every person.

We subscribe to the theological convictions of the 𝗔𝗽𝗼𝘀𝘁𝗹𝗲𝘀’ 𝗖𝗿𝗲𝗲𝗱, the 𝗡𝗶𝗰𝗲𝗻𝗲 𝗖𝗿𝗲𝗲𝗱, the 𝗟𝗮𝘂𝘀𝗮𝗻𝗻𝗲 𝗖𝗼𝘃𝗲𝗻𝗮𝗻𝘁, and the 𝗪𝗼𝗿𝗹𝗱 𝗘𝘃𝗮𝗻𝗴𝗲𝗹𝗶𝗰𝗮𝗹 𝗔𝗹𝗹𝗶𝗮𝗻𝗰𝗲.

[1] Millard J. Erickson, Christian Theology 1st ed. (Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Books, 1985), 932–942.

[2]James Strong, Strong’s Exhaustive Concordance of the Bible (NY,USA: Abingdon Press, 1890),58.

[3]Johannes P. Louw and Eugene A. Nida, Greek-English Lexicon of the New Testament Based on Semantic Domains (WA, USA: United Bible Society, 1989), 31, 35.

[4]Bill Bright, The Four Spiritual Laws (GA, USA: New Life Resources, 1951), 8–9,13, [booklet on-line]; available from http://www.greatcom.org/english/four.htm; Internet; accessed 30 November 2006.

[5]Daniel B. Wallace, Greek Grammar Beyond the Basics: An Exegetical Syntax of the New Testament (Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 1996), 448.

[6]The Logos Bible: New Testament, 580.

[7]Norman Geisler, Chosen But Free: A Balanced View of God’s Sovereignty and Free Will (Minnesota: Bethany House Publishers, 2001) 29–37; John Sanders, The God Who Risks (Illinois: InterVarsity Press, 1998), 251; and Terrence Tiessen, Who Can be Saved? (Leicester, UK: InterVarsity Press, 2004), 230–239.

[8]Geisler, Chosen But Free, 35.

[9] David Hunt, What Love Is This?: Calvinism’s Misrepresentation of God, (Bend, OR: The Berean Call, 2013), 65.

[10]Tiessen, Who Can Be Saved?, 239.

[11]The Logos Bible: New Testament, 806; Wallace, Greek Grammar Beyond the Basics: An Exegetical Syntax of the New Testament, 109, 125; and Harold Hoehner, Ephesians: An Exegetical Commentary (Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Academic, 2002), 340–345.

[12] Lewis Sperry Chafer, Systematic Theology, Vol. 7, (Grand Rapids, MI: Kregel Publications, 1948), 273–74.

[13] Ronnie Rogers, “Anyone and Everyone Can Be Saved by Grace: Grace Enablements” in RonniRogers.Com, article online https://ronniewrogers.com/2015/01/anyone-and-everyone-can-be-saved-by-grace/ accessed September 20, 2024.

[14]The Logos Bible: New Testament, 586.

[15] Erickson, Christian Theology 1st ed., 932.

[16] Iain H. Murray, Spurgeon Vs. Hyper-Calvinism: The Battle for Gospel Preaching (Pennsylvania, USA: The Banner of Truth Trust, 1995), 73–80; Jerry Walls and Joseph Dongell, Why I Am Not A Calvinist, 97–110; and Lewis Sperry Chafer, “The One Condition of Salvation” in Salvation: A Clear Doctrinal Analysis, 31–39.

[17]H. Hanko and H.C. Hoeksema and J. Van Baren, The Five Points of Calvinism (Grand Rapids, MI: Reformed Free Publishing Association, 1976), 18; R.C. Sproul, Chosen By God (Wheaton, IL: Tyndale House Publishers Inc., 1986), 72; David Steele and Curtis Thomas, The Five Points of Calvinism (Phillipsburg, NJ: Presbyterian and Reformed Publishing Co., 1963), 22–25.

[18]Westminster Confession of Faith [chapter 3, section 3], (J.G. Ecces Printers, 1976), 29.

