If indeed the Arminian system is a denial of the Gospel as Luther claimed (he called it semi-Pelagianism), then this is a serious difference to minimize and gloss over. Does the doctrine of the will matter in our day? Luther thought that it was the essential issue that set out what grace really meant and that grace and the teaching on the will really interpreted the Gospel. If we gloss over the issue of the will and simply say that others believe in salvation by grace, what have we really done? Roman Catholicism says that it believes in salvation by grace too. What do people mean when they say that they believe in salvation by grace? Are we being faithful to the Gospel of Jesus Christ if we simply assume that they mean what the Bible means on the subject?
Roman Catholicism says that salvation is by grace but means that God gives grace that we then have to cooperate with and then apply through the use of means. Does the Arminian system teach anything different in principle than that? What does the Arminian mean by saying that salvation is all of grace? The system would say that salvation is provided by grace but a person must believe of himself in order for that grace to be applied. For the Arminian to say anything else is to deny the system that is built on free-will and that is a denial of Arminianism. The Arminian might say that God gives all men a measure of grace in order to believe, but that leaves them in the same position. The remaining movement of the will comes from the person and so is not all of grace but instead is just mostly grace. It also denies that man is dead in sins and trespasses.
The conclusion is then that Roman Catholicism and Arminianism do have the same principle at the heart of it. Both have Christ providing grace for salvation and yet both have man applying grace to himself in some way. Both deny the total depravity of man because the will has something good in it that does not need to be redeemed and so can choose God. Both have man doing a work or doing some works in order to be saved. Both deny by their doctrine that grace alone does really saves and that faith itself is the work of God and purchased by Christ. The pioneer Reformers saw what semi-Pelagianism (Arminianism today) was and they were strong in their denunciations of it. Has Roman Catholicism changed today? Has Arminianism changed today? If Roman Catholicism changes, it is no longer Roman Catholicism. If Arminianism changes, it is no longer Arminianism. To change is to change from the system and not the system itself.
The Reformed system was set out by the Reformers as the theology of Holy Scripture. They taught that to teach free-will as Roman Catholicism does and what Arminianism does today is a denial of the Gospel. I know that I have said that several times in differing ways, but this concept must be grasped. This is not a small difference that is going on within the SBC. This is not just a small issue, but according to Luther and the pioneer Reformers this issue is over the Gospel itself. If this issue is minimized and glossed over by anyone, it is either in ignorance or on purpose. Either way it works out to be the same. If anyone thinks that there can be unity within the SBC without discussing this issue and that the Gospel is not compromised by the refusal to discuss this, that person has missed the whole point of the Reformation. If people who call themselves Reformed are willing to unite with others without this being perhaps the most substantive issue, then those people are greatly deceived. The Gospel cannot be discussed without this issue. That means that any unity apart from this issue will be a unity that is apart from the Gospel as taught by the Reformers. The SBC needs a true Reformation and not one that is without the theology of the Reformation. Is that theology taught in Scripture? If it is not brought up and discussed, will others know?
God Loves... Himself 
Leave a comment