[19]Steele and Thomas, The Five Points of Calvinism, 22–25; Charles Hodge, Systematic Theology Vol. 2 (Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdsman Publishing Co., 1946), 316–319.

[20] Hunt, What Love Is This?: Calvinism’s Misrepresentation of God, 65.

[21] R.C. Sproul, Chosen by God, 72.

[22] Hunt, What Love Is This?: Calvinism’s Misrepresentation of God, 67.

[23]Stephen Thorson, “Tensions in Calvin’s View of Faith,” Journal of Evangelical Theological Society, ed. Ronald Youngblood (Vol. 37, no. 3), 413–424; W. Wiley Richards, “Southern Baptist Identity: Moving Away From Calvinism,” Baptist History and Heritage, ed. Slyden Yarbrough (Vol. 31, no.2, January 1996), 29–33; and Geisler, Chosen But Free, 53–55.

[24] Purkiser, et al., “Grace, Faith, and Divine Sovereignty”.

[25] Charlie Bing, “Understanding the Faith that Saves” in GraceLife.Org, Grace Notes №102, online article: https://www.gracelife.org/resources/gracenotes/?id=102&lang=eng accessed September 20, 2024.

[26] Charlie Bing, “Understanding the Faith that Saves” in GraceLife.Org.

[27] Bill Mounce, “Antecedents and Faith (Ephesians 2:8–9)”, in BillMounce.Com article online: https://www.billmounce.com/monday-with-mounce/antecedents-and-faith-eph-2-8-9

[28] Charlie Bing, “Understanding the Faith that Saves”.

[29] Rogers, “Anyone and Everyone Can Be Saved by Grace: Grace Enablements”.

[30] “Faith Is Not Work”, in GraceProvoked.Org article online: https://graceprovoked.org/index.php/study-series/what-is-faith/faith-is-not-a-work accessed September 20, 2024.

[31] “Faith Is Not Work”, in GraceProvoked.Org.

[32] “Faith Is Not Work”, in GraceProvoked.Org.

[33] “Faith Is Not Work”, in GraceProvoked.Org.

[34] Jeremy Myers, “Faith is NOT a Work”, in RedeemingGod.Com, article online: https://redeeminggod.com/faith-is-not-a-work/ Accessed September 20, 2024.

[35] Jeremy Myers, “Faith is NOT a Work”.

[36] Charlie Bing, “Understanding the Faith that Saves” in GraceLife.Org.

[37]David R.. Anderson, Free Grace Soteriology: 3rd Edition, (Grace Theology Press, 2018), 178–179, 403.

[38]Anderson, Free Grace Soteriology, 178–179, 403.

[39]Anderson, Free Grace Soteriology, 189–190)..

We affirm that Christ suffered and died on the cross for the sins of every person, but His death is effective only when the individual accepts it. We disagree with theologies which teach that Christ died only for the sins of those who are preselected to be saved, and that God imposes or withholds this atonement without respect to the person’s free will.

In Christian theology, atonement is the doctrine that teaches that Jesus Christ’s death was primarily a substitutionary sacrifice offered to God by Christ as the “propitiation” (appeasement) for sins. In this view, the cross event is seen as Christ’s appeasement of God’s wrath. He suffered the punishment for the sins of those whom God intended to save from their deserved condemnation to hell.[1]

Because of humanity’s sinfulness, no one can be saved unless God takes the initiative. The good news is that Jesus died for all and has provided atonement sufficient for all, yet faith is the condition in order for His death to be efficient for the believer. Out of love, God sacrificed His only Son for the world so that those from the world who trust in Jesus and His atoning sacrifice will benefit from that atoning sacrifice and be saved.

The issue at stake here is whether Christ died in this way for all people or only for some people — the elect. Loraine Boettner states the Reformed-Calvinist doctrine well when he asserted that since God loves only the elect and God desires to save only the elect, it just follows that God provided the benefits of the cross only to the elect: “The atonement is efficient only for the elect. The non-elect (reprobates) were excluded from its work by God: ‘It was not, then, a general and indiscriminate love of which all men are equally the objects [that sent Jesus to the cross], but a peculiar, mysterious, infinite love for the elect, which caused God to send His Son into the world to suffer and die,’ and He died only for them”.[2]

For many Calvinists (although not all), Christ died only for some people — those He came to save. These people are the unconditionally elected by God. This teaching is also known as “limited atonement” or “particular redemption”.

Mainline Reformed-Calvinism has consistently maintained that Christ’s redeeming work was definite in design and accomplishment — that it was intended to render complete satisfaction for certain specified sinners and that it actually secured salvation for these individuals and for no one else. The salvation which Christ earned for His people includes everything involved in bringing them into a right relationship with God, including the gifts of faith and repentance.[3]

For Non-Calvinist Evangelical Christians, this doctrine of limited atonement is another one of Calvinism’s weaknesses, because it cannot be supported by Scripture or by majority of the Church Fathers. It contradicts the love of God, making God not only partial but hateful (toward the non-elect).[4]

David Allen, in his book The Atonement: A Biblical, Theological, and Historical Study of the Cross of Christ, asserts that this Calvinist view of limited atonement (that Christ did not intend to die for all sinners) is not the historical view of the Early Church:

The idea of “intent” gets to the question of God’s will, and whether or not God equally wills the salvation of all men. Even though both Calvinists and non-Calvinists agree that God has resolved or purposed only to save those who are in Christ through faith (i.e., those who believe), the Calvinist denies that God loves everyone equally or that He equally desires the salvation of everyone… Calvinists think that Christ especially desires or intends the salvation of some, while the Non-Calvinist thinks that Christ desires the salvation of all equally. The majority of Christians in church history have taken the position that Christ died for the sins of all, that God equally desires their salvation, but only intends to save those who meet His condition of salvation — namely, faith in Christ.[5]

We disagree with this Calvinist teaching of limited atonement because of the words “all” and “world” in many passages such as:

“He is the atoning sacrifice for our sins, and not only for ours but also for the sins of the whole world.” (1 John 2:2, NIV)

“For God so loved the world that he gave his one and only Son, that whoever believes in him shall not perish but have eternal life. For God did not send his son into the world to condemn the world, but to save the world through him.” (John 3:16–17, NIV)

It would perhaps be very difficult for a consistent Calvinist to share the Gospel with a clear conscience and honestly say to people, “God loves you and Jesus Christ died for you so that you may be saved if you believe on the Lord Jesus Christ,” without adding the clause, “only if you are one of God’s elect.”

“For there is one God and one mediator between God and mankind, the man Christ Jesus, 6 who gave himself as a ransom for all people.” (1 Timothy 2:5–6, NIV)

“He is the atoning sacrifice for our sins, and not only for ours but also for the sins of the whole world.” (1 John 2:2, NIV)

Christ Died for All People Because God Loves All People

Jesus was declared by John the Baptist as “the Lamb of God, who takes away the sins of the world” (John 1:29). Paul also tells us that Jesus died for all people: “For the love of Christ controls us, because we are convinced that one has died for all; and therefore, all have died. And He died for all, that those who live might no longer live for themselves but for Him who for their sake died and was raised” (2 Corinthians 5:14–15).[6]

The New Testament words for “world” (kosmos), “whosoever” (pas), and “all” (pantoon) are universal in scope implying that Christ died for everyone in the world.[7] The Bible clearly declares that Jesus Christ is “the atoning sacrifice for the sins of the whole world” (1 John 2:1–2), and that Jesus Christ “gave himself as a ransom for all” (1 Timothy 2:6). Hence, because of God’s unlimited love (John 3:16) and God’s desire to reconcile the world to Himself (2 Corinthians 5:19), Christ died for all individual persons in the world.

A contradiction exists between biblical affirmations about God’s love for the world and the Calvinist view that Christ did not die for all people in the world. God’s love for all people requires that Christ died for all of them — all sinners (Romans 5:8), all ungodly men (Romans 5:6), all lost people (Luke 19:10), and all God’s enemies (Luke 23:34) — not limited only to the elect.[8] The Greek lexicons are unanimous that “world” in John 3:16 denotes humankind, not the “world of the elect”. [9]

Roger Olson, in Against Calvinism, argues that God does not desire any to perish but rather desires all to come to repentance (2 Peter 3:9). How could God be said to love, with a desire to save, in any meaningful sense of the term, those for whom He did not provide atonement for their sins? Since no one can possibly be saved apart from the atonement of Christ, it is simply contradictory to speak of God’s universal love and His universal saving will on the limited atonement platform.[10]

Christ Died for All People Because God Desires All People to Be Saved

The New Testament is replete with passages that show that the Gospel is to be proclaimed to all people in the world (Matthew 24:14; 28:19; Acts 1:8; etc.). In Acts 17:30, God “commands all men everywhere to repent.” Titus 2:11 also asserts, “the grace of God has appeared for the salvation of all men”, implying that the invitation to receive the gift of salvation is issued to all people and not only to a selected few (Matthew 11:28 and Revelation 22:17).

Samuel Wakefield asks: “If Christ died only for the elect, how can the offer of salvation be made to all persons without some sort of insincerity, artificiality, or dishonesty being involved? Is it not proper to offer salvation to everyone if in fact Christ did not die to save everyone?”[11] God’s character simply cannot find compatibility with any doctrine teaching that the death of Christ was offered only to some and not for all.

John 3:16 affirms God’s love for all people. His love is unrestrictive: the scope of his love is the entire world. Apostle John specifically says God gave Jesus to be an atonement for the sins of the world. Just as God’s love encompasses the entire world, so Jesus made atonement for the sins of the whole world (1 John 2:2). There is no limitation here. There is, however, a condition for the benefits of Christ’s atonement to be effective for any individual: “everyone who believes.” [12]

Christ Died for All People But God Saves Only Those Who Believe in Christ

So, if Christ died for all persons, is it not possible that all men will be saved? Lewis Sperry Chafer, in Salvation: A Clear Analysis, responds: “The provision of a Mediator and the grounds of mediation for the whole world does not save the world, but it does render the salvation of the individual possible…” Although Christ died for all men, only those who accept Christ’s death will be saved.[13] There are scriptural evidences that prove that some people, whom Christ died for, will perish (Romans 14:15; 1 Corinthians 8:11; Hebrews 10:29; 2 Peter 2:1) but those who believe are saved (Acts 16:31; John 3:36; 5:24).

God has included a condition on salvation: faith in Christ. The atonement is unlimited. The benefits of the atonement are limited to only those who believe. (John 1:29; Roman 5:17–21; 11:32; 1 Timothy 2:6; Hebrews 2:9; 1 John 2:2; 2 Peter 3:9). [14]

Yes. There are many Scriptures which seem to say that the death of Christ was designed for the salvation of God’s people, not for every individual (John 10:15; 17:6, 9, 19; 11:51–52; and Revelation 5:9). These verses mention Christ’s death for “His sheep”, “the Church”, and “for those whom the Father draws to the Son.” Yet, not a single verse explicitly limits His death to these people. That Christ died for them (i.e. Christians) by no means requires that He died only for them.[15]

Many Calvinists commit the mistake of the “negative inference fallacy” in all the proof-texts they use to support their doctrine of limited atonement. The negative inference fallacy is a logical fallacy that occurs when a negative is assumed from a positive statement. Here are some examples of this type of fallacious argument: “John loves his friends. Therefore, John does not love his enemies”; “Mary loves her family. Therefore, she does not love her neighbors.”

Calvinists use verses such John 10:11, Ephesians 5:25, Acts 20:28 to make the same fallacious argument: “Jesus died for believers (the sheep, the church, the elect, etc.). Therefore, Jesus did not die for unbelievers (the goats, the reprobate, etc.).” When they do that, they make the error of the negative inference fallacy. Because the Bible is clear that Christ died and paid a ransom for all people. For example, Hebrews 2:9 and Acts 3:26 state that Christ died for “all”, “the world”, or “everyone”.

David Allen, in “The Atonement: Limited or Universal?” in Whosever Will: A Biblical-Theological Critique of Five-Point Calvinism, rightly points out that “the fact that many verses speak of Christ dying for His ‘sheep,’ His ‘church’ or ‘His friends’ does not prove that He did not die for others not subsumed in those categories.”[16]

We believe that Christ died for every single human person in such a way as to secure their salvation without requiring it or making it certain. Sinners need to personally appropriate the benefits of the cross for themselves. Trusting Jesus Christ is a condition for securing one’s salvation.

Instead, we believe that Christ died for every single human person in such a way as to secure their salvation without requiring it or making it certain. Sinners need to personally appropriate the benefits of the cross for themselves. Trusting Jesus Christ is a condition for securing one’s salvation.[17]

The atonement is universal and unlimited in the sense that the Church’s gates are wide open to “everyone who calls” (Rom. 10:13), to “him who is thirsty” (Rev. 21:6), to “all you who are weary and burdened” (Matt. 11:28). The invitation to believe in Christ and enter the Church extends to “every tribe and language and people and nation” (Rev. 5:9). In that sense, the atonement is universal and available to all.

“That is why we labor and strive, because we have put our hope in the living God, who is the Savior of all people, and especially of those who believe.” (1 Timothy 4:10, NIV)

Thus, there is a difference between the provision of forgiveness of sins and the application of forgiveness of sins.[18] Robert Picirilli, in Grace, Faith, and Free Will, is right when he says in relation to 1 Timothy 4:10 “that He [Jesus] is Savior of all people speaks of provision; that He is savior especially of believers speaks of application.”[19]

Gary Schultz, in his article entitled “Why a Genuine Universal Gospel Call Requires an Atonement That Paid for the Sins of All People” in Evangelical Quarterly, has argued convincingly that there is no sincerity in preaching of the Gospel to everyone, and declaring an invitation for everyone to repent, believe, and be saved, if Christ did not die for everyone:

How can the Gospel be genuinely offered to the non-elect if God made no payment for their sins…. If Christ did not pay for the sins of the non-elect, then it is impossible to genuinely offer salvation to the non-elect, since there is no salvation available to offer them. In a sense, when offered the gospel, the non-elect would be offered something that was never there for them to receive in the first place.[20]

In other words, if we follow the Calvinist fallacy, the Gospel is not really Good News for everyone: “If the atonement was only for the elect, to preach this message to the non-elect would at best be giving them a false hope and at worst would be untrue.”[21] It would be a dishonest and a deceitful form of evangelism.

The truth is, God makes the provision of salvation for all men, but it is conditioned by faith. Thus, salvation becomes actual only for those who believe, although it is potential and available to all. “Our inheriting eternal life involves two separate factors: an objective factor (Christ’s provision of salvation) and a subjective factor (our acceptance of that salvation).”[22] Although the provision of atonement is unlimited, yet the application of it is limited.

In his book The Death Christ Died, Robert Lightner explains: “we believe the cross does not apply its own benefits but that God has conditioned His full and free salvation upon personal faith in order to appropriate its accomplishments to the individual…”[23]

Therefore, Jesus Christ suffered and died on the cross for the sins of every individual person in the world, but His death is effective only when the individual accepts it. God sent Jesus Christ into the world so that the world through Him might be saved (John 3:17). That is the reason why Jesus is referred to as the Savior of the world (John 4:42; 1 John 4:14). In dying for the whole world, Christ tasted death for every individual person (Hebrews 2:9), which makes Him truly the Savior of all people (1 Timothy 4:10). Atonement is unlimited in scope in the sense that the offer of salvation is for all men. Atonement is limited in effect in the sense that only those who believe in Jesus are truly saved.

- — — — — — — -
Non-Calvinist Evangelical Christians are fellow born again believers from various theological persuasions which include Provisionists, Molinists, Free Grace, Arminians, Freewill Baptists, General Baptists, Wesleyans, Lutherans, Pentecostals, Methodists, Mennonite, Brethren, Nazarene, Evangelical Free, Anabaptists, Anglican, and all believers who embrace “Whosoever Will” theologies.

𝗚𝗿𝗮𝗰𝗲 𝗳𝗼𝗿 𝗔𝗹𝗹 𝗖𝗼𝗮𝗹𝗶𝘁𝗶𝗼𝗻 is a cross-denominational collaboration of various Evangelical Christian pastors, theologians, scholars, church leaders, and believers from all theological stripes who affirm and teach that God has provided the means of salvation for all people through the life, death, and resurrection of the Son of God. So that all who trust in Jesus Christ are saved by grace through faith. We believe that the Gospel (εὐαγγέλιον) is asserting that God actually loves the entire world and that God sincerely desires every person to gain eternal life through Jesus Christ. God offers the free gift of salvation to all sinners and invites all humanity to respond in believing faith. The saving grace of God is sincerely offered to every person, not decreed to a preselected few. We desire to be a theological voice against teachings that limit the saving grace of God only to a chosen few, against theologies that teach that Christ did not die for all of humanity, and against doctrines that say that the Gospel is actually good news only to preselected individuals, not for every person.

We subscribe to the theological convictions of the 𝗔𝗽𝗼𝘀𝘁𝗹𝗲𝘀’ 𝗖𝗿𝗲𝗲𝗱, the 𝗡𝗶𝗰𝗲𝗻𝗲 𝗖𝗿𝗲𝗲𝗱, the 𝗟𝗮𝘂𝘀𝗮𝗻𝗻𝗲 𝗖𝗼𝘃𝗲𝗻𝗮𝗻𝘁, and the 𝗪𝗼𝗿𝗹𝗱 𝗘𝘃𝗮𝗻𝗴𝗲𝗹𝗶𝗰𝗮𝗹 𝗔𝗹𝗹𝗶𝗮𝗻𝗰𝗲.

[1] Roger Olson, Against Calvinism: Rescuing God’s Reputation from Radical Reformed Theology, (Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan, 2011), 90.

[2] Loraine Boettner, The Reformed Doctrine of Predestination (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1948), 157.

[3]David Steele and Curtis Thomas, The Five Points of Calvinism, (Phillipsburg, NJ: Presbyterian and Reformed Publishing Co., 1963), 39.

[4] Olson, Against Calvinism, 89.

[5] David Allen, The Atonement: A Biblical, Theological, and Historical Study of the Cross of Christ (Nashville, TN: B&H Publishing Group), 7.

[6] Millard J. Erickson, Christian Theology 1st ed. (Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Books, 1985), 829–830.

[7]The Logos Bible: New Testament, (Seoul, Korea: Logos Publishing Company, 1992), 188, 250, 242.

[8] Erickson, Christian Theology, 832.

[9] Brooke Foss Westcott, The Epistles of Saint John: The Greek Text With Notes and Essays, (Cambridge, UK: Macmillan and Co. Limited,1886).

[10] Olson, Against Calvinism, 92–94.

[11] Samuel Wakefield, A Complete System of Christian Theology (Cincinnati: Hitchcock and Walden, 1869), 383, as quoted in Erickson, Christian Theology, 831–832.

[12] Olson, Against Calvinism, 92–94.

[13] Lewis Sperry Chafer, Salvation: A Clear Analysis (Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan, 1965), 26.

[14] Olson, Against Calvinism, 92–94.

[15] Olson, Against Calvinism, 97–98.

[16] David L. Allen, “The Atonement: Limited or Universal?” in Whosoever Will: A Biblical-Theological Critique of Five-Point Calvinism, 93.

[17] Olson, Against Calvinism, 97–98.

[18] Olson, Against Calvinism, 97–98.

[19] Robert Picirilli, Grace, Faith, and Free Will, (Nashville, TN: Randall House Publications, 2002), 153.

[20] Gary l. Schultz, Jr., “Why a Genuine Universal Gospel Call Requires an Atonement That Paid for the Sins of All People,” Evangelical Quarterly 82:2 (2010): 122.

[21] Schultz, Jr., “Why a Genuine Universal Gospel Call Requires an Atonement That Paid for the Sins of All People”, 115.

[22] Chafer, Salvation: A Clear Analysis, 31–39.

[23] Robert Lightner, The Death Christ Died: A Biblical Case for Unlimited Atonement (Grand Rapids: Kregel Publications, 1998), 56.